Slashdot Log In
Yahoo Changes Protocol, Blocks Third Party Clients
Posted by
michael
on Thu Jun 24, 2004 08:27 AM
from the purely-accidental dept.
from the purely-accidental dept.
NaDrew writes "ZDNet reports that Yahoo is once again blocking connections from Trillian (the alternative multi-protocol client). Yahoo tried this a few times last year and it looks like they're trying again. Cerulean, maker of Trillian, employs some excellent protocol engineers, who I have no doubt will quickly figure out Yahoo's latest obfuscation and release a patch. A quick fix discovered late this evening: Change your Y!IM host from scs.msg.yahoo.com to scs.yahoo.com, port 5050, and it should work. This is on Trillian 0.74H, not Pro."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Centericq is also broken (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Centericq is also broken (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Centericq is also broken (Score:5, Interesting)
I was using trillian until I figured out that all my contacts were on all the four major instant messagers... then I consolidated all my contacts into just one IM client.
Parent
Re:Gaim (Score:5, Informative)
I don't know if you're on Windows, but i am, and i find that Gaim (for Windows) is a pretty poor client. I mean, it's OK, but compared to other things, it needs a lot of work. It seems to me like the Windows version of Gaim was nothing more than an after-thought. I can't get work done (I'm paid to sit around instant-messaging my friends all day -- true story.) using an after-thought. ;_;
So... i use Miranda [miranda-im.org]. Needs a lot of work also, but it's much better off than Gaim, i find, and it's just as open.
Parent
Re:Gaim (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Centericq is also broken (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Centericq is also broken (Score:5, Informative)
bitlbee lets you connect to all the major IM networks using your normal irc client. When your mouth-breating, non-irc-using friends send you an instant message, it shows up just as a normal irc privmsg and you can respond in kind.
Parent
pfft (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it blocks gaim also.
Re:pfft (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:pfft (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Quick fix does not work (Score:5, Informative)
It appears to be a separate server, and you won't be able to communicate with other people on the 'fixed' yahoo servers.
Re:Quick fix does not work (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Trillian (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Trillian (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Trillian (Score:5, Insightful)
hmmm.... (ponders the ethical dillema)....
Anyone know why Trillian isn't paying for use? Have Yahoo and company offered?
Parent
Re:Trillian (Score:5, Insightful)
It doesn't cost the kernel developers anything for RedHat to sell their work. They produce the kernel for their own use and for others to use. Redhat packages it up and sells it.
When you use Trillian to send an IM via Yahoo, you're using Yahoo's servers, which they purchase and pay to maintain, and their bendwidth, which they also pay for. You're costing them money, and you're not viewing their ads, which is the method they use to make money. From their viewpoint, you're a leech on their services.
No such drain occurs on the kernel developers from Redhat selling their product.
I have no problem with Open Source products which use Yahoo or other IM providers. But if Trillian wants to make money off their product, then they should license the right to access Yahoo's servers. That's a personal opinion; my understanding is that they're not be under any _legal_ obligation to do so, and I'm not implying anything different here.
Parent
Damn... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, wait...
Kopete also (Score:5, Informative)
The business case sadly makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The business case sadly makes sense (Score:3, Insightful)
What makes people prefer trillian?
If yahoo can figure that out instead of trying to lock people out maybe they won't have to lock people out.
Re:The business case sadly makes sense (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, website 'X' will have their own chat protocol, and account
Re:The business case sadly makes sense (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
How to win back IM? (Score:5, Interesting)
Many of my fellow posters have suggested that the solution is for people to switch to Jabber. I agree that the solution should start with Jabber, but it's not as easy as asking everyone to please switch.
I'm going to try to identify the obstacles to a migration to open standards, and I hope that others will expand on this and maybe even offer some solutions.
How do you convince ISPs to begin deploying Jabber servers as they would deploy mail servers? Is there any money to be made in deploying and operating a worldwide network of Jabber servers? If so, maybe some entrepreneur could come up with a clever idea for bootstrapping the network.
As some people have mentioned, it is possible that IM may evolve interoperability naturally, but I wouldn't count on that happening anytime soon. The final weapon of the proprietary IM providers will be to add crypto authentication to the protocol, with a key embedded into the clients. They would then have a solid legal recourse (DMCA) against "rogue" clients seeking interoperability. (Who knows, though... that could be a useful selling point for open standards!)
There... now that I've identified the problems, all that's left is for someone to provide the solutions. ;)
Parent
PLEASE NOTE (Score:5, Informative)
I could dig up the older comments/articles which thoroughly contradict this troll-ish article summary but I don't think it deserves my time.
Yahoo did not, I repeat did *not* try to "block" third party IM clients "several times last year". *All* they did was upgrade their protocol for better reliability/etc (I have personally noticed the increase in reliability/refresh rate etc). It is up to the 3rd party developers to upgrade their protocols if Yahoo decides to do so.
And Yahoo did offer to help them fix their stack to help it work with their servers. I am not affiliated to Yahoo, btw - I just think it receives a lot more undeserved flak then it should.
Re:PLEASE NOTE (Score:4, Informative)
Story here [slashdot.org]
Story here [slashdot.org]
Story here [slashdot.org]
Parent
Re:PLEASE NOTE (Score:5, Insightful)
Right. It's an unfortunate side-effect.
They're also forcing all their users that DO use the Yahoo! approved clients to upgrade to their new client. A client with more bloat, more featuritis. No choice for the lowly user in all this. Yet the entire value of their messenger service is the number of people on it. That's the only reason 3rd party apps are made; people want to talk to other people who are on the Yahoo network. Instead of recognizing their users, even if they don't pay for the privilege of using the network, as a valuable asset, they treat them like, well, sheeple. Especially if you happen to be on a third party client.
Even AOL treats third party clients better, by "supporting" an oudated version of their protocol. It might not have all the whizz-bang features, but it keeps even those damn geek hippies on the network, which is a good thing for all those involved, really.
How would you feel if Microsoft suddenly changed the "hotmail" protocol, so you could send e-mail to any one on hotmail, or receive any from them? Even if it's your girlfriend, or your mother?
How about if your telephone company suddenly won't let you connect to the bad side of town? All those free phonecalls cost em, you know?
Parent
FYI Miranda forum thread (Score:5, Informative)
In short, scs.yahoo.com:5050 is no good.
Not necessarily a bad thing (Score:5, Insightful)
What about the law? (Score:5, Interesting)
If they want to get rid of 3rd party clients, then this is just another arms race, meaning we will eventually have open clients that work, after some finite delay.
In all honesty I can't blame yahoo! for trying. After all, for each person that doesn't see the ads associated with their official client, they lose revenue.
Yahoo! is a great site and they provide a LOT of stuff for free, so I don't blame them for trying to get some money back for all the free stuff they have given us over the years. I guess since IMing is so popular and so much time is spent in the IM client, to them that's a LOT of missing eyeballs over a long period of time that don't get to see the ads. That's a lot of money lost by the minute. And let's face it.. we are using their computers for free, and not giving anything back each time we use a third party client.
My question though, is that if they hate third party IM clients for cutting into their rev. stream, why don't they take the law out of their own hands and use the law to their advantage? Is there nothing that could be done, by drafting some clever EULA or something, that would make it illegal or something like that to use 3rd party clients? That might actually dampen the efforts with libyahoo and other projects that try to develop an open protocol lib. Sourceforge might even cease to host such projects, being that they are in the realm of piracy or accorting to the DMCA.
While it would suck for me (as I love to use centericq over their stupid client), why don't they just make it illegal to use third party clients?
Re:What about the law? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well I disagree. First off, I don't think that the 'suits' that are paid to think about how to ruin our lives haven't already thought of this. I don't think that by censoring my thinking I am doing anyone any good. By asking the question that I did, I think that will eventually reveal that in fact Yahoo! doesn't really want to kill the 3rd party clients -- at least not yet. I think that if they really wanted to, they would have been more aggressive about it already. And believe me, by my posting that question here on
I think that in actuality they prefer for the time being that as many people as possible use their Y!IM network. Maybe sometime later in the future when they are a monopoly (if that ever happens) they will then proceed to kick the ass of every 3rd party client.. but until then, they secretly believe 'the more the merrier'.
That's the cool thing about having so many competing systems. And that's the problem with something like Microsoft where they managed to kill off all their competition. They become dicks and stop doing a good job as soon as that happens.
Parent
Re: Yahoo Changes Protocol, Blocks Third Party Cli (Score:5, Interesting)
Messaging clients with advertisement-based model will surely object to allowing third party clients to connect, since it doesnt make any business sense.
Furthermore, they may have allowed such third party clients in the past, to gain that critical mass that ensures market peneration and continued usage, but once they are past the bell curve, they would then clam down on it.
Think of it as an equivalent to Microsoft clamping down on piracy - they never prevented that in the past knowing that so long as its their products being used, they will be able to generate revenues one way or the other. Now that the market penetration is coming to a saturation (or if not, there are far more alternative solutions available than ever before), they have started to really put on the squeeze.
Finally, companies like trillian may well have the best protocol engineers in the world, but such disruptions in service shall push away customers every time, however small the percentage might be. Unless connectivity to widely used messengers is provided by agreement, such connectivity outages will cause most users to move to move away from them.
Adopting a new protocol (Score:5, Insightful)
I know this is pie in the sky, but this whole messenger war seems so stupid. Wasn't someone working on a standards for a messenger protocol? This whole messenger war thing seems so stupid and only serves to piss users off.
This is ind of like copy protection and DRM. They keep trying to stop people and people just keep getting around it. Nobody ever seems to learn. Are they just going to keep beating their heads against the wall until the end of time? Are all these guys that clueless and stubborn?
Re:Adopting a new protocol (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Backwards compatibility with unsupported products? (Score:5, Insightful)
Awfully sorry. (Score:5, Interesting)
malicious intent? piffle! (Score:4, Interesting)
And to those complaining about the yahoo client, I find it to be the best IM program overall. The new version has a clean interface, quick access to your address book and other features, but is customizable to not show any of that stuff if you don't want the clutter. Best of all, it doesn't deliver ads. NONE. Plus the offline messaging is a great feature.
Perhaps the people complaining haven't used it for a year or two and just think it's awful that a commercial company would break compatibility for an upgrade? It happens all the time in the open source world - cut Yahoo some slack.
Google (Score:5, Funny)
Makes you just itch for a google client doesn't it?
'Cause if it's Google it must be good!
GMail - like turning on the lights and watching the cockaroaches scatter!
Yahoo Profit from Ads? What Ads?! (Score:5, Informative)
Trillian Patches Available (Score:5, Informative)
Already fixed in GAIM CVS (Score:4, Informative)
Goddamn, that makes me feel geeky.
Just let them make money. (Score:4, Insightful)
But these companies spend millions of dollars on their networks for the hardware and software that is part of it. Let them play a little add here and there to help support it.
All these ad blockers and ways of getting around their revenue streams only make them try and make more annoying advertising.
If trillian wanted to be a good friend to yahoo, they'd pass through their advertising as well or find some other way to compensate them. Just because Yahoo decides to offer their network services for free doesn't mean anyone else can deploy software that uses it as well. It's like having someone write a robot to suck the content off your website, chagnge a few slogans and graphics and publish it on their site as their own minus your advertising.
Just for the record (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Why do they bother? (Score:5, Interesting)
Now my question, didn't the gov't come out with a law a while ago forcing AOL to share their IM standards so third party software could integrate with it? And if so, wouldn't this apply to all IM software, including Yahoo?
Parent
Re:Why do they bother? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Why do they bother? (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, 3rd party clients are the ONLY way they receive revenue from some of us. I keep a Yahoo and Hotmail email account. I rarely IM anyone outside of AIM. Trillian's checking of Yahoo email drives me to their site (where I see their ads). No checking, I don't go as often to check my mail. They lose money. As far as I'm concerned, Yahoo is shooting themselves in the foot.
Parent
A word of advice... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Gaim..?? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Gaim..?? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:So (Score:5, Informative)
It's already there, open source, many servers, and intercommunication possible between multiple servers.
And some people have made proxies for jabber-commerical messenger systems communication.
And it works with many, many clients, console-based as well as graphical...
Parent
Re:So (Score:4, Interesting)
That by itself is enough to make it the clear leader for corporate use. I set up a server for our office LAN and our IT guy installed Psi on every employee's desktop. Now we have a private, low-latency communication system for passing short messages back and forth in real-time. There hasn't been a single problem with the roll-out; I started the server, spent 20 minutes telling the other employees how to use Psi, and walked away from it.
With any other IM service, we'd have to deal with privacy policies (such as mandatory encryption of all messages) or other hassles. With Jabber, we can freely send sensitive information between employees without worrying about outside snooping. Beyond that, we wrote an notification API for use with our internal applications that allows you to send event notices to selected employees via either email or Jabber. It's nice to get instant notification of system status changes without depending on our Internet connection being available.
Parent