|  |
|
| |
By: Ralf
Date: 11/7/00 6:26:40 AM
# Replies: 22
As some of you know, I've been trying to find a decent instant messaging app for my desktop that I can use to:
a) chat, and
b) transfer files
Not much to ask for, right? I don't care about free internet telephone service, matchmaking, chat-rooms, clubs, or any of that other crap most IM chatters seem to think is important. It SHOULD be simple enough for my biz partner without my having to train him extensively. It MUST be small and quick enough to leave running 24/7 without taking over my computer.
So here then, is a quick chronicle of my quest, and a quasi-review of the programs I looked at. Note that I made no attempt whatsoever to be fair or impartial, as I am looking for a very specific solution. What I hate might just ring your bells.
Response #1
By: Ralf
Date: 11/7/00 6:47:24 AM
ICQ
I started out with ICQ (www.icq.com), the grandfather of dedicated chat applets. I had fond memories of ICQ when it was a simple, cute flower-icon nesting in my tray.
Unfortunately, the current incarnation (v2000b) is a bloated monster that sucks up 6 megabytes of RAM when idle and 19 megabytes(!) when chatting. The user interface sucks, to put it kindly, and requires a tremendous amount of expert-level tweaking to get it useable. The default settings are obnoxious: every button click, every mouse movement, every event generates a loud honking or clanging noise, without any attempt to make the sounds meaningful. Typing text into the chat window produces "cute" typewriter clacking noises and bell ringing, which is fun for about 20 seconds but soon drove me bats.
It's a tribute to how bad the UI is that I LITERALLY COULD NOT FIND the control panel to turn off the sounds. Once there, it's a struggle to select alternative, quieter sounds, since the selector mechanism is clunky and there are like, 200 different events you must twiddle. I rapidly became exhausted and simply selected the "No Sounds" scheme. But now I don't have any signal when a message arrives. Sigh.
And don't get me started on the buttons. ICQ is PACKED with icons and buttons. EVery square inch of real-estate is clickable, and often launches you into the nether regions of internet radio or lesbian bondage chatrooms. It took me a solid day to figure out how to turn off all the various toolbars and simplify the interface so it didn't take up a third of my 1024x768 display.
So how's it do on chat and file transfers, my two prerequisites? Not bad. Once you get somebody "authorized" to chat with, it's pretty painless. But the authorization process itself is kind of a joke, in that there must pass at least three messages to and fro before ICQ grants two users the right to add each other to their contact list. Sheesh. If any one of these authorizations fail, the whole process starts over. It is NOT FUN trying to educate somebody (like my business partner) on why he must "authorize" me before he can send me a note.
File transfers work GREAT if you don't have a firewall. There's no file-size limit, and the offline xfer option is very nice -- you can receive files from others even after they've logged off. But remember what I said about firewalls? I have one, and because of ICQ's inability to choose a specific UDP port and stick with it, I can't expose the ports it needs to SEND a file. So while receiving a file from a pal works, I am mute in return.
So ICQ was not my solution.
Scoring:
User Interface: D-
Chat: B
File Xfer: C
Windows Footprint: C
Overall score: C
Response #2
By: Ralf
Date: 11/7/00 6:51:12 AM
Microsoft Netmeeting / MSIM
Being a Microsoft proponent, I *really* wanted to like Netmeeting. It seemed ideal, seamlessly integrated with IE and Windows. Netmeeting's been around for awhile, too, and I figured the bugs'd all be dead by now.
How wrong I was.
I can't comment on Netmeeting or MSIM's chat or file transfer performance because I couldn't get the fuckers to install. After two days of struggling with Hotmail and rebooting my computer, I gave up. No software could possibly be good enough to warrant this level of expertise to install. If somebody told me Jesus Christ, Adolf Hitler, and Bill Gates himself was waiting to chat with me on Netmeeting, I'd beat them to death with my cordless mouse because there is NO WAY I'd put myself through the pain and humiliation of installing Netmeeting again.
