On 3/12/09 11:24 AM, Pedro Melo wrote: > > On Mar 11, 2009, at 8:05 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: > >> The big question of all is whether it is the job of jabber.org to >> compete with >> Skype. Aren't there others in this space already trying to do >> that? If >> jabber.org is truly competitive, and no longer a self-defeating >> reference >> service, is it still fair to use the "Jabber" name? Peter, you may >> remember, >> one of the options we discussed was to actually get rid of jabber.org >> entirely. ;-) > > I don't think its the role of jabber.org to compete direcly with Skype. > > But there are certain services that would make the network better > (like a network of sock5 proxys, and all the NAT-busting stuff) that > require some form of central coordination, and that fits perfectly for > jabber.org. > > As for the IM service, I would keep it running and continue to accept > new users as the "backup route for new jabber users": if they are not > introduced to a more local jabber service then you can always have > Jabber.org.
Look, if we don't do it nobody will. Much as I like the folks who work on services like Google Talk and Nimbuzz and SAPO (etc.), they need to justify their services to people at their companies. That means they try to funnel users to their domains. It's not in their interest to run an open infrastructure for IM / file transfer / voice / video. Whether we call it "Jabber" or "FreeTalk" or something else doesn't matter. (I rather like "FreeTalk", myself.) The point is that we have the chance to federate with all those other services but also offer something more open. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ JDev mailing list Forum: http://www.jabberforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=20 Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/jdev Unsubscribe: jdev-unsubscr...@jabber.org _______________________________________________
