Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Instant Messenger all Rumor

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the or-maybe-this-is-just-a-clever-distraction dept.

Google 265

Jbravo writes "Search, blogging, maps, photos, email, and now a portal, Google has kept adding to their array of services. Is an instant messenger next for Google? Most recently Google has been said to be buying out a company called Meetroduction, LLC for their instant messenger Meetro. So, is it true? Is Google writing the check now? Well, after a chat with Paul Bragiel, CEO of Meetroduction, the word is not right now. He called the whole story 'rumors.'"

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST FISH! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317039)


Hello? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317046)

Wasn't this called "Hello"? See here: []

Re:Hello? (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317152)

Yeah, I got it (Hello) on my computer right now.

I don't know anyone else who uses it, but when I *do* finally make friends I'll be all set!

Re:Hello? (3, Insightful)

Takumi2501 (728347) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317202)

From TFA:

Google already has an instant messenger. "Hello" is a product that they received along with Picasa.

Re:Hello? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317301)

Yes they have an IM. No, it is not "Hello." Yes, it is very, very cool.

FunSharing is where it's at! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317049) ... gl getting an acct there, that's where Google keeps the IM...

Re:FunSharing is where it's at! (1)

blowdart (31458) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317110)

An apic ip? In Malaysia? Doubtful, very very doubtful, especially as a quick search shows it linked to as a shareaza / bit torrent site.

So are you link whoring, or what?

The future is Google (0, Redundant)

Ichigo Kurosaki (886802) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317052)

Forget instant messeging i am waiting for google to bring on the desktop domination via GoogleOS...

I for one welcome our new google overlords

Re:The future is Google (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317111)

Yes, my guess is a GoogleOS thin-client is not far off. Why? The things that most people do don't require even a 10th the functionality of Windows. Google search/IM/mail, for many people, this covers it.

Re:The future is Google (1)

numbski (515011) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317126)

Meh. A clean looking Linux distro with the default filesystem set to GoogleFS (NOT GMailFS), and a braindead simple installer with binary updates switched on by default.

Bring it. :)

You will bow before Google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317151)

The project is called Google Operational Desktop, or GOD for short. Google's next product release after that will be called "Salvation" and they will gain converts from everywhere.

Several millenia from now books will be written about the archangel Microsoft, who had it all but fell from grace due to greed and corruption and how the masses were saved from this dire situation by the coming of GOD.

Re:The future is Google (1)

krinkelkrok (899514) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317279)

I can't wait for that 20 MB install which give me a simple full OS with all basic functinonality. Out of the box with no hassle. Bootable from yer CF.

I'd even bear with a ad or two in a free version.

Only if its unix based and open source. (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317122)

Let them create GoogleOS. It would be a good idea in the long term once Linux is mature enough I think people would actually buy the OS.

Google has enough money to completely fund Linux development and do that.

Re:Only if its unix based and open source. (1)

someonewhois (808065) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317201)

What makes everyone believe that Google will use Linux if they make their own operating system? Linux has a long way to go in terms of hardware and software support -- the UI isn't the only current issue.

GoogleOS X (1)

Thijs van As (826224) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317182)

Anyone remember GoogleX [] which was online for some hours at the Google Labs website?

Quote from the site:
Roses are red. Violets are blue. OS X rocks. Homage to you.

I'm already seeing Google promoting Apple to bring OS X to non-Macintosh computers, which is even less work because of Apple's transition to x86.