Scoring:
UI: Unknown
Chat: Unknown
File Xfer: Unknown
Windows Footprint: Unknown
Score: F
Response #3
By: Ralf
Date: 11/7/00 7:05:29 AM
Odigo
Odigo (www.odigo.com) is a relative newcomer to the IM scene, and brings something entirely new to the table: interoperability. Using plug-ins, Odigo users can connect to the AOL, ICQ, and Yahoo networks, and as far as the other users go, Odigo users look just like native AOL/ICQ/Whatever users. It's pretty slick, and both the ICQ and Yahoo plug-ins work great, with minor limitations.
Odigo is by far the sexiest messenger I've seen yet. It's the WinAmp of IM apps, with a completely skinable interface. The default is beautiful, with rounded buttons and clever switches and effects. I just wanted to *play* with the damn thing offline, it's so cool. But if you tire of the standard dark blue scheme, you can download zillions of themed skins from x-rated filmstars to various Pokemon.
After my Netmeeting escapades, hammering a nail through my skull would have been fun, but installing Odigo was truly painless. It took just one SETUP.EXE, plus an additional .EXE for each additional plug-in desired. So to get Odigo up and running with AOL, ICQ, and YIM support takes 4 executable files run in sequence. No reboot necessary. Signing up for an Odigo account is simple, and worked the first time. The first time you fire it up with any plug-ins, it prompts you for your ICQ ID and password, then stores it away for future use. In other words, you login to Odigo and it automatically logs you into AOL, ICQ, and Yahoo at the same time. Slick. (Why somebody would want all that chat action going on at once is beyond me, but it's a significant technical feat.)
Chat's pretty straightforward, and works well. File-transfers between Odigo/Odigo clients work well, but break if you try to send a file to, say, an ICQ user. (According to their tech support, "they're working on that".)
One really cool feature that saved me buttloads of frustration is the online, real-time tech support. When you login as a newbie, you automatically have one "friend" in your contact list: Tech Support. Initiating a chat with this friend actually lets you chat with an Odigo employee, who will happily explain things that aren't clear in the help files, or help resolve a problem. I was very impressed with the responsiveness and accuracy of their techs, especially when confronted with bizarre Odigo/ICQ incompatibilities. Heck, they even knew the ports needed to open for firewall access.
But as nice as Odigo is, its footprint is quite large: 20+ megabytes while running. Also, it appears to be targeted more for flirting and grabbing cyber-ass than conferencing or file transfers.
So My quest continued...
User Interface: A
Chat: B
File Xfer: B-
Windows Footprint: D
Innovation: A
Overall Score: B
Response #4
By: Ralf
Date: 11/7/00 7:23:01 AM
Yahoo Instant Messenger (YIM)
I was very surprised by Yahoo's IM product, available from messenger.yahoo.com. I expected a knockoff of AOL's hideous toy, or maybe a web-based HTML client that breaks every 20 minutes.
Instead I found a small, simple, client that does two things well: chat and file transfers. It's not as fancy as Odigo, nor as feature laden as ICQ (though Yahoo does have the popular stuff, like free i-net telephone). In fact, the only reason I tried native YIM was because of Odigo -- I wanted to see how faithful the Odigo interface to Yahoo was.
The YIM interface is plain but functional. I was up and operational within minutes, never having had to resort to the help files. While the app claims to be skinnable, the skins I've seen are pretty ugly, so I've stuck with the simple Windows95 grey defaults and they've served me well.
The chat window is best of breed because of its scrolling history buffer. While other messengers keep track of history, it's often an auxilliary window you must open. Not so with YIM -- it's all in one nice integrated package that works well, with many nice touches. Hypertext links typed by others that scroll by can be clicked. Users can personalize their fonts and colors, or use underlines and italics to add emphasis. In fact, since it's HTML-based, any of the text manipulation tags work... I wouldn't want to hand-code a table while chatting with somebody, but pasting a table from a web page seems to work fine. At the end of your session, you can save the whole buffer as an .RTF or HTML file, for future reference. I haven't seen this much thought put into a chat interface since the heyday of 1980's BBS systems.
File transfers work well, but alas, are limited to under a megabyte. Offline xfers are supported, in case the user you're spamming is offline... they'll get the file next time they login.
Security is thoughtful and non-obstructive, defaulting to "invisibility mode" to prevent you're being mobbed when you login.
It's a good thing the app's easy to use, because the help files suck. Worse, they're ONLINE HTML DOCUMENTS, so you can't read the help files unless you're connected to the internet! What genius thought of this? I pity the poor newbie who's having trouble getting connected so they can use YIM.
