-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- First off, thanks. You brought up a lot of points my limited knowlege did not allow me to see.
On 31-Jul-97 Riku Saikkonen wrote: >Travis Cole wrote: >>On 30-Jul-97 Riku Saikkonen wrote: >>>To tell if someone is online: >>> - finger >>> - rwho (but rwhod isn't installed in most places) >>> - talk (try to talk...) >>Now if my friend runs Win95 and his ISP doesn't support shell accounts or >>finger, then how is finger going to do any good? You defeated your own point > >Have him run a finger daemon on the Win95. I think those already exist; at >least I've heard of one. (I don't use Win95, so I don't know for sure... But >fingerd is easy to write.) > I will have to look for that. But I will run into that dynamic IP problem. Once I start school I will have a static IP so any one can contact me whenver they want, I will just have to figure out how to contact them on their dynamic IP, WinNT, no finger, ISPs >>of rwho. And I think there are some Win95 talk clients but you need to know >>your friends IP which can present a problem. >> >>And I fully realize that ICQ at this point is only good if all parties >involved >>are running Windows. I am trying to defent my point that ICQ for Linux would >>be good. Well unless I had to pay $10 a month for it. > >What I'm trying to say is that ICQ for Linux would be no better than >fingerd+talkd+... for Win95. ICQ has nothing new; it's just MS's proprietary >implementation of things that finger, talk, IRC, and friends have done for >years. > >And ICQ is not free, and likely never will be. The client may be free of >charge right now, but an ICQ server isn't. Not all want to use MS's >centralised server; for example, if you're on a network not connected to the >Internet (or MS's ICQ server has crashed, or MS has shut it down in favour >of some newer, cooler, and more expensive "invention"), ICQ doesn't work at >all, but finger and friends do. And it looks like even the (use of the) ICQ >client won't be free for long... > >(Not to even speak of the other, usually more important, meaning of "free": >free with source code that anyone can modify and distribute.) > My initial point in starting this thread so many (years, months?)days ago was that I liked ICQ enought to pay for it as long as I didn't have to pay to much. And I was looking for other Linux users to support me in getting a version for Linux or at least Java. >>>To message: >>> - rwrite / rmsg, if installed (it's not in most places) >>> - e-mail >>> - perhaps ytalk (I seem to remember that ytalkd had a feature for this, >>> but I'm not sure) >>> - IRC, if he's on there (tell him to be [1]) >>>To chat: >>> - talk (ytalk for more than two people at a time) >>> - IRC >>> - one of the voice chat programs for voice >>Once again same points. Most of these are not supported for someone with >Win95 >>and a dynamic IP. The IRC networks are terribly unreliable and who whants to >>keep an IRC clent open all day just to receive messages that you may not see >>unless you can setup your IRC client to give you some kind of notification >when >>you are send a message. I will admit I don't fully understand the feasablity >>of your IRC suggestion, that may very well be possible. > >Unreliable IRC networks are solved by running your own reliable IRC >"network" (one or two servers are enough for quite a few people), or finding >a reliable IRC network (EFnet probably isn't a good choice :)). (But I think >(y)talk would be better than IRC for this kind of thing, at least if you can >find out the IP somehow (see below).) > See above, about my plans to do this. >>And the problem with email is how many people check their email every 2 >>minutes. With ICQ the message when you send someone a message they are made >>immediatly aware of it. The also have the option of turning that >notification >>off. > >If you run an e-mail notifier such as xbiff (I'm pretty sure those exist for >Win95 too), you get the same thing with e-mail. If you write a procmail (or >equivalent) script, you can do much more, for example playing a tune on the >sound card when a certain friend mails you. > >>>The major problem with these is that they're not installed everywhere. But >>>neither is ICQ. And if we're going to get a system that's in common use, I'd >>>much rather have it be something free, decentralised and tried-and-true >>>(like IRC or