carlo.comments: carlo.log → Jabber, OpenID And “teh shiny”
http://hooloovoo.vox.com/
· 2 years ago
I am using a jabber based client as my main IM. Its from that "other" search engine portal company. You know the one. It's getting closer to having "teh shiny" :)
Altho, I do admit I have Y!M open as well right now for this very reason: My mom, a couple of friends, and some co-workers use it.
Robert
· 2 years ago
Yay openID!
Perhaps taking me to a profile page before commenting -so I can input the name I'd like to have my comment appear as?
Carlo Zottmann
· 2 years ago
No, why? The beauty of OpenID -- when you allow my site to access your profile, you can choose which public OpenID profile to use. If it doesn't have a screen name... well... not my fault. ;)
http-alex.weej.com-
· 2 years ago
I think Google is really doing a good job here. I always recommend Talk to people when necessary. They have a really good integration going on.
I don't use them myself, though, as I run my own server
Robert
· 2 years ago
Point taken, Carlo. Maybe I should look at what Vox is doing more carefully (and perhaps bug them about the profile screen name...)
Rene Y
· 2 years ago
I think it's very hard to put "shine" onto an identity platform (which is just a phrase for what i think OpenID is/does). I think enough people just have to take the time to write some old-fashioned prose comparing what OpenID does for your online identity management, vs. how it used to be done (or is being done still today). Look at the "Leave a Reply" portion of this blog - it gives me a choice between identifying myself via my OpenID or via the "Old school" method. They're presented as equal alternatives. Why would one be any better than the other?
PS - I tried signing via my ClaimID which is "rene_y" but it said "Could not discover an OpenID identity server endpoint at the url: rene_y". ClaimID said they were "OpenID compliant" or "ready". I'm not a technophobe and I BELEIVE in what OpenID is trying to achieve, but there is/are definitely something/s i am NOT getting about how OpenID is suppoed to work...
Carlo Zottmann
· 2 years ago
bq. I think itâs very hard to put âshineâ? onto an identity platform (which is just a phrase for what i think OpenID is/does).
Of course, but for me, _"the shiny"_ doesn't just mean coming up with client software. The product/technology has to be appealing to the unexpecting user, in whatever form. Back then, when ICQ et al came along, these technologies were new and interesting and cool, and users went there.
Jabber and OpenID are protocols, platforms, technologies... But in my experience (which might be limited, agreed) the end user doesn't care about protocols, platforms, technologies, as great and advanced they may be. The end user cares about "cool", so in order to reach widespread adoption, you have to have a selling point, one that is visible to the non-dev community.
And that might be a client or a website with plug-and-play tools and widgets for bloggers. Or something totally different.
I think you're overlooking the single best Jabber client I've found: Adium. Sure, it's only available for OS X, and since it connects to every IM network I use anyway, there's unfortunately no distinct advantage I'd get by Jabbering instead of Y!Ming or AIMing. This is, of course, part of your point. :)
That said, I think you're exactly on target with regard to your questions about why these protocols haven't captured the public's imagiation: in short, the public has no imagination when it comes to _protocols_. The fact that Skype took off has nothing at all to do with the backend communication layer, except insofar as that layer was better at getting through firewalls than anything else on the market. People used the protocol, not because of the _protocol_, but because of the _feature_ the protocol enabled. When you say that Jabber will take off as soon as it has a client with some killer features, I don't think that actually says anything about Jabber itself: you're simply arguing for a shinier _client_. If Y! implemented the killer "Smilmiis" (How's that for a name? :) ) in Messenger, people would use it. If AOL did the same, people would use it.
It's clear to me that unless the killer feature is something Jabber can do that those other protocols _can't_, it won't make much difference. The central problem in bringing a brand-new client to market is the absolutely stunningly huge installed base. I use Y!M to talk to you guys at work, I use AIM to talk to all my friends in the states, and I use MSN to talk to one idiot who only uses it because that's what everyone at his office uses. But I'm a geek! Most people wouldn't bother setting up a whole new client to talk to one person. Unless Jabber hits a big tipping point (maybe Steve Jobs will make it the official client of the iPhone?), I don't see how it will get enough market penetration to matter much at all.
Also, OpenID is cool. A single point of sign-on _is_ a killer feature, and it's slowly strengthening it's hold on the minds of amazing developers. When sites like LiveJournal are pioneers of a technology, I don't think it'll be too long before the _functionality_ (if not the _protocol_) is on the lips of a good chunk of bloggers. Whether it hits the mainstream or not is entirely dependent on how widespread the client support for OpenID becomes. It's one thing to make _getting_ an ID easy, it's quite another to have enough _use_ for that ID to make a difference in the market.
Also, my OpenID server apparently doesn't like your website. It checks out fine from openidenabled.com, but throws an error here. I'll fix comments on my site if you fix comments on yours. ;)
http://philwilson.org/blog/
· 2 years ago
"OpenID is a great concept, and personally, I like it very much. What it lacks is a killer application."
OpenID is for logging in to things. I look forward to your suggestion of a killer app for "logging in to things".
Also, your previous comparison is fatally flawed. An IM infrastructure and protocol has a default application, an IM server and client, OpenId has, what? a login form?
Carlo Zottmann
· 2 years ago
bq. OpenID is for logging in to things. I look forward to your suggestion of a killer app for âlogging in to thingsâ?.