YIM's stab at online tech support (ala Odigo) fails miserably. Like Odigo, newbies are gifted with a free friend, the "Yahoo Helper", which appears automatically in the contact list. But this is not a direct chat-link to a human being, it's an interface to a dreadful robot server, who answers every question with "have you tried the online help files?" After I figured out it wasn't a human being, I amused myself for a few minutes by asking if it'd be okay if I drilled a hole in the monitor to let all the pixels out and such. The Helper is useless for anything other than entertainment.
For now, my Quest ends here. I'm currently a satisfied YIM user (RalfusMaximus), and keep the client running whenever I'm online, as it only consumes 4MB of RAM while running in full-blown chat mode. Woo!
So try YIM and drop me a line!
User Interface: B
Chat: A
File XFer: B
Windows Footprint: A
Overall Score: A-
Response #5
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 11/7/00 6:41:05 PM
Ralf,
I am somewhat of a chat program hound. I've used just about all of them at one point or another. One I didn't see you mention was Pow-Wow. Not that I am recommeding it, it's has pretty much gone the way of ICQ. It's not quite as bad, it's still a bit more streamline, but no god send by any means. On the subject of Yahoo Messanger, let me add 2 comments, and preface it with a comment, and add a review of my own. The 2 primary chat clients I use are indeedn Yahoo Messanger, and AOL Instant Messanger.
Yahoo:
There are a lot of features that I like about this program. For one thing, your contact list travels with no matter what computer you install the program on, unlike it's AOL counter part which stores its contac list on the local HD. (BIG disadvantage). Unless Ralf has discoverd something new, there previously was not a limit on file xfers. There is also a new feature added to Yahoo Meesanger, Net2phone. This program has been intergrated into the latest release, and amazingly, without adding much overhead to the program. The really cool thing about it is that in my opinion, it works much better than it's Dialpad (http://www.dialpad.com)counterpart. If ou have friends that require that you call long distance frequently, you would find this little feature VERY useful. Main drawback: Reliability. That goes for both parts, the chat prgram as well as the phone program
AOL Instant Messanger:
Light, little overhead. Brought to you by the same people that make ICQ. File transfers are fairly quick, surprising for an AOL product. Easy to setup and use, as almost every AOL product is. If you're a stock person or a news hound, it has nice little ticker interface that scrolls, and you can even set up to notify uyou if you get new mail. (But then again, who nowawadays doesn't have their e-mail client up all the time anyway?) AOL's BIG advabtage is reliability. IM goes down VERY infrequently.
MSN Messanger:
I have just recently started messing with this little program. Be aware that this is NOT to be confused with Netmeeting. This is Microsoft's flavor for a light chat client. Now I haven't had near the experience with this program as I have others, but form what i have seen so far, it's shaping up to be the best of both worlds between Yahoo and AOL. Permits file xfers, light overhead. Uses the same Net2Phone technology that Yahoo uses, but doesn't seem to work as well. It has a another report of high relibility. Overall, it's been looking pretty well so far.
Ralf, reconsider one thing about Netmeeting, there's been no hiding on anyone's part that it IS a resource hog. Fora reason though. It's not meant to be a "chat client" persay. It's really meant to serve as more of a virtual office format. The fact that it supports so much as far multi media options as remote desktop capabilites contributes to why it is so resource heavy. I think it's plain overkill for what most people want to use it for.
Ralf, What problems were you having trying to get it to install? I hvae them installed under 95/98/2000 and ME without incident.
Response #6
By: Roxanne
Date: 11/9/00 7:14:49 AM
Ralf, ever thought of just calling people on the telephone to chat?
*giggle*
Response #7
By: Ralf
Date: 11/9/00 8:47:35 AM
Okay, I call your bluff. What's your number?
Response #8
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 11/9/00 9:18:49 AM
On the telephone?
Ralf, if you do that, we have to seriously discussing taking away your geek status!
The only execption would be if you called her FROM the computer to her telephone.
Ralf, are you still using YIM?
I never see you on there.
Response #9
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 11/9/00 9:20:42 AM
If anyone has any comments about any of these Instant Messaging programs, I would be very interested to hear them. I have quite a large volume that utilize chat programs for different means. Any information or comments that anyone would have, always helps.
