Video Chat Software Reviewed 305
Ryan writes "The PowerPage by way of The New York Times has a comparison of Apple's new iChatAV and Microsoft's MSN Messenger 6. My favorite quote, 'Microsoft, true to tradition, has focused on expanding its list of features, while Apple has worked toward elegance and simplicity.'"
Right... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Right... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Right... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Right... (Score:5, Informative)
I fired up iChat AV, and so did he. I saw the little phone button next to his name, so I pressed it. It connected and we started talking. Working great. No port forwarding.
IIRC, the audio stream is sent right inside the instant messager packets so as long as you can instant message, you can use voice.
I'll break out tcpdump and check it out sometime. No hurry though, cause it works great...
Justin Dubs
Re:Right... (Score:2)
You're in luck. No A/V data flows through AOL at all. [jpj.net]
Re:Right... (Score:3, Informative)
How do I know this? Well it told me, and took me to my firewall pref pane so I could click Add and let it through. That's simplicity.
sounds like more bloat. (Score:4, Insightful)
Manuals? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Manuals? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Manuals? (Score:4, Funny)
SuSE knows best. (Score:2)
The reason why I like to buy SuSE Linux is because they KNOW that nothing, not even the best electronic documentation, can beat a well written book. Microsoft just can't figure this out. I found my first expierence with Windows XP even more pai
Re:sounds like more bloat. (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, if we could only tell all those people that Apple exists.
-Dae
Re:sounds like more bloat. (Score:5, Insightful)
I would rewrite this passage this way:
Simplicity is judged a valuable attribute by the normal layperson, but people buy features.
Put another way, simplicity is seen as a sophistication in and of itself, and is therefore desirable, but the average Joe pounding down CA Highway 41 in a Ford F250 doesn't buy simplicity - he or she buys 'features' that will 'make computing easier'. And they buy all this at a place where they can get the "Best Buy". S
Here's a laugh: Microsoft bills Windows XP as a fully color managed operating system, and insists XP works as well as a Mac for, say, fine art photographic interpretation.
You ever see fine art photographs on the wall in a BRIGHT SCREAMING RED AND BLUE frame - with the wall behind the print painted in still more primary colors? Me niether - and there's a reason why. Apple chooses to 'frame' documents in more subtle and understated silvery-neutral tones. Unlike Windows, where you have to create your own middle-grey desktop (uh, sorry, Wallpaper) pattern, Apple eincludes one by default. You can even turn off the traffic signal-colored windows controls with a single click. That's thoughful simplicity.
Windows XP is a terrible environment (by default, mind you) for using Photoshop or any other piece of software where you'd be expected to make careful color and tonality judgements on screen.
Does the Average User(TM) know that, or care? No and no. So the features (NEW, COLORFUL THREE-DEE WINDOWS THAT LOOK RENDERED BUT AREN'T!) sell more copies of XP while subtly increasing the number of elements that make color and tonal adjustments more difficult.
If Apple gave up on simplicity and built what everyone on Slashdot wanted (A $500.00 Mac OS X on x86 box with six expansion slots, ten drive bays, an Athlon64, a 400W power supply and an M+M dispenser on the front) the people who DO buy Macs faithfully every 30 months would leave in droves. The thing about simplicity is that it is incredibly tough to do properly. Simplicity done Microsoft's way = sparse.
Based on the PC market, you might say that about 3-5% of the people with computers value and purchase simplicity.
when there's nothing more to take away... (Score:3, Insightful)
Evolution isn't a progression to ever greater and greater differentiation
but...is first an ascent to a higher point, and after having reached this
point is then a descent to more and more simple forms. (Rudolf Steiner)
Perfection (in design) is achieved not when
there is nothing more to add, but rather when there
is nothing more to take away. (Antoine de Saint-Exupery)
Everything should be made as simple as possible,
but no simpler. (Albert Einstein)
cheers! [earthlink.net]
gnomemeeting? (Score:5, Interesting)
an open source h323 soft compatible with netmeeting for all *nix, but dunno if it is still with msn6, would be nice to check this
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:5, Insightful)
"Installation of Gnomemeeting is easy once you have the right version for your specific distribution of Linux! Here at PowerPage, we followed the simple directions:
4. Software installation
4.1. Which libraries do I need to run it?
You will need
* the standard Gnome libraries (they are now optional in recent GnomeMeeting versions, but we recommend using them to have the full-featured GnomeMeeting).
* the OpenH323 and the PWlib libraries (See download section of this website).
* the OpenLDAP library (Included in your distribution)
* the SDL library (Included in your distribution). Having SDL is optional, but if you compile GnomeMeeting without SDL, the fullscreen feature will be unavailable.
* the Quicknet telephony development files (Provided with your kernel). Having those files is optional, but if you compile GnomeMeeting without Quicknet support, it will be impossible to use Quicknet hardware during calls.
4.2. How can I compile GnomeMeeting?
Simply use the binaries from your distribution, the ones in the downloads section, or compile that way:
As root, follow the steps
4.2.1. Compile PWlib
You have to compile PWlib that way:
$
$ make optshared
$ make install
If you want to compile Firewire support into PWlib, you have to pass either the --enable-firewiredc or --enable-firewireavc to the configure script. Notice that executing the configure script will generate a ptbuildopts.h file that will be placed in the include/ subdirectory of the pwlib sources. If you want to benefit from the callto URLs, P_LDAP must be defined and set to 1 in that file. Similarly, P_HAS_IPV6 must be defined and set to 1 if you want to be able to use IPv6 with GnomeMeeting.
4.2.2. Compile OpenH323
You have to compile OpenH323 that way:
$
$ make optshared
$ make install
If you have any problem, please have a look at openh323 FAQ. You can also mail the GnomeMeeting mailing list.
4.2.3. Compile Gnomemeeting
Download it in the download section of the GnomeMeeting websit.
run the
--prefix=/usr to install it in
--with-ptlib-includes= specifies the location of PTlib headers (for example,/opt/pwlib/include/ptlib if you extracted PWlib in
--with-openh323-includes= specifies the location of OpenH323 headers
If OpenH323 and PWlib are correctly installed (both the libraries and the headers), we suggest you to compile GnomeMeeting that way:
$
$ make
$ make install
We at the PowerPage were disappointed to see the installation instructions for iChat and MSN Messenger 6:
1. Download iChat if you're using OS X; download MSN Messenger 6 if you're using Windows.
2. Double-click the file you downloaded and click the 'install' button to begin the installation.
3. Double-click the program's icon to run it and sign on."
Give me a break. If they would have compared Gnomemeeting, it would have been trounced. Why? Because this wasn't an article geared toward people who like--or even know
There goes another Slashdotter who just doesn't understand which software is geared toward which people. We don't
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
Give me a break. If they would have compared Gnomemeeting, it would have been trounced. Why? Because this wasn't an article geared toward people who like--or even know
Shut up troll. Obviously you can't read:
How can I compile GnomeMeeting?
Simply use the binaries from your distribution
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
Might be due to the general lack of source code for Apple and MS products.
GnomeMeeting comes with any distro that includes Gnome2.. that includes SuSE and Redhat. You don't have to do anything special to install or use it.
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/
Lack of source code my ass. iChat might not be open-source, but the entire core of the OS is.
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
I wouldn't go farther than that - that will "just work" for the supported distributions. With Debian, Mandrake, Redhat, Slackware, and SuSE binaries available, what major distributions are left out?
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
If not, you have to tell them how to install apt-get to use your oh-so-simple instructions.
Bottom line: This article was targeted toward people who couldn't give a rat's ass about what to
Re:gnomemeeting? (warning - kinda long) (Score:2)
duh (Score:5, Funny)
(This isn't a troll, it's sarcasm) (Score:2)
Looking at this another way- (Score:2, Funny)
Quote of the year (Score:5, Funny)
I believe I hear the sounds of a pissed off Gnu.
Re:Quote of the year (Score:2, Insightful)
Really, I don't think you should set that standard for all beta software. Near-perfectionists like Apple probably would have a different standard of what "beta" means compared to "if it compiles, it ships" Microsoft.
Smileys (Score:5, Funny)
'nuff said.
Of course it does... (Score:4, Funny)
Functionality (Score:3, Interesting)
Plus, exactly how many features can u need on a peice of software that is made for point to point communication?.
Re:Functionality (Score:2)
I'd rather have the most full featured piece of software, as long as:
1. It lets me customize it
2. It doesn't load up anything I don't want
I can't believe geeks would put down too much functionality. You should all be kicked out of the club. Simplicity you say? Simplicity is for those people who can't program their own VCR. Duh!
Re:Functionality (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, that's a great metaphor for linux UI in general -- as most humans agree that programming a VCR is stupidly and unnecessarily hard. Even with VCR+ or VCR Gold or on-screen programming or *whatever*, I've never seen a VCR timer that didn't inherently make life hard for the user.
Compare this to tivo -- on tivo, you press one button, you can browse listings, you can search listings, you hit the record button and that's it. Much better human interface design and product engineering -- and as a result, they can charge for it!
I'd love to see linux become viable for more users, but until the "Simplicity is stoopid, and you are so stoopid" mentality is violently overthrown, linux will remain a decent server platform and a desktop also-ran.
~jeff
Re:Functionality (Score:3, Funny)
Comments on the Article (Score:5, Insightful)
This point, like the one the editor made, is what defines it to me. Do you want to play? Get MSN. Do you want to communicate? Get iChat. There are times and places for both of these activities.As those of you who saw Jobs' keynote Monday will already have guessed, this was a prime requirement for the iSight camera that Apple released -- designed to attach to the various displays Apple has released. Looking at the pictures on the NYT site (yeah, registration, ooh, scary), there's a massive difference in the way that the people using the two apps look -- one that you wouldn't necessarily click to from just reading the text.This is true, as it stands, but misleading. As they point out elsewhere in the text, iChat works as well on any FireWire camera, such as pretty much all modern camcorders, etc. This has more to do with using an established graphics communication protocol over a generic bus like USB than who manufactures the hardware.
Re:Comments on the Article (Score:3, Insightful)
You have to remember that MSN is fighting AIM which has included a lot of this customisation (which the kids really like) in it's past versions. MSN is just playing catch-up to AIM, showing it up with the video, and catching up to iChat, showing it up with the customisation.
Re:Comments on the Article (Score:3, Insightful)
Since you couldn't just, you know, SIT YOUR CAMERA ON TOP OF YOUR FRIGGING MONITOR!!!! The little Apple camera hoobajoob is cool, but Jobs made it sound like it was physically impossible to put a camera on top of a monitor until the glorious miracle of iSight.
--riney
Re:Comments on the Article (Score:5, Insightful)
That, and its a damned nice little camera, too.
Re:Comments on the Article (Score:2)
Now THIS is something it would be nice if Windows would do. You have to use trackercam to get 1394 camera functionality on windows with webcams, though there may be another driver which do
Of what use? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Of what use? (Score:2, Informative)
Also, we have a couple of development locations, so it's great for when you need to have a conversation with someone not near you.
NYT reg... (Score:2, Informative)
Needed feature (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Needed feature (Score:3, Funny)
anyone know of something similar for Linux/Unix? (Score:3, Interesting)
maybe something that will work with apples iChat AV?
Re:anyone know of something similar for Linux/Unix (Score:2)
maybe something that will work with apples iChat AV?
iChat AV is proprietary and just came out, why would you expect anything other than other iChat AV clients to work with it?
Re:anyone know of something similar for Linux/Unix (Score:2)
Re:anyone know of something similar for Linux/Unix (Score:2)
To loosely quote Jobs at the WWDC Keynote: "Right now, iChat AV is Mac only, but we expect to work toward interoperability as our competitors copy it."
I'd expect AIM to work with it first due to Apple's relationship with AOL, with YIM coming after that.
~Philly
Remember Cornell Cuseeme anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
It's good to see Apple and Microsoft are now providing it with some timely competetion.
Re:Remember Cornell Cuseeme anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes.
Probably better then you.
I also remember it was based on the early QT codecs with lots of support from Apple. Indeed Cornell used to be quite publicly appreciative of the support they had gotten from Apple on CUSeeMe. In return Apple loved to show off CUSeeMe to it's academic customers as an example of the kind of cutting edge tec
requirements (Score:4, Informative)
Re:requirements (Score:5, Informative)
Re:requirements (Score:2)
I point out iChat's video and audio superiority, and two people mod me down as a troll.
It's easy to have lower system requirements when your stuff doesn't look or sound as nice.
(I'm kidding, I'm kidding. Don't take it personally.
Re:requirements (Score:4, Informative)
This is partially due to the very high quality codec being used. However, it will work on slower processors if the bandwidth limit is turned on. Without bandwidth limitations, the app brought my G4/400 to a crawl. With the limit turned on to 400kbps, it runs just fine and the quality is still very nice.
Re:requirements (Score:2)
Since 600MHz is a decent floor perhaps Apple may use it as a selling point to try to convince users to upgrade hardware, or just to go up to OS X (finally! who hasn't by now except companies that needed specific software!) The restriction to 600MHZ may also be an indication of
Re:600MHz _G3_ for Video (Score:2)
This is correct for straight integer and some floating point. The G4 uses its much faster AltiVec unit for FP wherever possible. Also, most graphical routines in OS X (including the codecs used by Quicktime and iChat) make heavy use of AltiVec. Generic int+fp non-graphical benchmarks show the G4 to be very similar to the G3, but real world use is far different. Photoshop, iMovie, Final Cut Pro, as well as
Once again... (Score:2, Interesting)
"Apple, on the other hand, would sooner die than release anything that could be described as "stuttering" or "microscopic." In iChat AV, video is as crisp, clear, bright and smooth as television (640 by 480 pixels), in a window as small as a Triscuit or as big as your screen. Unless you begin to type, the typed-chat window isn't even visible during a video or audio call. Beware, however: Apple offers t
Re:Once again... (Score:3, Informative)
that being said, most computers have microphones and using the full duplex audio chat has been repeatedly compared to cell phone quality. you can also do one sided video chats... so make friends
Re:Once again... (Score:2)
That's not true at all, I don't think I've seen a usb camera that *couldn't* do 640x480.
I don't understand why iChat *forces* you to stream at 640x480.. why couldn't I chat with 4 people at once and have each one at 320x200? it'd take the same amount of bandwidth... and be much more useful.
Having 640x480 available is nice, but requiring it is stupid.
Re:Once again... (Score:2, Informative)
It's just like iPod. Apple recommends that you should use it with a Mac, however, other MP3 players WILL work with Mac as well.
Re:Once again... (Score:2, Informative)
My cheap as hell webcam works fine for streaming video. The quality is decent. And there is still nothing stopping me from going out and buying an awsome digital camcorder or firewire webcam and using that.
But to force it on someone is just bad business.
And what is all this crap about "mucking around" with the OS???
Both of my webcams are USB, they provide 30 fps of 320x240 video. (they can do 640x480 but most connections have a hard time uploading that)
Well good (Score:2, Insightful)
Elegantly simple? Or elegant for simpletons? I'll take "expanded list of features" for $1000, Alex.
One of the features of Microsoft's offering is "works with almost any old Webcam". Apple's "requires a video camera with FireWire"
I like things that work. From the article it appears they both work equally well so the deciding factor will have to be...features.
were we reading the same article? (Score:5, Interesting)
From the article it appears they both work equally well so the deciding factor will have to be...features.
No, the deciding factor will have to be...video quality.
Here's what Pogue's article says about the Microsoft product:
If both conversation partners have high-speed Internet connections or are on the same office network, Messenger's video looks very good. You have only three size choices for the video - small, smaller or microscopic - but it's bona fide video. [Also, Pogue goes onto say that the MS product gets bogged down if you're connecting through a router]
And here's what Pogue's article says about Apple's product:
Apple, on the other hand, would sooner die than release anything that could be described as "stuttering" or "microscopic." In iChat AV, video is as crisp, clear, bright and smooth as television (640 by 480 pixels), in a window as small as a Triscuit or as big as your screen.