Re:The future is Google (2, Interesting)

Arthur.RHCP (820799) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317188)

I don't know if they'll dominate desktop, but they're dominating the internet... Orkut, Gmail and Search. Do you need more?

yes (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317057)

all i can say: OM GLOLZ trixed

Perhaps not the right approach for the market (5, Interesting)

Sv-Manowar (772313) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317058)

A lot of people already have IM networks that they're locked into because their friends/contacts are happy with that network and use it. In europe, its extremely common for people to have MSN, whilst the trend stateside seems to be more toward AIM (with MSN still significant there too). Google could do better by adopting something like XMPP/Jabber and either using a client that supports MSN/AIM/ICQ protocols or the server-side protocol translation that Jabber supports. A solid Google IM client based on XMPP might be just what the standard needs to build profile (whilst still allowing easy adoption through MSN/AIM compatibility)

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (4, Interesting)

Film11 (736010) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317077)

Agreed. It is simply too much hassle for one to change instant messaging networks like that. Changing my e-mail to GMail was bad enough, but telling everybody to add your new contact name, or worse, telling them to download a client so they can chat to you exclusively is just out of the question for me.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317089)

I hear ya there. The conglomeration of non-compatible IM technologies is a real deterrant. If they could make a client that made Jabber EASY to use (i'm comparing it to ichat's implementation which IMHO is less than perfect) then I would use it for sure.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317118)

If they could make a client that made Jabber EASY to use

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

ToddBox (825708) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317096)

True that. For the longest time I had all three (Y!, MSN, and AIM) running so I could chat with my friends. I gave that up a few years ago and figured that the ones using MSN and Y! were not worth slowing down my computer. I recently adopted Miranda IM and am pretty happy with it. I might use it once or twice a month. It's really small and works pretty well with Y! and MSN. I still use AIM primarily but with the wonderful Messenger:Mate add-on. If Google were to come out with something that worked well with all three and included all the features well...that would be mighty dandy. Definitely worth a try. But to start using a new IM program and populate a new buddy list...F that. It would have to be something really special to get me and millions others to move.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

WhatAmIDoingHere (742870) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317123)

Why doesn't Google just buy Trillian?

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

bleaknik (780571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317158)

Because Trillian 3.0+ is too bloated for Google's tastes. Remember. Google like simple, efficient... For the most part.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317131)

It seems that the most common network is different for different countries.

In Romania, perhaphs 99% of all people that use IM are using Yahoo Messenger.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (5, Informative)

slashdotnickname (882178) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317260)

In europe, its extremely common for people to have MSN, whilst the trend stateside seems to be more toward AIM (with MSN still significant there too).

or you can get an awesome open-source program like miranda [] which supports ICQ, AIM, MSN, Jabber, Yahoo, Gadu-Gadu, Tlen, Netsend and tons more... all in a ~3meg memory footprint.

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

TooncesTheCat (900528) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317296)

Miranda was my IM savior. Small, fast, easy to use and have a crap load of plugins. Along with it being Open Source and having everything that your beloved Gaim and Trillian have. Coupled with the fact that its OPEN SOURCE and that it supports all those protocols. Did I mention OPEN SOURCE?

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

Egregius (842820) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317402)

Or you simply install the im_kit [] into BeOS.

Oh wait, that's right, BeOS [] lost the OS wars. -_-

Re:Perhaps not the right approach for the market (1)

Baloo Ursidae (29355) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317369)

Given that client-support for multiple protocols is a great way to get a gigantic, underfeatured buggy pieces of crap (see Trillian, GAIM, et. al. for examples), seems like the best way is also the right way in Jabber: Let the server do the walking.

Rumors and denials (3, Insightful)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317061)

Denials are almost a sure sign that something is up. Rumors, I don't know. But every time a company denies something, it seems it's actually confirmed shortly thereafter.

Re:Rumors and denials (2, Interesting)

iluvcapra (782887) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317272)

Absolutely right. If nothing were up, it would be in his interest to simply not comment, since it would feed interest in his company.

He called the whole story 'rumors'.

Read this as "He's doing the best he can to hold down his stock price so he can buy back as much of it as possible before the deal's announced."

Re:Rumors and denials (1)

Digital11 (152445) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317305)

Eh, I doubt that. I just spoke to Paul on Meetro and he called this /. post 'Hillarious' because they're just rumors.

Too many already (5, Insightful)

ilyaaohell (866922) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317065)

Any company trying to roll out yet another instant messenger would be making a mistake. There are already three uber-popular, incompatible networks, not to mention the handful of smaller protocols. None of them really offer anything that the others don't have. Enough is enough.

