AIM vs. iChat

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by iBookman, May 15, 2003.

  1. iBookman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 15, 2003
    Location:
    Lancaster, PA, USA
    #1
    I have been using AIM for a couple of weeks now and then I went to try iChat and it seemed kinda lame. I'm not sure if I'm missing some features or what. It just seems like AIM is much more of a complex application then iChat. Can you guys help me out and what do you think about them?
     
  2. 5300cs macrumors 68000

    5300cs

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    japan
    #2
    iChat is kind of lame, but I think follows along with Apple's minimalist design ideals (which is why I think Apple hasn't released a wheel-mouse.)

    iChat kind of sux for sending files to pc people using AIM, as a matter of fact I had to either email them or use AIM in order to send them the files, which is really lame:mad:

    just for chatting I think it's OK, and it doesn't have that annoying flashing ad banner that AIM does.

    I used Proteus before iChat, and it was pretty cool. Not free though:mad:
     
  3. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #3
    ichat has some niceties and lots of downers, being connected and not running the app is nice but its featureless

    use adium, lite, free, super customizable. And well it rocks
     
  4. janey macrumors 603

    janey

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Location:
    sunny los angeles
    #4
    you're not doing it properly, or someone's behind a firewall.
    I send files to people using iChat (to a PC with AIM) often.
    just thought you might wanna know.
     
  5. Mineral macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2003
    Location:
    Arkansas
    #5
    AIM is slow as hell on OSX.

    iChat rocks, but it needs profile and animated buddy icon support.
     
  6. baby duck monge macrumors 68000

    baby duck monge

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2003
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    #6
    ichat seems to take almost no resources, which is super nice. it's also nice not to have to have the program open, and to have rendevous doing its thing (particularly nice on my school's campus where all the dorms are on the same part of the network).

    AIM does kick ichat to the curb in terms of features, though. if ichat could work something out with its away messages, that might be enough to get me to use it again (though it has other issues, as well).

    basically - ichat is really restricted in what you can do, but if you don't need much, it's great. if you want more features, you're going to have to go with AIM or the like.
     
  7. pEZ macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Wisconsin
    #7
    As an alternative, Adium isn't an option for me because I have friends on ICQ as well - that's why I use Proteus. Sure, it's not free, but it doesn't need to be. Fire is MUCH worse - can't tell you how many times it has crashed my computer.

    And yes I mean crash. As in kernel panic.
     
  8. synthetickittie macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2002
    Location:
    Boston
    #8
    I dont get why EVERYONE seems to want ichat to send your away message when people im you like aim does. I use ichat over aim for THAT reason (that it doesnt) and it just looks cooler to me. I can live with out a profile and some features even tho I badly want all those things. I just LOVE not having my away message sent to people when its on because IF it was like aim I wouldnt be able to talk to people when my away message is on. Its like the people I dont feel like talking to that just dont know when to shut up but I dont feel like yelling at them I just put my away message on and they think Im not there but I can keep talking to the people that I accually want to talk to at the same time. NOW a perfect thing would be if apple could get ichat like yahoo (only reason I dont use yahoo as my main messanger is 99% of the people I know only use aim/aol) on the fact that in yahoo you can "hide" yourself and make it look like your totally offline but still talk to people that you want to IM and then unlike yahoo have it so if you have your away message on people that im you get your away message sent to them. If your asking why dont I block people its that its not aways the same people that I dont feel like talking to and one second I feel like talking to someone and then the next I may only feel like talking to a few people and then the people that get blocked go on another sn that I dont know and relize I blocked them
     
  9. anneleonard macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2003
    Location:
    Reading, UK (a.k.a. Strongbadia)
    #9
    I agree, Proteus is great, the only thing that it doesn't do is a chat with a couple of people at once (for that, I have to switch to msn messenger :( ) Most people in the UK don't use AIM, the predominant one is MSN, without a doubt. AOL sucks anyway, don't want to have much to do with it! Only my mum uses that so Proteus is great in that you can message people on different IM networks. Proteus isn't that expensive -only $10- and why shouldn't you pay for decent software, if someone's spent a long time developing it, and it doesn't have manky msn advertising all over it? You don't have to register Proteus anyway, its pretty much donation-ware. Its really customisable and fits really nicely into OSX.
     
  10. Duckie macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    May 10, 2003
    Location:
    USA
    #10
    Between AIM and iChat, I choose iChat.

    Usually, I use Adium and sometimes iChat but I have this thing against buddy icons. The buddy icons and the ugly chat windows are what send me back to super fast Adium.
     
  11. proxyma macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2003
    #11
    What do i think of both ?
    take a look to iChat X heading at
    iCM
     
  12. MacFan25 macrumors 68000

    MacFan25

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2003
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    For just chatting, I think that iChat is a great app. But, I would like to see a profile feature.
     

Share This Page