Paul Johnson wrote:
> The topology is identical, and how it works (servers being clients of other
> servers to deliver between sites, end users connecting to their local server)
> is identical to SMTP. The only real differences between SMTP and XMPP is
> XMPP uses XML and gets the job done in n
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 08:59, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:49, Steve Lamb wrote:
> >> Paul Johnson wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sou
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:49, Steve Lamb wrote:
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
Paul Johnson wrote:
> So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sounds like
> you're arguing to me.
No, that would be
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:49, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
> >> Paul Johnson wrote:
> >>> So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sounds like
> >>> you're arguing to me.
> >>
> >> No, that would be what your strawma
Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
>> Paul Johnson wrote:
>>> So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sounds like you're
>>> arguing to me.
>> No, that would be what your strawman is telling you.
> So are you going to explain why I'm wrong, or
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 22:19, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sounds like you're
> > arguing to me.
>
> No, that would be what your strawman is telling you.
So are you going to explain why I'm wrong, or do we just take the Ult
Paul Johnson wrote:
> So SMTP unifying email is a bad thing? That's what it sounds like you're
> arguing to me.
No, that would be what your strawman is telling you.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
---
Paul Johnson wrote:
> I'm not sure the Soviet Union didn't have help. They were plagued by
> power-hungry party officials and translators that accidentally
> mistranslate morbid but harmless Russian idioms into outward threats.
> Had Lenin not seized power and disposed of Marx, Stalin not have eve
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 21:03, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > That contributes to the problem for sure, but I'm not limiting it just to
> > a protocol support issue. Memory leaks and terrible UI choices also tend
> > to plague the multiprotocol clients (GAIM and Trillian in particular
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 20:55, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > I'm just saying the client-side approach to multi-protocol
> > support is ass-backwards in general and usually results in a client that
> > whose support of half a dozen clients is the world's least funny joke,
>
> Perso
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 20:59, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > How long have multiple-IM clients been around now? 6 or 8 years? Even
> > DOS had more progress made over the same timespan in terms of usability.
>
> Hyperbole much, Paul? Let's see, in the start they did what... IC
Paul Johnson wrote:
> I'm not sure the Soviet Union didn't have help. They were plagued by
> power-hungry party officials and translators that accidentally mistranslate
> morbid but harmless Russian idioms into outward threats. Had Lenin not
> seized power and disposed of Marx, Stalin not have
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 20:03, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > I meant in general, the whole genre of multi-IM software.
>
> This is not fair -- the fact one program is crap (and even commercial one)
> doesn't mean that similar programs are crap as well. Windows NT is piece of
> sh..t,
Paul Johnson wrote:
> That contributes to the problem for sure, but I'm not limiting it just to a
> protocol support issue. Memory leaks and terrible UI choices also tend to
> plague the multiprotocol clients (GAIM and Trillian in particular).
Yes, of course, and that would never happen in
Paul Johnson wrote:
> How long have multiple-IM clients been around now? 6 or 8 years? Even DOS
> had more progress made over the same timespan in terms of usability.
Hyperbole much, Paul? Let's see, in the start they did what... ICQ and
mayyybe AIM. Now they're up to over a dozen networ
Paul Johnson wrote:
> I'm just saying the client-side approach to multi-protocol
> support is ass-backwards in general and usually results in a client that
> whose support of half a dozen clients is the world's least funny joke,
Personally I see it the other way around. My experience with
Paul Johnson wrote:
> I meant in general, the whole genre of multi-IM software.
This is not fair -- the fact one program is crap (and even commercial one)
doesn't mean that similar programs are crap as well. Windows NT is piece of
sh..t, so Linux has to be bad as well :-).
>> I talked about that
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 14:29, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Hmm, what's the deal with the kopete package version being radically
> > wrong then?
>
> kopete is still just part of kdenetwork package, except that now they
> decided that they want to make swifter development cycle than K
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 18:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:19:43PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > How long have multiple-IM clients been around now? 6 or 8 years? Even
> > DOS had more progress made over the same timespan in terms of usability.
> > I think that says mor
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:19:43PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> How long have multiple-IM clients been around now? 6 or 8 years? Even DOS
> had more progress made over the same timespan in terms of usability. I think
> that says more about the utter lack of effort or the impossibility of a
Paul Johnson wrote:
> Hmm, what's the deal with the kopete package version being radically wrong
> then?
kopete is still just part of kdenetwork package, except that now they
decided that they want to make swifter development cycle than KDE itself so
they declared independence. Except that KDE-Qt
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 13:37, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > That's odd, Debian's 3.5.3 version of Kopete still doesn't do it. 0.12 <
> > 3.5.3...
>
> I said, that it has not been packaged for Debian yet. (3.5.3 is version of
> KDE, not Kopete which is there in version 0.10).
Hmm, w
Paul Johnson wrote:
> That's odd, Debian's 3.5.3 version of Kopete still doesn't do it. 0.12 <
> 3.5.3...
I said, that it has not been packaged for Debian yet. (3.5.3 is version of
KDE, not Kopete which is there in version 0.10).
> I don't have a problem with it taking advantage of kparts, it's
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 07:34, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Kopete won't let you do service discovery,
>
> Not true with 0.12.
That's odd, Debian's 3.5.3 version of Kopete still doesn't do it. 0.12 <
3.5.3...
> > GAIM's just plain annoying (why does it open new windows for what s
Paul Johnson wrote:
> Kopete won't let you do service discovery,
Not true with 0.12.
> GAIM's just plain annoying (why does it open new windows for what should
> be an ignored line in STDERR?) and doesn't have service discovery
I said politely that "it is not that strict about Jabber standards"
On Monday 24 July 2006 10:00, Matej Cepl wrote:
> Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> > What Jabber client do you use? What the best?
>
> I use kopete because of integration to KDE (and decent IRC
> client), but what's the best is very loaded question. Run
>
> apt-cache search jabber client
>
> and you will ge
On Monday 24 July 2006 06:52, Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> Matej Cepl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > [...]
>
> Thanks.
> What Jabber client do you use? What the best?
Psi is my preference. It's in main, though there's a dev branch that's adding
Jingle (VOIP) to it right now, too. http://www.psi-im.
Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> What Jabber client do you use? What the best?
I use kopete because of integration to KDE (and decent IRC
client), but what's the best is very loaded question. Run
apt-cache search jabber client
and you will get what's available. Most widely used on Linux are:
* Kopete (
Matej Cepl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [...]
Thanks.
What Jabber client do you use? What the best?
Rodolfo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Rodolfo Medina wrote:
> I've been trying many of the above tools.
> I confess that it's not clear to me what the advantage should
> be in using Jabber with its more or less complicated system
> of gateways instead of Gaim or other multi-protocol IM client
> that connect "natively" to ICQ or MSN
> i
On 7/22/06, Rodolfo Medina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've been trying many of the above tools.
I confess that it's not clear to me what the advantage should be
in using Jabber with its more or less complicated system
of gateways instead of Gaim or other multi-protocol IM client
that connect "
Try amsn. Its what i usually use. It only supports the msn protocol, but it is feature rich *and* has webcam support.www.amsn.sourceforge.net
On 7/22/06, Rodolfo Medina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/16/06, Rodolfo Medina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> My sister wants to chat with MS Windows users
On 7/16/06, Rodolfo Medina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> My sister wants to chat with MS Windows users who use a chat
>> program called `messenger'.
>> Can she do that using Debian GNU/Linux, and will any IRC client
>> be fine? A command line tool would be better, as `ircii'.
"Kelly Clowers" <
33 matches
Mail list logo