Re:Too many already (4, Insightful)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317116)

and IRC from 1988 still beats them hands down.

Re:Too many already (2, Insightful)

ilyaaohell (866922) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317141)

I don't know what you're trying to say, so I'm guessing you're just trying to score some mod points here. IRC is designed for group conversations, AIM/MSN/Yahoo is designed for person-to-person conversations. Having said that, those IM services also have fully functional chat room capabilities. So basically it's just like IRC, only with more functionality and centered around people who keep a regular network of friends.

But hey, I'm sure that you've already earned yourself some "Insightful" points from someone, so mission accomplished.

Re:Too many already (2, Interesting)

A beautiful mind (821714) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317186)

Ok, let's skip your attitude.

How does it have more functionality than irc? It has _different_ functionality.

Being a bitlbee user, i'm redirecting all of my IM traffic to IRC anyway, for convenience reasons, so i really don't get what's your point. I was just trying to highlight the fact that for a lot of people a protocol created 17 years ago perfectly does the job, or does the job better.

Re:Too many already (4, Insightful) troll (593289) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317330)

Depends on the job you're doing. No webcams, voicechat, direct ims(read: pictures inside convos, great for screenshots), or any other 'rich' features

IRC is extendable enough that you can add it, and a few clients have tried in the past(VIRC), but theyre just not standardized enough to rely on.
Tis a shame too If someone made a nice client that actually offered these features it'd save me and my friends a lot of time/effort having to switch between irc/aim depending on what is needed. I of course prefer irc when possible, but if I have a screenshot in my buffer, I'd rather click direct connect and right click -> paste picture than open ms paint, paste, save to disk, /dcc send nick (path to one-off screenshot), delete screenshot.

Re:Too many already (2, Interesting)

TheEqualizer (812747) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317117)

Indeed, with Yahoo, MSN and AIM the whole IM market is already oversaturated, Google would need at least 2-3 years to build a decent sized following. The idea does however fit in the whole "collecting all the information in the world" motto they have. Maybe they'll make it a beta like all the majority of their projects, and asses futer development based on beta's success.

Re:Too many already (2, Interesting)

ilyaaohell (866922) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317153)

I don't see how facilitating instant internet communication fits into their "collecting all the information in the world" motto at all. It would take a REALLY anally-retentive person to want a searchable log of ALL their conversations with their friends, if that's what you're implying here.

Re:Too many already (2, Interesting)

irtza (893217) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317255)

um... i do that already with gaim. I have logs of all conversations... currently over 10 megs of logs going back a few years. It is unbelievably useful. addresses, phone numbers, birthdays, all sorts of information ready to be mined with grep. Of course I have only needed to do that a few times, but nonetheless one must maintain the logs to be able to ever do it.

also, you don't have to be anally retentive to do that. Its the same reason I keep all emails and documents written and have downloaded the human genome project. You just never know when you may need it.

Re:Too many already (1)

timeOday (582209) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317308)

Seems to me it would be precisely as useful or worthless as email - and therefore gmail, which sets a precedent for google's view of the matter.

Re:Too many already (1)

Redrover5545 (795810) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317307)

There are already three uber-popular, incompatible networks, not to mention the handful of smaller protocols. None of them really offer anything that the others don't have.

Tell me about it. Instant messaging services are almost as saturated as the web-mail market.

Re:Too many already (1)

Rakshasa Taisab (244699) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317408)

Although i agree with part of your argument, that google can improve IM as they have web-mail, but they are not entirely analogous. Web-mail relies on a standarized protocol which can communicate with everyone no matter what client they use.

IM could really need some kind of standarization, preferably not relying on a single entity to act as the hub. I think that what we need is a system like that used for email, with the features of IM. (With spam protection;)

Re:Too many already (2, Informative)

skinnytie (594811) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317347)

Actually, check out [] . This client is location based. It auto-populates your buddy list with people around you based on criteria.

