Meebo Discontinuing All Services Except for Meebo Bar 121
An anonymous reader writes with news of Meebo's fate, a mere six days after being acquired by Google. From the article: "Meebo, which began in 2005 as a browser based instant messaging program, will now cease most of its services by next month. The IM service supported various IM platforms such as Yahoo! Messenger, Windows Live Messenger, AIM, ICQ, MySpaceIM, Facebook Chat, Google Talk, CafeMom and others."
Their cash cow, the Meebo bar, will "...continue to be available to site publishers and will see continued improvements and new features in the weeks and months ahead." With Meebo killing off their messenger, are there any good Android chat alternatives that aren't tied to Google Talk?
embrace and extinguish? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Even though it sounds like it may be mainly about getting good employees, and the toolbar crap, that isn't a reason to stop the other services they don't care about.
Or if they do, at least wait a little while. On the Meebo website they have the listing of discontinued services, and then up in the corner "Google has acquired Meebo!""Learn More". I think Meebo's customers have learned enough already.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I wonder what the motivation behind this is... is it to take a competitor out of the road? Or maybe it's more bening, such as gaining qualified employees?
I think it's definitely Bennings. [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
April fools? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow, first read I had to look at the date.
Meebo Bar is like a total perversion of everything they once did well. I used to love using Meebo since it provided a centralized place to track all my conversations. But when I started seeing the Meebo Bar appear elsewhere I ditched them. Who knew they'd all of a sudden be acquired just to obtain control of something horrible like this?
Re:April fools? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
WTF does that mean?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It means you may have Asperger syndrome because you couldn't figure out that GP was trying to say "in general..."
Re:April fools? (Score:5, Funny)
THANK YOU! (Score:2)
Thank you! Now none of the rest of us have to deal with Meebo Bar.
Now if only we can figure out who accidentally the whole Meebo, we can get it back...
Why getting meebo? (Score:2)
I would say it is highly probable that in the next 3 months or so, the web based google talk, will be adding MSN, facebook and other IM compatibilities
But why the hell acquiring Meebo for that?!
The support for multiple chat networks is done thanks to Pidgin's LibPurple (also used in Adium, HP/Palm's WebOS, etc.) which is already open source.
Google could already use it if they want multi-protocol support.
What the meebo people did is develop their wonderful web interface (a complete window manager in AJAX) bringing an almost desktop-application-like experience on web browsers (which in itself is impressive). But the multi-protocole support wasn't their work
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
The Meebo Bar is a major revenue-generating ad platform. Google most likely bought out Meebo for the ad market (like doubleclick) not the chat functionality.
Re:April fools? (Score:4, Interesting)
The Meebo Bar is a major revenue-generating ad platform. Google most likely bought out Meebo for the ad market (like doubleclick) not the chat functionality.
Really? I doubt all 58 people actively using meebo could generate that much revenue.
Admittedly, I've only been around for some few weeks, but I never heard about meebo till google bought them.
There are so many good multi-protocol messenger clients around for just about any platform you may wish
to run. The only reason to ever use meebo was that it was browser based, but with a cell phone in every
pocket how important is that?
As the first link in the summary suggests, this is probably to bolster Google +, which, by all accounts is
not living up to Google's expectations.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Admittedly, I've only been around for some few weeks
Only a few weeks old and already writing? That's amazing.
Although it's very sad to see you discovered slashdot. I hate to think what will happen to your developing brain.
Re: (Score:2)
Dont post as AC I would have modded this funny >.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it's not people installing the Meebo bar on their browser... website owners can use Meebo to run advertising on their sites (much like adwords but incredibly more obnoxious).
As a web developer, I was surprised to find out they actually offered a useful service for end-user.
Re: (Score:3)
As a web developer, I was surprised to find out they actually offered a useful service for end-user.
Care to list the benefits of Meebo, after being acquired by Google, I mean ?
Re: (Score:3)
I meant that I was surprised to find out about the messaging app. I only knew about them because of the horrendous ad-serving package some of my clients had installed. I assume that service is being merged into DoubleClick and Adwords campaigns.
Re: (Score:3)
Please tell me what android messenger you'd recommend that has cross-protocol support like Pidgin on desktops and Meebo IM did on my phone?
Re: (Score:3)
https://play.google.com/store/search?q=im&c=apps [google.com]
Re: (Score:3)
I use ebuddy which works, I can't remember the other one I tried but uninstalled (I don't tend to chat much on the phone)
you could try googling.... http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2010/09/android-im-apps-which-one-should-you-use/ [arstechnica.com]
http://lifehacker.com/5803525/the-best-instant-messaging-application-for-android [lifehacker.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've always liked Meebo and I'm very sad to see it go. The "Meebo Bar" can go die in a fire though, of c
Yes, there is. (Score:5, Informative)
Imo.im is actually a better solution for multi-service instant messaging on Android than Meebo,
Re: (Score:3)
Seconded -- I've been using it since I got an Android phone a few weeks ago, and it does what it does competently without much fuss.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Yes, there is. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Not using anything that requires it's own login. I have logins for all my messenger protocols, thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh, then what's this big "Sign in to the imo Network" [imo.im] that wants a username and password for?
Re: (Score:1)
Xabber (Score:2)
XMPP (Jabber) client with multi-account support.
Jabber (Score:2)
It would be nice if EVERYONE switched over to open jabber servers. Get off all these proprietary services.
But then, who would pay for the server loads? Server resource and network bandwidth isn't exactly free.
Re: (Score:3)
Who pays for IM? It's always been a free add-on service for something else.
Most newer IM services are already Jabber/XMPP (Facebook, LiveJournal, etc). There are only a few "legacy" services that I know of anymore (YIM, AIM, MSN).
Plus, Jabber/XMPP services can connect to these other services through bridge connector plug-ins, though from what I've seen, there's almost no interest in working on them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Server resource and network bandwidth isn't exactly free.
Chat bandwidth is so minor, it might as well be. There's plenty of people willing to run IRC servers for free.
Re: (Score:2)
It would be nice if EVERYONE switched over to open jabber servers. Get off all these proprietary services.
But then, who would pay for the server loads? Server resource and network bandwidth isn't exactly free.
The server resources are in fact virtually free, and as such you will find dozens of places that run a XMPP/Jabber server for exactly zero money. They have the bandwidth and the boxes for their other business, and it costs them no more to allow other to use excess capacity.
There are many lists of these, such as https://list.jabber.at/ [jabber.at] http://xmpp.net/ [xmpp.net] etc.
They are all inter-operable, and I routinely communicate (BOTH to and from jabber) with Google Talk or Xabber, or Kopete.
Jabber isn't just for text any
Re: (Score:1)
nope.
Re: (Score:1)
IMO.IM (Score:2)
Check out http://imo.im/ [imo.im]. It has integration of practically every messaging service, as well as a great and android app.
Re: (Score:1)
Check out http://imo.im/ [imo.im]. It has integration of practically every messaging service, as well as a great and android app.
Yeah, I too use imo on my Android. Low battery consumption, works quite well.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll second that. I've been using Imo for quite a while now. When I first got an Android device I tried a number of IM clients and eventually settled on Imo. I tried eBuddy for a short time, but it requires that you create an eBuddy account and then add all of your other IM accounts to that. Imo, on the other hand, acts like a normal multi-account client and has you manage your accounts locally with the client and logs into them directly from your phone.
I can see the benefit of the eBuddy method for a d
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yay, yet another account to create. It's not enough that I have accounts for the networks I want to connect to?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I see a lot of people write this, but the web version of imo.im doesn't seem close to the quality of Meebo... Meebo was the best multi-protocol web messenger by a huge margin. Then again, with everyone having a phone with a bunch IM capabilities these days, it may not matter. I always used Meebo whenever I wanted to access MSN messenger, which these days is never.
Meebo android client was nice when it launched but they never updated it.
I actually like it that they are stopping the service now, as now they of
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks google... (Score:3)
Google Talk on android sucks too, messages may come in upto 15 minutes late or not at all, especially if you have a web gmail open somewhere with gtalk embedded. Meebo is a good fix for that too. The best I had found in alternate IM's for the phone. It is fast, light, and works, even on my low end phone.
Any slashdotters know of other LIGHT and SNAPPY, android IM clients that support Yahoo and G Talk?
Re: where's teh innovation? (Score:1)
Out of the keyboards of ACs .... this is actually a reasonable question. It's as though teh internets have become a zero-sum game, just at the same time as the "real" economy has. Some thought required here.
Google does this fairly often (Score:3)
They're perhaps a little nicer about their acquisitions than Microsoft.
Still, it's quite annoying. I now have five years of chat logs that differ slightly from the pidgin html format. There's an abandoned conversion program [sourceforge.net], but it lacks a makefile and I'm not keen on figuring out how to get it to compile. If anyone else is working on the same problem please do let me know.
The whole affair makes me really wary about switching to another online chat program, but rolling my own equivalent service seems a bit complex. For the moment I'm symlinking pidgin's history files to my dropbox account, which is probably going to be a viable solution if I feel like installing Pidgin and Dropbox on every computer I want to chat on, or perhaps carry portable versions on a thumb drive. It's too bad meebo isn't an open source project, maybe google can do us that favor.
Re: (Score:2)
adblock plus + element hiding helper = your solution. noscript is useful as well.
Useless (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.ebuddy.com/
Re: (Score:1)
plus.IM also good alternative (Score:2)
THIS IS A SUBJECT FIELD (Score:3, Informative)
I'm sorry, what connects with them? I don't see anything relevant in your message body.
Re: (Score:3)
... because everyone else uses them and won't switch to something else?
Chat alternatives... (Score:2, Funny)
Hmm, chat alternatives on a phone. Have you tried voice?
Re: (Score:2)
So Voice can send messages to my friend in the UK who uses MSN, or my childhood friend who uses AIM? Oh, how about my mother, who likes Yahoo?
Re: (Score:1)
Sure. Voice is agnostic to such things. It doesn't care if you're black or white, American or Tommy. It doesn't care if you like Chevy or Ford.
*shrug*
Re: (Score:2)
It's on a phone, I'm pretty sure he meant "make a phone call".
Re: (Score:2)
My point was that it was not a replacement solution.
Re: (Score:2)
In my experience, for the last few decades, a mobile phone, that supports voice calls, has been the single mechanism for instantanious communication with the highest penetration (indistinguishable from 100% of all adults). No internet chat protocol has even come close to that bredth of usage.
Re: (Score:2)
But your point falls flat, as no protocol is useful when the other end doesn't support that protocol. That doesn't need saying, it's carries zero bits of information.
You get that, and I get that. However, the person I was originally replying to apparently does not. Therefore while the bits it does carry (not zero, just superfluous) are redundant for you, they are not for the intended recipient.
In my experience, for the last few decades, a mobile phone, that supports voice calls, has been the single mechanism for instantanious communication with the highest penetration (indistinguishable from 100% of all adults). No internet chat protocol has even come close to that bredth of usage.
Sure, if you don't mind both parties being raped for an international call. IMs cost between nothing and almost-nothing (depending on if you pay for the data transfer... wifi, "unlimited plans" etc)
Re: (Score:1)
A Few Alternatives (Score:1)
I used to use Meebo on the desktop, but when I got Android I was surprised by just how bad Meebo's Android app was, so I stopped using it. Since then I've been using ebuddy, whose Android app is quite nice actually. The major downside to ebuddy is that they set your status message on every account to an advertisement for ebuddy without you necessarily knowing about it.
Some friends of mine recommended Trillian for Android. I tried it, and it works relatively well, though I still prefer ebuddy. Multi clie
IMO (Score:1)
Anti-competitive (Score:1)
I'm sorry, but any way to slice it, that's just a straight up anti-competitive move.
I don't use Meebo, or much care about it, but Google is *clearly* using their might and cash to eliminate services. I can't decide whether it's Google trying to squash tools that marginalize the difference between competing products, thus eliminating any advantages one IM protocol has over another, or they are just trying to remove products from the landscape and further promote the mono-culture they have pushed so very har
eBuddy (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If it has stopped advertising by hijacking users' IM statuses I may reconsider it
IM? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Have you tried using an AJAX-ey chat client on a dumb terminal?
My God, man. If there isn't an ncurses interface, at least, then count me out: I'd rather key SMTP commands directly into the recipient's mail server than try to use something like Meebo with a dumb terminal connected to a host running Links or somesuch.
That all said, I do miss ytalk.
(Sorry, but I'm simply very literal today. Yes, it's my fault. No, nothing you say will improve it.)
Re: (Score:2)
Cost.
Sending cell text messages is also not entirely reliable between networks, especially internationally to/from US cellcos.
Also, cost.
Google's new motto: (Score:1)
Fuck it. Be evil. Pay's better!
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Trillian for Android (Score:2)
I've been happy with Trillian.
http://www.trillian.im/android/ [trillian.im]
Meebo bar? (Score:1)
Where is it? When's the happy hour?
Partially on topic (Score:2)
What the hell are google thinking?
Google really should copy Apple's imessage system - we need some kind of way to contact other Android users, for free (besides chat) - it should default to a replacement or seamless app like the iphone.
I loathe apple but I have to give credit where credit is due.
These meebo folk could've helped on creating Googles all in one messaging solution that works on the desktop or mobile - putting the meebo team to Google plus is a waste
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think that Google+ isn't intended to include Google's all-in-one messaging solution that works on desktop-mobile-and-everywhere-else?
Re: (Score:2)
Only for the chat (Score:1)
The bar sucked, and I think most people used it for the chat. However I think they gave up on trying to support it as it kept getting worse until it stopped being improved. It had some glitches, facebook chat didnt work anymore, and my biggest gripe - the app for android blew because it didnt let you log in with the same account, total fail.
IM+ (Score:2)
Has a free version, does ICQ,AIM,GTalk,Facebook,MSN,Yahoo (Yahoo implementation is a little buggy for me, but YMMV), and its own protocol "Bump". The paid version is $5, no ads, Skype support, etc. Both versions do push messaging, simple and clean interface. Highly recommend.
IM+ (Score:2)
Any good Web alternatives? (Score:2)
I'm a meebo user, and this sucks. For various reasons, i pretty much need a web chat client for big chunks of my day.
I liked meebo because the UI is small and gets out of my way most of the time. eBuddy is big and intrusive, any others?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the UI is that much of a problem. Still, I usually use imo.im, since it syncs unread messages with their mobile app.
Gibberbot (Score:1)
There goes free library reference chat (Score:1)
A lot of libraries use Meebo chat embedded in their website to provide reference services-particularly because it was free and thus fit their budget. It required nothing extra on the users' end. Now what will they use?
Re: (Score:1)
Yep, same here....
Re: (Score:1)
While I normally have no need for Meebo since I typically use Pidgin on a standard desktop machine, their Web-based instant messenger is very useful on systems that don't have a decent multi-protocol instant messaging client. It's also nice because it doesn't need to be installed. Hell, I didn't even know until relatively recently that Meebo even *had* anything besides their Web IM client. And now, since they've been bought out by Google, they're *already* killing off their instant messenger? WTF? And