On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 10:12:56PM -0400, Julian Missig wrote: > On 4 Oct 2004, at 18:46, Mikael Hallendal wrote: > >Sounds a bit over the top to try to guess what client would be best > >depending on what other IM clients the user has used. And also, imho > >the usability of ICQ sucks, and presenting the user with something > >much easier to use might be a better drive then presenting him with > >something very similar. > I never said I thought ICQ was good, but regardless of how "easy" > something is to use, presenting the user with something most similar to > what they're used to will always be less disruptive for them than > presenting them with something completely different. The response to give in this case seems to me to be `A Jabber client with a simple interface is Bitlbee/../, if you have time to change interface you might start here, but if you're in a hurry, Jabber clients that have an interface similar to ICQs are Psi/.../.' Or similar, please excuse my 10am wording skills. This is even more overkill, and yet seems like rather a good idea to me, as long as such a script is kept current. /K -- Kevin Smith Postgraduate Research Student Department of Computer Science University Of Exeter
pgpMf6X4ERCSV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev
