Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Yahoo! Opens up Their Instant Messenger

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tue Jun 20, 2006 06:21 AM
from the all-this-cooperation-is-making-me-nervous dept.
Businesses The Internet Yahoo! Communications
prostoalex writes "Reuters is reporting on the new release of Yahoo! Messenger, which will allow third-party applications and plugins to run within the Messenger environment. From the article: 'Initial partners include 30 Boxes, a calendar-sharing site that competes with Google Calendar, commodities trading site Hedgestreet.com and Pando.com, which offers a service for sharing videos or other files via BitTorrent technology. More than 100 mini-programs will be available initially.' The application is currently available in beta. Relatedly, Microsoft is removing the beta warning label from Windows Live Messenger and promises better voice communications, landline calls and future integration with Yahoo! Messenger."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Ask Slashdot: Phishing in Yahoo! Geocities? 54 comments
Van Cutter Romney asks: "I've received a lot of phishing IMs on my Yahoo! Messenger from contacts whose accounts I guess have been hacked into. All the phishing messages lead to Geocities websites like this where the user is displayed a Yahoo! login page. For most people, the page looks legitimate and they enter their Yahoo! username and password (I was nearly fooled once). Since both the website (Geocities) and the messenger belong to Yahoo!, I'd like to know if they are doing to anything to counter these attacks."
This discussion has been archived.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.

Yahoo! Opens up Their Instant Messenger 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • I'm wondering... Will they make it so that ANY of this runs on Linux? If not, why should I care?

    • Re:One thing (Score:5, Informative)

      by Ilgaz (86384) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:46AM (#15567929) Homepage
      They don't even care for OS X version.

      That piece of shame isn't updated so it has some OS problems. A caring end user posted a patch to versiontracker and everyone installed it. I mean the people who need it.

      Patch: http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/ 29522 [versiontracker.com]

      Yahoo Messenger (the scandal, check comments there!) http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/ 14474 [versiontracker.com]
      • ICQ only has a classic.
        Of course all good OS X users use Adium or Fire as their cross IM network chat client.
        • No, apologies. I reject to use any companies product if they don't give a sh*t to my platform of choice. That means I won't use a third party client to access their precious services too. I use the Yahoo web (java,another story!) if I am in desperate need.

          ICQ 3.4 is both classic and os x version in single application package based on which OS you doubleclick it. It does send and resume files which Yahoo can't over 1 mb. In fact using Yahoo Mac messenger (!) to use any critical data is a huge risk since it
          • I reject to use any companies product if they don't give a sh*t to my platform of choice.

            I prefer that the company's product doesn't give a sh*t about what platform I'm using. Just give me complete interface documentation (or better, use a standard protocol -- in this case, XMPP) and I'll be on my way, thank you.

      • Re:One thing (Score:4, Interesting)

        by neoform (551705) <djneoform@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 20 2006, @07:30AM (#15568116) Homepage
        They don't even care for OS X version.

        Yup, and they don't even care about windows.

        Yahoo messenger is extremely bloated (uses 30-50megs of ram), it crashes ALL the time on me (on multiple computers), and last of all, the protocol itself (YMSG) is horribly designed, no logic used whatsoever when they created it.
      • The Mac version sucked hard from Day 1. I installed it once and created an account, and then never opened it up again.

        Frankly, they ought to just take that abomination out back and put it out of its misery, and take the salaries of whatever developers were working on it (probably none, but you never know) and send it as a donation to the Adium project, since I expect most people using Yahoo Messenger on the Mac are doing it through that. (Or if they're not, they should be.)

        OT: Shouldn't the title of this ar
        • Google is completely open; you can connect with any jabber client and you can also connect any jabber server to their network (e.g. you can talk to people on google talk from your own jabber server and have a name like firstname@lastname.com).
    • Wny should they care if you care?
    • btw "Pando is free software that lets you send and receive files and folders of any size* with your existing email account" Windows and MAC

      goMyPlace will do the same on any platform and this is open source (GPL) and "No adware, no spyware ... no, really" you can check the source code, which arrives in the installation package

    • If they'd wanted to have an open IM system, they'd have jumped on board with Jabber ages ago. This isn't anything to do with "openness", in the sense that most of us understand it; it just means that they have a plugin API now. That makes it "extensible by third parties", not "open."

  • Yay! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Vo0k (760020) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:24AM (#15567855) Journal
    Another 5000 zombies for my botnet! Where's the API? Starting to write my "3rd party app" right now!

    • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kjart (941720) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:44AM (#15567926)

      Not that I don't find that comment funny, but I'm curious why AOL adopting a 3rd party addon model is seen as a security hazard (I'd wager a decent chunk of /. feels that way - could be wrong) whereas Firefox is considered a secure browser.

      Then again, it is AOL.

      • Re:Yay! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by chromatic (9471) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @02:06PM (#15571398) Homepage

        It's difficult to imagine a web browser plugin that could harass millions of other web browser users as easily as an instant messenger client plugin could harass millions of other instant messenger users.

          • Re:Yay! (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Vo0k (760020) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @07:29AM (#15568114) Journal
            Security vulnerablities = bugs. These are avoided at all cost, and hard to spot. Malicious code is a different cup of tea. Should be much easier to spot and result in immediate reporting of the malicious extension. Even if one in a thousand of users takes a peek at the source, that's enough to prevent malicious pieces of code from executing.

            Additionally, a browser uses a "pull" method to get data: User requests data, gets response. May visit a site with malicious extension and the site may try to trick them into installing it, once visited, but no visit - no risk. IM uses "push-pull", with the "push" part more dangerous - the IM is listening and reacts to incoming requests from outside, the malicious code can contact everyone on contact list and send itself to vulnerable clients, no action on side of the user may be required. A browser vulnerablity will infect users visiting given site using vulnerable browser. A IM vulnerablity will infect all on-line users of the IM.

            Of course these are just qualitative differences - IM idea is simply more dangerous than browser one, but both can be vulnerable. And there's a matter of user base. Users of AOL are most likely to install a program a friend from their contact list suggests them to install.

  • I will get people complaining that because I use GAIM I can't install their fancy new plugins.

    Then they will vanish from the internet. Forever.

  • Dear lord why are they making shit programs like this. Do you actually know someone who wants to use their computer to videochat at the same time they're talking to someone and IMing a third while downloading something? These IM clients have morphed into horribly bloated slow, cranky fragile pieces of junk. Just what we need - an MS lab project that they magically took the 'beta' tag off even though its the same junk as last week - to compete in the same space as all the other junk.

    And of course it will be

    • Re:AOL Triton?? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by kjart (941720) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:40AM (#15567906)
      Do you actually know someone who wants to use their computer to videochat at the same time they're talking to someone and IMing a third while downloading something?

      Yes, I do - young people. Based on your ID, I'd guess you don't fit into that demographic (but I could be wrong).

      • Re:AOL Triton?? (Score:4, Funny)

        by petabyte (238821) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @07:55AM (#15568261)
        I know you're right but that does make me feel very old. Teenagers today can video conference, cell phone, IM, myspace, iTunes, etc all at once. Back in my day, *gets out cane*, if you got IE 3.0 and AIM working life was good. My cousin in elementary school has a better laptop and cell phone than I do. I know there are people on this site who fondly remember punchcards, but kids today.

        Get off my yard!

        *marks himself DEPRECATED and schedules date for port removal*

      • Re:AOL Triton?? (Score:5, Funny)

        by anaesthetica (596507) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @08:50AM (#15568684) Homepage Journal
        Wow. I think this is the one instance I've ever seen where having a dramatically higher UID actually gave you more cred. Jeez, next thing you know, Macs will be running on Intel chips...
    • These IM clients have morphed into horribly bloated slow, cranky fragile pieces of junk. Just what we need - an MS lab project that they magically took the 'beta' tag off even though its the same junk as last week - to compete in the same space as all the other junk.
      I think it's mostly attributed to the lack of computer literate individuals that these applications are targetted to; They want to bring something old but too complicated to use to them, and pass it off as something fresh.
    • Do you actually know someone who wants to use their computer to videochat at the same time they're talking to someone and IMing a third while downloading something?

      I've actually video chatted with one person while IMing a second and downloading something. And I'm not exactly a spring chicken anymore.

      It's an easy usage pattern to fall into. You have a camera plugged in, someone wants to chat from a 'net cafe overseas (which frequently have IM cameras). You have a friend who is making fliers for an event,
    • It's just Zarwinski's Law of Software Envelopment [catb.org] in action:

      "Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Those programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which can."

      The PHB's in charge of the various companies' IM divisions don't just want to be an IM service, deep down they'd really like to figure out some way to accomplish everything you want to do on your computer with regards to communications. Really, I think they see themselves not as a special-purpose tool, but as a portal; th

    • Do you actually know someone who wants to use their computer to videochat at the same time they're talking to someone and IMing a third while downloading something?

      I'll take the last bit. IM file transfers are notoriously unreliable and on Y!IM, IIRC, they're limited to 10 MB. The Pando plugin let's you send files (or folders of files) up to 1GB, takes advantage of bittorrent, and is better at getting around firewalls than traditional p2p IM file transfers.

      (Full disclosure: I work for Pando Networks but n

  • Too bad... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tacarat (696339) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:33AM (#15567883) Journal
    Here's the link to the story that they forgot [reuters.com]. A pity, though. They're only opening up the IM for extra, user made, modules. I was hoping they published code for the Yahoo messenger for the community. Hell, I'd be happy if they'd just update the linux version or at least make the current versions more WINE friendly. I'd like my voice chat and video, please.
    • Hmm, but you can already use it from within Gaim, Miranda or even bitlbee, can you? So what's new then? This is a real question, I always wondered how come these programs can use the code if it's not really open. Trillian seems to pay some of the IM providers for using their interface, but the other ones clearly can't (and shouldn't!!!) I'm glad with it, in any case, bitlbee saves my IM'ing life!

  • Y!M Newest Feature (Score:5, Funny)

    by demongeek (977698) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @06:46AM (#15567930)
    Viral infections and data mining tools that work from WITHIN the messenger itself. No more need to open up those nasty attachments, have a plugin that automagically executes files of all times and dials home without you ever needing to think about it....
  • I would not be surprised to see Yahoo! instant messenger to integrate with Yahoo! Maps. That's a trend that MS, Google and Yahoo are definitely focussing on. You can already map your Jabber contacts on Google Maps or Google Earth [slashgeo.org]. Yahoo! Maps licensing restrictions were also alleviated considerably [slashgeo.org] during last week's Where 2.0 conference.

    • I would not be surprised to see Yahoo! instant messenger to integrate with Yahoo! Maps.

      Just what the world needs - a tool that makes it even easier for perverts to stalk 14-year old girls! :o) Just think - when your prey IMs you, you can tell at a glance if you need to violate the "within 100 yards of a school" provision of your plea bargain! :o)
  • O boy they are following the AOL-Wildtangent model..... Free with one IM program you get a bonus of Spyware!!!(oops I mean an enhanced browsing experience). Just what the world needs.

  • And NOW Ads! (Score:3, Informative)

    by Blahbooboo3 (874492) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @07:31AM (#15568125)
    Yes, and don't forget the best part of the new beta. An advertisment at the bottom that you can't get rid of! Wonderful. I am downloading the current non-beta version and saving that one for future use forever.
  • I applaud Yahoo for opening Messenger to 3rd Party modules. For those people who use the service, myself among them, Yahoo must update Messenger for OSX, Linux. It is blatent disregard for the market that they are lax in updating non-Windows Messenger. This "tool" is the only Windows application I use, and the only one keeping me from leaving dual-boot Windows/Linux behind forever in favor of Linux.

