Google Launches 'Talk' Instant Messaging

[Ti_Poussin]

Talk in iChat support Audio and Video of it, I try to iChat (a Mac with a MiniDV cam) to an another iChat (Mac with USB cam with iChatUSBcam plug-in) and it work. Seem we have a great thing going on here, doesn't work with PC, that's normal, the video and audio are encode with a special codec (H264 aka MPeg4 part10 for video, probably AAC for audio no sure of audio codec). At least I don't need a .mac or AIM account to use iChat anymore.

That's great, now we need a PC that can use H264 video conference and we are all set

 

[Stella]

Competition is good.

You could argue what you said to apply to any product... i.e., why did Apple bother with iSight, there are many manufactures out there ( for Godsake, no one answer this ).

If Google played their cards right, they could shake up IM for the better - using open standards rather than making another propriety protocol.

It's probably been said a million times already, but do we really need another messaging client, especially one that isn't compatible with other clients? Plus, there doesn't appear to be a Mac version anyway... Not excited about this in the least...

 

[aegisdesign]

Maybe cause iChat is totaly useless outside of USA, where AIM, AOL is not used by anybody! Seriously I know nobody at University, at my job, my friends, my coloc jobs office, nobody around here using AIM. So iChat is total waste of time here, use Adium for MSN and Yahoo chat.

Works for me in the UK. I've 8 people online in my buddy list. 6 on Windows, 2 on Mac, all in the UK. I don't know anyone on MSN other than kids that don't know any better who use it for their chat rooms.

 

[aegisdesign]

Talk in iChat support Audio and Video of it, I try to iChat (a Mac with a MiniDV cam) to an another iChat (Mac with USB cam with iChatUSBcam plug-in) and it work. Seem we have a great thing going on here, doesn't work with PC, that's normal, the video and audio are encode with a special codec (H264 aka MPeg4 part10 for video, probably AAC for audio no sure of audio codec). At least I don't need a .mac or AIM account to use iChat anymore.

That's great, now we need a PC that can use H264 video conference and we are all set

Actually, it's nothing to do with the codec. It's the initiation protocol used by iChat, which is proprietary to Apple and AIM. Google hope to change that by using a freely available protocol to initiate video/audio conferencing.

All iChat is doing here is using the Google Talk Jabber server for authentication but it's iChat doing the initiation, saying hello, opening ports, traversing your NAT etc.

 

[aegisdesign]

The only nonsense I see is your post.

A virus writer writes viruses to cause as much dammage as possible.

Who cares about a tiny little OS like OS X. About 3% of the world thats who.

This is true.

Nope. They write them for prestige.

Maximum damage is one measure of prestige but how much 'prestige' would a virus writer get if they were the first virus writer to break through the otherwise impenetrable wall of security in MacOSX? They'd have gonads the size of a small planet if they managed that.

Q. So why haven't they done it yet.

A. It's too hard.

 

[Ti_Poussin]

Actually, it's nothing to do with the codec. It's the initiation protocol used by iChat, which is proprietary to Apple and AIM. Google hope to change that by using a freely available protocol to initiate video/audio conferencing.

All iChat is doing here is using the Google Talk Jabber server for authentication but it's iChat doing the initiation, saying hello, opening ports, traversing your NAT etc.

Seriously, the data doesn't pass through talk.google.com sever. Crap, I was hoping it would have been so cool, when an iChat version for PC or Talk with video/audio support for PC/Mac? video conference between Mac and PC is needed.

 

[aegisdesign]

Seriously, the data doesn't pass through talk.google.com sever. Crap, I was hoping it would have been so cool, when an iChat version for PC or Talk with video/audio support for PC/Mac? video conference between Mac and PC is needed.

Could you imagine the bandwidth bill if all the world's video conferences went through talk.google.com! No, it's a direct conversation once the init is done with each end firing TCP/IP packets back and forth containing video/audio in whatever format they both understand. Part of the initiation sorts out what both understand codec wise usually. Google may have limited it for now though during beta.

Google's PC client understands quite a few audio codecs already that iChat would handle but iChat doesn't understand Google's initiation protocol.

So it needs Apple to adopt Google's protocol or vice-versa if we're to talk to PC clients.

 

[abhishake]

A bit like iChat?

Anyone else feel that their design is a lot like iChat's? Anyway.. it does work with mac, just use adium.. That's what i'm doing. I love it.

It should begin to control the market for chatting in at least half a year. Everything google does becomes widespread and I'm sure this will too.

 

[daveL]

Actually, it's nothing to do with the codec. It's the initiation protocol used by iChat, which is proprietary to Apple and AIM. Google hope to change that by using a freely available protocol to initiate video/audio conferencing.

All iChat is doing here is using the Google Talk Jabber server for authentication but it's iChat doing the initiation, saying hello, opening ports, traversing your NAT etc.

Don't know what you're saying here. I can use iChat AV (Tiger) with jabber.org accounts. No .Mac, no AIM. iChat/Tiger works with any Jabber server; there's nothing proprietary about it.

 

[VicMacs]

jabber sucks.... I hate it because servers are always going down.

 

[daveL]

jabber sucks.... I hate it because servers are always going down.

I doubt you'll have that problem with the Google jabber servers, which is why this announcement is a big deal. Google is taking jabber mainstream, and that's good for everyone.

 

[~Shard~]

Competition is good.

You could argue what you said to apply to any product... i.e., why did Apple bother with iSight, there are many manufactures out there ( for Godsake, no one answer this ).

If Google played their cards right, they could shake up IM for the better - using open standards rather than making another propriety protocol.

Fair enough - I guess we'll see how it does in the long run.