I was under the impression that it was an identity management platform/protocol. But in the end, yes, that means it is for logging in to things. ;)
But as I've said, the "killer application" for OpenID could be something quite simple. For example, being an integral part of the Wordpress standard package so every WP installation would allow OpenID authentication by default. Yes, no, maybe? Well, I don't know... I was just musing there.
I don't have all the answers, I am just thinking out loud. And I might be wrong in my conclusions, too.
Gaurav Kanoongo
· 2 years ago
I really like this article. I think Microformats also worth a mention here.
I am quite enthusiastic about these technologies, and wish to develop something like a Universal Social Network, based on technologies like OpenID, XMPP/Jabber, Microformats, and FOAF etc.
All Comments
Altho, I do admit I have Y!M open as well right now for this very reason: My mom, a couple of friends, and some co-workers use it.
Perhaps taking me to a profile page before commenting -so I can input the name I'd like to have my comment appear as?
I don't use them myself, though, as I run my own server
I think enough people just have to take the time to write some old-fashioned prose comparing what OpenID does for your online identity management, vs. how it used to be done (or is being done still today).
Look at the "Leave a Reply" portion of this blog - it gives me a choice between identifying myself via my OpenID or via the "Old school" method. They're presented as equal alternatives. Why would one be any better than the other?
PS - I tried signing via my ClaimID which is "rene_y" but it said "Could not discover an OpenID identity server endpoint at the url: rene_y". ClaimID said they were "OpenID compliant" or "ready". I'm not a technophobe and I BELEIVE in what OpenID is trying to achieve, but there is/are definitely something/s i am NOT getting about how OpenID is suppoed to work...
Of course, but for me, _"the shiny"_ doesn't just mean coming up with client software. The product/technology has to be appealing to the unexpecting user, in whatever form. Back then, when ICQ et al came along, these technologies were new and interesting and cool, and users went there.
Jabber and OpenID are protocols, platforms, technologies... But in my experience (which might be limited, agreed) the end user doesn't care about protocols, platforms, technologies, as great and advanced they may be. The end user cares about "cool", so in order to reach widespread adoption, you have to have a selling point, one that is visible to the non-dev community.
And that might be a client or a website with plug-and-play tools and widgets for bloggers. Or something totally different.
Just saying.
I think you're overlooking the single best Jabber client I've found: Adium. Sure, it's only available for OS X, and since it connects to every IM network I use anyway, there's unfortunately no distinct advantage I'd get by Jabbering instead of Y!Ming or AIMing. This is, of course, part of your point. :)
That said, I think you're exactly on target with regard to your questions about why these protocols haven't captured the public's imagiation: in short, the public has no imagination when it comes to _protocols_. The fact that Skype took off has nothing at all to do with the backend communication layer, except insofar as that layer was better at getting through firewalls than anything else on the market. People used the protocol, not because of the _protocol_, but because of the _feature_ the protocol enabled. When you say that Jabber will take off as soon as it has a client with some killer features, I don't think that actually says anything about Jabber itself: you're simply arguing for a shinier _client_. If Y! implemented the killer "Smilmiis" (How's that for a name? :) ) in Messenger, people would use it. If AOL did the same, people would use it.
It's clear to me that unless the killer feature is something Jabber can do that those other protocols _can't_, it won't make much difference. The central problem in bringing a brand-new client to market is the absolutely stunningly huge installed base. I use Y!M to talk to you guys at work, I use AIM to talk to all my friends in the states, and I use MSN to talk to one idiot who only uses it because that's what everyone at his office uses. But I'm a geek! Most people wouldn't bother setting up a whole new client to talk to one person. Unless Jabber hits a big tipping point (maybe Steve Jobs will make it the official client of the iPhone?), I don't see how it will get enough market penetration to matter much at all.
Also, OpenID is cool. A single point of sign-on _is_ a killer feature, and it's slowly strengthening it's hold on the minds of amazing developers. When sites like LiveJournal are pioneers of a technology, I don't think it'll be too long before the _functionality_ (if not the _protocol_) is on the lips of a good chunk of bloggers. Whether it hits the mainstream or not is entirely dependent on how widespread the client support for OpenID becomes. It's one thing to make _getting_ an ID easy, it's quite another to have enough _use_ for that ID to make a difference in the market.
Also, my OpenID server apparently doesn't like your website. It checks out fine from openidenabled.com, but throws an error here. I'll fix comments on my site if you fix comments on yours. ;)
OpenID is for logging in to things. I look forward to your suggestion of a killer app for "logging in to things".
Also, your previous comparison is fatally flawed. An IM infrastructure and protocol has a default application, an IM server and client, OpenId has, what? a login form?
I was under the impression that it was an identity management platform/protocol. But in the end, yes, that means it is for logging in to things. ;)
But as I've said, the "killer application" for OpenID could be something quite simple. For example, being an integral part of the Wordpress standard package so every WP installation would allow OpenID authentication by default. Yes, no, maybe? Well, I don't know... I was just musing there.
I don't have all the answers, I am just thinking out loud. And I might be wrong in my conclusions, too.
I am quite enthusiastic about these technologies, and wish to develop something like a Universal Social Network, based on technologies like OpenID, XMPP/Jabber, Microformats, and FOAF etc.