  • Damn! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Jessta (666101)
    Damn, When I read that heading I thought maybe yahoo was going to open up their messager protocal.
    This doesn't even deserve to involve the word 'open'. But it can use the word 'API'
  • Now how about opening the calendar and address book?

  • First, where's the alleged link to the Reuters article referenced in the post? Never mind, 15 seconds of Google News helped.

    Anyway, the article is a bit short on details, but the promises don't sound too, er, promising. What's it, really? Now people can write Javascriptlets and new plugins for messenger?

    Yawwwwn.

    Call me back when they open-source the client, release specs for the protocol, and accept input from the larger developer community. Until then, I'll be sticking with the people [jabber.org] who have been d

  • Try this little experiment. Keep your mouse hovered above the top visibility drop-down. (the one that says: - Available to everyone).
    After a second of holding your mouse still, a little yellow square will appear that says:

    You appear as
    Online to 1000 Contacts
    Offline to 0 Contacts


    Microsoft LCS Status: Online to everyone

    Could this be the first sign that the client at hand already has the MSN Protocol connection modules integrated? Wonder why they're not activated at all yet, as this is the only

  • Until I read the summary I thought that meant they were going to stop their practice of deliberately changing the YIM protocol every other week to break 3rd-party clients.
  • Does this mean that we can now expect the authors of the YIM transport for Jabber will be able to better support it?

    I mean, I'd love to see Yahoo put up their own Jabber gateway, but I'm more realistic than that.
  • So, is this the death of web 2.0? Are IM programs going to take over the desktop? Are we going to be running word processors as an IM plugin? If Yahoo IM suppose AJAX, anything is possible...

  • Heh... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by zptao (979069)
    Yahoo! is so far behind in the IM market that they shouldn't even bother. Not to mention their client sucks, of course.
  • And yet, the world moves on and Jabber [jabber.org] continues to gain users.

    • Really, I'm surprised Y! Messenger's not dead already. I think I have maybe one contact that uses Yahoo's messenger. Just about everyone I know uses MSN. Even ICQ's less ubiquitous than it was six years ago.

      Yahoo still has about 20% of the market. ICQ is less ubiquitous because it is now owned by AOL, who integrated it with AIM. The problem with IM, in general, is everyone is looking for the big win and wants their little walled garden to take over so they can make money as the gatekeeper of all IM commu

    • Re:standardize instant messenging (Score:5, Informative)

      by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday June 20 2006, @11:47AM (#15570269)

      Do companies make money from their proprietary instant messengers? Is it just ad revenue?

      Both. Some companies sell "pro" IM clients and a number get ad revenue from the download page or from ads embedded in the client. The real money, of course, is in dominating the entire space so you can begin charging for access or tying to other features. No one has managed that and hopefully Google will get them to give up on it.

      However, when will it be that instant messenging gets a standard protocol (or regains it, i.e. IRC)? When I want to email someone, I know their address and I can email them, I don't have to think about which program they are using to read/write their email. When I want to call someone on the phone, I dial their phone number to reach them anywhere in the world.

      Additionally a standard protocols allows an individual or company to run their own server for security and stability reasons. Luckily, such a protocol exists. It is called Jabber and is an approved, open standard. Google has implemented it for their GTalk IM system and Apple has implemented it in their iChat program. I think GAIM supports it as does Trillian (pro only?). The difficulty is, since the existing protocols and social networks are closed, people can't easily migrate away without the ability to interchange. Hopefully, Google will take over enough of the market that other companies will see the value in being able to intercommunicate and we will all get that standard protocol and a defacto standard as well. You can already send messages via the Jabber protocol to anyone who has a Gmail account and the IM client is built into the Webmail interface to it. It works the same as e-mail for addressing, (username@gmail.com or username@somedomain.foo).

      Maybe google will have one.

      They already do. Also, Jabber is widely deployed in enterprise businesses for secure, internal messaging.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.