fingerd+talkd+smtpd) than something proprietary like ICQ. >>I also would much rather have something like IRC, finger, talk, or email but >>finger and talk do not work well if at all with non Unix computers. In light >>of this a multiplatform program like ICQ may be better. > >finger, talk, and e-mail are _much_ more multiplatform than ICQ. And a major >point: It is much easier to write a fingerd, (y)talkd, and IRC client for >Win95 than to port ICQ to Linux. (Actually, a fingerd, some form of talkd, >and IRC clients for Win95 already exist. Tell your friends to use them!) > >(It seems to me that ICQ isn't multiplatform at all, but supports only >Windows on Intel. Am I missing something?) > You are correct and as I said before the reason this thread stated was because I wanted to try and change that. Get them to make a Linux version or hurry up with the Java version. But yes all the excepted Internet protocals will run on about any computer/software and are not owened by any one who could turn them off on a whim or only 1 or 2 servers which could crash. About writing a fingerd, I am not a prgramer but I am starting to learn. I do think that writing my own working useful programs is a way off. >>You still seem to be assuming that every one has a static IP or that I can >>easily find my friends dynamic IP and this is usualy not the case. For email >>notification if you are not directly on the network your email goes to (dial >up >>connection) then that may be a little to slow for what I would like. > >E-mail can be just as fast as any other kind of connection, if set up >properly. (You probably need to run an SMTP daemon on your machine; but >those exist for both Linux and Win95.) SMTP does work with dynamic IPs too; >just route it through the ISP's mail server (most ISPs do this). (If you >know the IP of the receiver (and he runs an open smtpd), you can also send >mail directly, bypassing mail relays.) > I know all of this. I use smail and all the mail I send or receive is first routed through my own computer. But I use fetchmail to check my mail from my ISP so sending a message to me only gets my attention every 10 minutes (a often as fetchmail checks it) I can't see a way to ovoid this on a dynamic IP unless every one knows my IP. >Dynamic IPs are somewhat problematic, though; to figure out the IP, either >the ISP has to have a service for finding online customer's IPs (finger >would be good for this, e.g., so that fingering the mail address gives the >IP if the user is online; I think some ISPs have this), or you need a system >like the ICQ server (or an IRC network, or you could even use (automatic) >mail to transport IP addresses). The problem, I guess, is that there simply >isn't a general way to find dynamic IPs. ICQ tries to offer a way; but it's >not general, and it's proprietary... > I have looked at all these options and there isn't really anything I can do other than use something like the dynamic domain servece from http://www.ml.org which could be a viable option for the dynamic IP issue. >>As for privacy and security I am not really too concerned, but probably >should >>be. > >Probably. Just think of the number of security holes found in MSIE and >Netscape... > Well I mean't about my Linux box being the subject of a Cracker attack. On a dynamic IP it shouldn't be much of a problem and as for someone eves droping on my messages when using ICQ or some other sevice. Well I don't use those for anything I care if other people find out about. PGP is for that :) >>Also AOL just released a beta version of AIM, an ICQ like program. There is >a >>java version out that works well in Linux. Take a look at AOLs web page. > >It's not free either, I would assume... > >-- >-=- Rjs -=- [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > AIM is in free beta testing now. I am sure there will be some fee in the fuure. - ------------------------- E-Mail: Travis Cole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.methow.com/~tcole -- Get my Public Key here Date: 01-Aug-97 Time: 22:32:44 640Kb should be enough for anybody Bill Gates - ------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM+LKNGgYC2+RaorhAQGkWgQAjFTNF318saLWG3nhZiXsbbLHOcHIdFrR fM1b1DXm/RJ+f2616Ss5G8mel4yJ1ActE1B6rbSr7uYvEL3CJhA0Oqv4lVB9vvSV nghQQYt4Ji2XbJS/HFWPDB5lAKRUBrxxCfAFhwLrpxLujb11PNDhfGhcauLwn/ZO /hzH7uQSXEg= =nS7W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