 

[Evangelion]

It's probably been said a million times already, but do we really need another messaging client

Clients are nest to irrelevant. what matters is the protocol

especially one that isn't compatible with other clients?

this is compatible with other Jabber-clients. of course, it's not compatible with other protocols. And that is a good thing, since if it talked with other protocosl, it would reinforce the hold those closed proprietary protocols have over the market. By leveraging an open standard, they are planning to turn IM in to something that works as well as email does. That is, you do not have to have separate protocols/clients in order to speak to different people, You just use one open standard and any client you prefr to communicate.

Plus, there doesn't appear to be a Mac version anyway

There are Jabber-clients for Mac.

Not excited about this in the least...

I guess you just don't see what this could mean. This is a serious threat to the current system where we have several incompatible protocols divinding the market. Replacing those protocols with one open protocol is a GOOD THING (tm)!

 

[aegisdesign]

Don't know what you're saying here. I can use iChat AV (Tiger) with jabber.org accounts. No .Mac, no AIM. iChat/Tiger works with any Jabber server; there's nothing proprietary about it.

The answer was to whether the audio/video went through the jabber server, which it doesn't. and that bit is a proprietary protocol to Apple and AIM even if it bears a large similarity to SIP/STUN underneath.

 

[~Shard~]

<snip>

Please see my above comment - fair enough!

 

[TBi]

If you were a virus writer wouldn't you prefer to be the first person to write a Virus for Mac OSX or would you rather add your name to the 65,000+ viruses for Windows??

Actually you make a very good point I'm sure MS would pay you money if you did that

 

[ioinc]

hmmmm

No it's FALSE! Window's has more holes in it than Swiss cheese- and I'm sick and tired of hearing that Window's has more viruses because it's more popular.

Since Mac OSX has been around there has been 0 viruses/spyware/trojans etc that have infected Macs. NONE

And it's not because Mac OSX is obscure- it's because in its very nature it is a secure system. END OF

END OF RANT!!!!

Of course having low market share has a big part in this.

If you don't take this type of volume into consideration you would be able to say that the police in Green River, Wyoming are better than the police in New York City because they have lower crime rate.


Have no doubt that if OSX had 95% market share it would have viruses and ads. (as much as windows... we don't know... but it would have them)

 

[~Shard~]

Have no doubt that if OSX had 95% market share it would have viruses and ads. (as much as windows... we don't know... but it would have them)

I don't think it would have as many viruses, etc. as you might think. One of the main reasons there are no viruses, etc. for OS X is not due to the small marketshare as many people incorrectly believe, but rather due to the inherently secure nature of the OS, since it is UNIX/FreeBSD. The very nature of the system makes it difficult to compromise with viruses and the like, so whether it's 5% or 95% marketshare, that wouldn't change. Sure, it would be more of a target, and it would be more "worthwhile" in some apsects for hackers to target it, but the fact remains, OS X is an extremely secure OS and would not reach anywhere even close to the level that Windows has in terms of vulnerabilities, threats and the like.

 

[AnAppleADay]

OMGoogle!

Well google is growing fast, much of that growth to our benefit, however, I am not a particular fan of GoogleTALK. I mean, there is nothing better than iChat, so competitors should just stop!!! MacChat for life!

 

[aegisdesign]

Of course having low market share has a big part in this.

If you don't take this type of volume into consideration you would be able to say that the police in Green River, Wyoming are better than the police in New York City because they have lower crime rate.


Have no doubt that if OSX had 95% market share it would have viruses and ads. (as much as windows... we don't know... but it would have them)

Interesting analogy but off base.

Crime rate has almost nothing to do with how effective the police are. I say almost as preventative crime measures do have an effect on crime rates. As do environmental factors.

So to use your analogy, Apple are providing a secure, pleasant environment in which crime doesn't take place and people have less desire to commit crime. Microsoft are providing an insecure environment where the people don't care about the neighbourhood. And then Microsoft as a police force aren't doing enough to solve it.

If viruses were proportional to market share, then we'd have 3% or so of all the viruses being written. We have 0%. Equating viruses with the market is just bizarre since the writers don't get any money out of it. They'd be better off domain jacking or threatening to DDOS as cybercrime goes.

 

[aegisdesign]

Well google is growing fast, much of that growth to our benefit, however, I am not a particular fan of GoogleTALK. I mean, there is nothing better than iChat, so competitors should just stop!!! MacChat for life!

But Google aren't competing with iChat. In fact, they're reinforcing iChat as a solution as both of them support Jabber. I'm really looking forward to the day there is ONE IM protocol.

We've one mail protocol, one web protocol, one ftp protocol and dozens for competing IM protocols. Spot which one is mad.

 

[johnnyjibbs]

So basically nothing to get excited about, this is just another IM client out there (for Windows). I'm glad they've gone with a standard protocol though rather than add another proprietary format to the mix. As for the voice talking, Google is no doubt worried about the success of Skype and wants to get in there.

 

[takao]

"just another IM client" i second that

seriously do we need another jabber client ? i tried them in the dozens but finally stopped used jabber after the first 3 months of excitment "oh it's open source" "it's so customizable" etc.
the fact is: nobody uses , neither friends or family

here two services are completly dominating: ICQ(aim protocol) within the 16-25 age group and with the younger ones msn

the funny thing is how adiumx on the mac still hasn't got the invisble feature and still is a PITA for some basic IM features

what baffles me is that the very unique feature of icq: the simply exchange of contacts through numbers is completly lost, i know my ica number by heart compared to my phone number

 

[wdlove]

I'm very happy with iChat so far.

Hopefully this will spur Apple to make improvements to iChat.

 

[clayj]

This is what Google Talk might do to certain people whose English skills are, shall we say, lacking: