<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: AOL, AIM and Openness</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/</link>
	<description>the personal nook of Mark Doliner</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2011 06:28:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Doliner</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1896</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Doliner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 May 2010 04:57:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1896</guid>
		<description>Truefire: I&#039;m not sure I follow... is _what_ somehow fixed in the recently-released Pidgin 2.7.0?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Truefire: I&#8217;m not sure I follow&#8230; is _what_ somehow fixed in the recently-released Pidgin 2.7.0?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truefire</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1751</link>
		<dc:creator>Truefire</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 17:34:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1751</guid>
		<description>I say get some reverse engineering done on the new protocol. This will have least impact on the end users.

This comment is pretty new for a rather old post...is this somehow fixed in the &#039;new&#039; 2.7.0?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I say get some reverse engineering done on the new protocol. This will have least impact on the end users.</p>
<p>This comment is pretty new for a rather old post&#8230;is this somehow fixed in the &#8216;new&#8217; 2.7.0?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baylink</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1191</link>
		<dc:creator>Baylink</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 23:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1191</guid>
		<description>Well, that&#039;s fine, and all, but the issue is Metcalfe&#039;s law: the people who are going to use a multiprotocol IM client are doing it *because there are people on those networks they want to talk to*.

And that&#039;s a much larger number, in aggregate.

Dropping AIM screws Pidgin, and its users, not the network, and not those people at the other end; I really hope Pidgin doesn&#039;t.

If it does, I&#039;ll have to replace it in my image at work... or move *everyone* to a local Jabber server, which is almost as painful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, that&#8217;s fine, and all, but the issue is Metcalfe&#8217;s law: the people who are going to use a multiprotocol IM client are doing it *because there are people on those networks they want to talk to*.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s a much larger number, in aggregate.</p>
<p>Dropping AIM screws Pidgin, and its users, not the network, and not those people at the other end; I really hope Pidgin doesn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>If it does, I&#8217;ll have to replace it in my image at work&#8230; or move *everyone* to a local Jabber server, which is almost as painful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Albert</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1180</link>
		<dc:creator>Albert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1180</guid>
		<description>Coincidence?  http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2010/04/06/is-aol-killing-the-messenger.aspx</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Coincidence?  <a href="http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2010/04/06/is-aol-killing-the-messenger.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.fool.com/investing/high-growth/2010/04/06/is-aol-killing-the-messenger.aspx</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1160</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Apr 2010 02:50:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1160</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s 9 years!  We took that project class in the spring of 01.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s 9 years!  We took that project class in the spring of 01.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob Gibson</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1151</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob Gibson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:44:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1151</guid>
		<description>Sadly, I think the time has come to consider the ultimate fate of a proprietary protocol.  AIM has been the juggernaut for years, but I haven&#039;t spent a great deal of time on AIM, even though I log into that account every time I run Pidgin.

For my 2 cents, the two most important networks (Google and Facebook) run Jabber/XMPP.  Everyone I regularly talk to via an IM is available through one of these two services.

I would like to see some refinement here, particularly in the notifications.  Users on Jabber/XMPP accounts seem to go offline regularly and come right back on.  But otherwise, the support is spot-on.  I haven&#039;t checked the bug tracker, but I think I will now.

It&#039;s just a gut instinct that tells me that well-documented XML being passed around seems far more useful and flexible than a protocol whose sole source of documentation is turning its back on an entire developer community.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sadly, I think the time has come to consider the ultimate fate of a proprietary protocol.  AIM has been the juggernaut for years, but I haven&#8217;t spent a great deal of time on AIM, even though I log into that account every time I run Pidgin.</p>
<p>For my 2 cents, the two most important networks (Google and Facebook) run Jabber/XMPP.  Everyone I regularly talk to via an IM is available through one of these two services.</p>
<p>I would like to see some refinement here, particularly in the notifications.  Users on Jabber/XMPP accounts seem to go offline regularly and come right back on.  But otherwise, the support is spot-on.  I haven&#8217;t checked the bug tracker, but I think I will now.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s just a gut instinct that tells me that well-documented XML being passed around seems far more useful and flexible than a protocol whose sole source of documentation is turning its back on an entire developer community.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AOL, AIM and Openness &#124; Pidgin.cz</title>
		<link>http://kingant.net/2010/04/aol-aim-and-openness/comment-page-1/#comment-1149</link>
		<dc:creator>AOL, AIM and Openness &#124; Pidgin.cz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Apr 2010 10:31:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kingant.net/?p=732#comment-1149</guid>
		<description>[...] Celý článek (EN): ZDE [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Celý článek (EN): ZDE [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