As you can see, video quality for the Apple product is incomparably better. The whole point of this video chat stuff is great quality video, and it appears that Apple is the only one offering high quality video at the moment. Unless you're content to look at triscuitsRe:Well good (Score:2)
hmm, wonder what kind of bandwidth one needs to do the whole 640x480 thing at a decent frame-rate? I also noted the "firewire" requirment - but then again since the cam Apple is selling is fire-wire, and $149 vrs. $49 for an el-cheapo USB cam... One could expect it would look better.
But - as I said - bandwidth; at anything less than cable-modem speeds, it's probably likely to be just as craptacular as any other web-cam.
Oh yeah, and Yahoo IM has had a full-res mode for a while now called supercam
Re:Well good (Score:2)
With iChatAV I was using about 50KBps in both directions. The video is pretty good, but the audio sometimes cut out.
FYI, I had some trouble getting it to work at first. After opening my firewall to AIM and restarting iChat everything worked flawlessly -- don't know which was the fix.
Re:Well good (Score:4, Interesting)
Toward the end of that project, I read some essay on the philosophy of Unix programming. It stressed the concept of very many small special purpose programs, that when chained together, produce useful work. I saw the light. A crap-load of features is not neccessarily the right thing.
I've found that I much prefer an application that does one or two things very well over and application that does 100 things poorly.
Got my iSight yesterday.. (Score:5, Informative)
The camera is absolutely amazing. About the size of a long C cell, the quality blows away any USB cam I've ever seen, and looks better than my camcorder as well. The whole iChat/iSight experience is, as Apple promised, beyond simple. Download iChat AV (had it already) plug in the camera, and off you go...well at least to the other two people I know who have iChat AV installed.
Well there had to be a caveat, eh? Forget about it if you have a slow Mac. I first hooked it to a dual 500mhz G4, and with bandwidth limits off, the thing bogged down my machine like nothing I had ever seen. I had to do a pushbutton restart twice.
Then I tried it on my daughter's 1ghz 17" iMac. Perfect. Flawless. I was having chats with people at 600kbps and it was like television on the other side, or so I was told.
Back to the dual 500, but with bandwidth limited to 200kbps. Now it works fine, but the moral here is that Apple is not telling all about processor requirements. To be honest, anything less than an 800mhz G4 is going to choke without the bandwidth limiter.
Yeah other cams are cheaper and there aren't many people to communicate with yet. But the difference between this type of chat and generic AIM is, forgive the cliche, paradigm changing.
I ordered two more iSight's today.
Mounting bracket question... (Score:2)
~Philly
Re:Mounting bracket question... (Score:2)
There's a swivel/pan mechanism in the iSight as well.
Re:Got my iSight yesterday.. (Score:3, Informative)
Worked just fine on my dual 533 G4 with a puny GeForce2 FX, windowed or full screen. I wasn't sure what the bandwidth limit did so I left it set to the default, None. The other end was my dad's 800 MHz iMac. He is on DSL and I am on cable. The only problem we noticed was sketchy sound quality at times. The video window resized smoothly and easily without stopping the video. I didn't notice any huge processor hit and I probably would have noticed because I keep CPU meter running in the dock all the ti
Useful? (Score:3, Insightful)
Number of times I've actually used it for videoconferencing: 0. Nada. Zilch.
Could someone please explain to me why I would want to videoconference when I could just use GAIM and not rape my internet connection?
Re:Useful? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Useful? (Score:3, Funny)
picture of ichat av (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.flashenabled.com/nimages/ichatbg.jpg [flashenabled.com]
it works great, full screen and super-simple. msn 6 and ichat both do im, but msn is on version 6 with lots of features that many people need, or want while apple is starting out for the most part and many people don't need app sharing, white board, etc...it's pretty exciting. i use a mac and a pc so i've got the best of both.
cheers,
pt
Re:picture of ichat av (Score:2)
But upon closer inspection, is that really a PAIR of Segways behind the iMac?
!
Re:picture of ichat av (Score:2)
Privacy (Score:2, Interesting)
I was talked into getting iSight, but it's nice... (Score:5, Interesting)
Earlier, I took my older Pismo PowerBook into the back yard and had an audio chat with her, while getting video from the iSight attached to her PowerMac. 700-800kbps there. Not bad at all. My audio stream going to here was 30kbps.
All in all, it's a sweet device. I need to make more Mac friends. It's only a matter of time before there's an iChat AV videochat directory*.
*All original ideas are the property of me. Boo yeah, grandma. I thought of it first, and so on...
iChat AV is so simply easy to use! (Score:5, Interesting)
And I think Steve Jobs described Video-conferencing pretty accurately. It's one of those features that you go "I will never use this. It's cool. But I will never use this." and then after some use you will go "Why did I say that? THIS IS GREAT!".
You know what? Steve Jobs was completely right! iChat is now my favorite chatting application because of it's sleek interface, ease of use and audio/video capabilities. I just plugged in my webcamera and iChat AV booted up automatically and configured itself! How is that for plug and play, Microsoft? No drivers, no nothing. It simply worked. Set up in less than ten seconds. I am stumped!
"Way to go Apple!" is what I say! This will completely change how I communicate with my father that reside in the US. We've emailed and called back and forth for six years now, but now it looks like we're taking a step further to the future!
But what really need to happen is interconnect-ability between all apps though
Re:iChat AV is so simply easy to use! (Score:3, Interesting)
This has been my biggest beef with iChat since its first release. For all of Apple's proselytizing of the technology, iChat is essentially devoid of any support for AppleScript and AppleEvents.
It would be awesome to be able to tie iChat to other scriptable Mac apps via AppleScript. The possibilities are endless. Unfortunately Apple thinks the potential for hackers to abuse the IM system via AppleScript outweigh the benefits
My favorite quote... (Score:4, Informative)
Comparing Apples to Microsofts (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally think that Apple made a mistake by limiting iChat users to AIM/ICQ/.Mac but I presume that Yahoo had some legal barriers that made it unwise to enter. I think that OSX hackers will probably hack this thing eventually that it will accept other hardware Cams, such as USB types, as they seem to be quite a resourceful bunch, but the lack of AIM/MS IM/Yahoo compatibility is something that will continue to hinder decent Audio/Video Chatting over the internet.
Had it for years (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm gonna ask someone to cut and paste... (Score:2)
Re:SpinDot (Score:4, Funny)
What's Linux got to do with anything? I thought the article was about iChat. Could you please keep you anti-Linux elitism out of this?
Re:SpinDot (Score:2)
Thanks, best laugh I had all day.
Re:SpinDot (Score:2)
Re:SpinDot (Score:2)
Microsoft calls Linux "a cancer" and actively tries to prevent it from existing.
Yet you say...
Apple is about as Linux friendly as MS is
???
Re:blah blah blah (Score:5, Funny)
Re:blah blah blah (Score:2)
Re:blah blah blah (Score:2)
i sware!
Re:usability? (Score:5, Insightful)
These people do video chat software, codecs and networking are all great, but not everybody has to be doing that. Besides, there is plenty of broadband to go around, just because everyone doesn't have it doesn't mean those that shouldn't be able to take advantage of it. (seriously, how many things are there that everyone has?)
Re:usability? (Score:2)
-Richard
[0] Office pr0n? Ick...
Re:usability? (Score:2)
Re:Use GnomeMeeting (Score:3, Informative)
GnomeMeeting has an impressive feature list and it's adherence to open standards is naturally very appealing.
However, when comparing it to beta iChat the differences were planet-sized. Apple has created a wonderful UI; I could concentrate on communication, not on the software itself.
It is true that GnomeMeeting allows you to use different codecs and is slightly more hacker-friendly. However, whe
Re:Use GnomeMeeting (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Use GnomeMeeting (Score:3, Interesting)
Both Gnome Meeting and Yahoo Instant Messanger allow you to talk with more than one person at once. iChat AV doesn't.
I'd say that's a very key part of "human communication". My wife uses Yahoo IM video conferencing to talk with her mom (in one state) and her father (stationed in another country) at the same time.. she couldn't do this with iChat AV.
Re:iChatAV vs. MSN Messenger 6 (Score:2)
Re:iChatAV vs. MSN Messenger 6 (Score:2)
They are not comparing the quality of the iSigh vs. Msn messenger.
Re:iChatAV vs. MSN Messenger 6 (Score:2, Insightful)