Thanks!
Response #10
By: Ralf
Date: 11/9/00 11:26:33 AM
I've taken to logging into YIM using 'invisible' mode, to avoid being mobbed when all I want to do is upload a file.
But feel free to ring me up anyway! Even invisible folk can chat.
And if Rox gives me her telephone number, it'd be only for the comedic value, since I would never dream of harrassing a lady unbidden.
Response #11
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 11/9/00 7:40:40 PM
There's an interesting social phenomenon associated with these things. Back when I was on ICQ, people would find me from mailing lists I was on, and they'd demand to be able to chat with me. I had it set to require confirmation when someone added me to their list, and I kept getting nastygrams from people *I hardly knew* because I wouldn't let them put me on their list. Never mind that they would only ever send me ****SMILE!!!**** messages, or never send any messages at all.
After a while, I would respond to these people's smile messages with ****FUCK YOU!!!**** because it was about as sincere as their smiley. Needless to say, they didn't see it that way.
So basically, you have to fight and play politics in order to not get nastygrams from people who think it is their right to tell you to *****SMILE!!11!!*****
I gave up on ICQ.
Response #12
By: Ralf
Date: 11/10/00 3:10:40 AM
Apparently if you're female it's 10,000 times worse.
Chicks are constantly harrassed by horny males who think everyone with breasts and a computer must be online because they want sex. That was part of the reason I ditched Odigo: it's geared more towards hooking up hormone-crazed yahoos than, er... Yahoo is.
As a sign of solidarity (or maybe just because I value my privacy) I'm always invisible while online. I *love* getting chatted up by people I know (like you folks) but everyone else can bite my ass.
Response #13
By: sooz
Date: 11/10/00 3:48:03 PM
All you gotta do is take yourself outta the directory, Homey. I have ICQ and am rarely bugged.
I'm assuming that biting Ralf's ass would be easy, since he rarely wears pants.
Response #14
By: Roxanne
Date: 11/10/00 10:04:56 PM
867-5309-e-9
Call me "Jenny".
Response #15
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 11/11/00 2:07:45 AM
sooz, these are people I know from other situations. Like, if an acquaintance of yours asked for your phone number, would it be improper to say, "Well, I've heard about people who harrass other people on the phone, so I don't want to give you my number."? You mention that you had a remotely interesting conversation with someone on ICQ and they're all over you for your magic number.
"Looky golly! We're on thu internet, with our chat system! We can send stupid messages back 'n forth!"
What ever happened to talk? You type 'talk somewhere.com' and they get a ding, and they type 'talk' and before you know it, you're in textual bliss.
Response #16
By: Ralf
Date: 11/11/00 6:53:20 AM
Hmmm. Is there an area code for "Jenny"?
Response #17
By: sooz
Date: 11/11/00 12:01:06 PM
Homey, you can make it so certain people don't see you when you're online. Like, suppose I wanted everyone BUT Gowan to know when I was online... I'd select an option for that. Then, it would tell ME that Gowan's online (because he loves me and wouldn't dream of blocking me from his list), but a symbol would show up next to his name on my end, so I'd know he couldn't see me.
Reading the directions will do wonders. :-)
Response #18
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 11/11/00 12:58:05 PM
You can do that with the Winderz version of ICQ, but not the Mac version. Cuz Mirabilis hates Mac people for some reason.
Response #19
By: Ralf
Date: 11/12/00 7:10:08 AM
They don't HATE them, they just don't know what to do with them. Mirabilis is owned by AOL.
Response #20
By: Roxanne
Date: 11/13/00 7:49:48 AM
Ralf: Ask Tommy Tutone.
Response #21
By: Capt. Spastic
Date: 11/13/00 2:32:55 PM
It's the law of suppy and demand. Since there are so few MAC users, they are of little consequence.
:)
Response #22
By: Homer The Brave
Date: 11/20/00 11:28:56 AM
I've told ye before, cappy. You yourself are a MAC user, if you have ethernet. What you meant to say was 'Mac.'
Anyway, no. AOL's Mac software lags behind the Winderz version by a teeny bit, but it's got all the functionality (unless something has changed since last I looked). Mirabilis, on the other hand, has always fucked over the Mac user trying to use their system.