Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

7
Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång

Transcript of Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Page 1: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Instant Messaging

Nil LakavivatStanislav Goryachev

Calle Spång

Page 2: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Content

• Introduction• History• Different protocols, clients• Standardization attempts• Additional features

Page 3: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Introduction

• Real time, text based communication between two or more people

• The messages are transfered over a network.• Examples (active accounts)– QQ (783 million)– Skype (309 million)– Windows Live Messenger (294 million)– Yahoo! Messenger (248 million)

Page 4: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

History

• Predecessors (mid 1960s)• Quantum Link (late 80s- early 90s)• IRC (late1980s)• ICQ (1996)• Jabber (2000)

• Instant messanger – service mark

Page 5: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Protocols

• Standardization

Name Creator License Transport Layer Security

Spam protection

MSNP Microsoft Proprietary No No

OSCAR AOL Proprietary Yes Client based

XMPP Jaramie Miller

Open Yes Yes

QQ Tencent Inc Proprietary ? ?

Skype Skype Proprietary ? ?

Page 6: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

ClientsName Creator Released Type OS

Adium Adam Iser, Evan Schoenberg

2001 Multi protocol OSX

AOL Instant Messenger

AOL 1997 Single protocol Windows, OSX, Linux

Google Talk Google Inc. 2005 Dual protocol Windows, Web based

ICQ Mirabilis 1996 Single protocol Windows

Skype Niklas Zennström, Janus Friis

2003 Single protocol Windows, OSX, Linux

QQ Tencent 1999 Single protocol Windows, OSX, Linux

Windows Live Messenger

Microsoft 2001 ”Dual protocol” Windows

Page 7: Instant Messaging Nil Lakavivat Stanislav Goryachev Calle Spång.

Pros & Cons

• Pros– Easy and fast communication– Distance– Conference Meetings

• Cons– Security risks– Inappropriate use– Privacy