As much as it would be cool... (3, Insightful)

theotherlight (904426) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317067)

we really don't need another IM program. I'll consider trying it, but I think the general IM'ing population won't want to change.

I'll change in a second -- and tell all of my friends to change -- if, somehow, it just blows everything else out of the water. This, however, seems unlikely.

Ummm, they already have an IM client... (5, Informative)

todesengel (722281) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317071)

Sure they don't advertise it, but Hello [] is a Google product...

So why hasn't Slashbot reported on current_ yet? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317073)

It is apparently Google's foray into cable television: current_ TV []

Re:So why hasn't Slashbot reported on current_ yet (1)

Gothic_Walrus (692125) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317169)

Simple - the channel really has nothing to do with Google.

As far as I can tell (this coming from Google itself [] , mind you), all they provide are the search data and the name for the segments. Google doesn't seem to have anything else to do with the channel.

Look out... (3, Funny)

gorus (249583) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317074)

...sooner or later, Googlezon is coming.

Re:Look out... (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317175)

Oooooh... look at the spooky mass-media conglomerate forming over the horizon... it's gonna getcha!

Okay, seriously, while I'm as against the increasing tendency to gather media outlets into the hands of an ever-decreasing number of people as the next ranting lunatic, at the moment Google is perhaps the company to be worried least about doing this and abusing their role.

At the moment.

The way it usually works.... (2, Insightful)

gouber (884841) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317075)

considered rumor only from now until it actually gets announced....

I smell...OpenSource? (0)

TsukasaZero (850187) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317082)

1. Get source of GAIM, rename and change graphics.
2. ???
3. .......No profit.......

"Rumours" is not a denial. (4, Insightful)

Angostura (703910) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317083)

.. It is, to use the old phrase "a non-denial denial".

If the guy had said "It's just rumours and there is absolutely no truth in it" that would be one thing. Just saying "it's a rumour" is the polite equivalent of "no comment".

I would imagine that Paul Bragiel and his company is quite enjoying the attention, so it's not in his interests to decisively quash these rumours, so he's left things a little ambiguous.

Re:"Rumours" is not a denial. (1)

RickHunter (103108) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317263)

For the Apple/x86 stuff, the company was saying it was "baseless rumours" up until the actual announcement. So even "absolutely no truth in it" doesn't really mean anything these days.

Which of course means... (1)

numbski (515011) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317088)

...that it is absolutely true. To butcher Shaekspeare :) ....

"...thou doest protest too much..."

Re:Which of course means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317183)




"doest" is jim carrey.

Re:Which of course means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317217)

Actually, dost or doest is correct when the subject of the sentence is thou.

Originally thou was singular and you was plural, but the English adopted the French convention of using the plural form in place of the singular form under formal circumstances. While the French retained their singular second person pronoun, in English the more formal you ultimately replaced thou completely.

When the subject of a sentence is thou you need to add -st to the verb of the sentence. You use -th when the subject is he, she, it or any singular noun.

Brilliant move by google if they do that. (5, Interesting)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317093)

Because people search google, an IM would be genius. People who search for the same thing could meet each other through google IM. Almost like how technorati and other sites do it, google could take it one step further. Imagine the waste IM client combined with the google search engine.

Re:Brilliant move by google if they do that. (1)

The_Mystic_For_Real (766020) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317177)

Somehow I don't think every google searcher wants to meet someone who looked for the same thing. > like "paris hilton" "sex tape"/"bonzi buddy" "warez"/"free video" "hot teens" too?

Sure (1)

elucido (870205) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317286)

I'd like to meet guys who like hot women, duh. Am I supposed to want to meet gay guys instead? I'm straight. Meeting other straight guys = access to free porn.

Also lets remember that porn isnt the only reason people go online, a lot of us are investors, researchers, students etc. For the majority of people this would be a good idea. I want to meet people with the same interests, even if its just porn interests.

Brilliant? This is pretty damn old tech! (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317274)

Ever used odigo and its radar? You could always see the poeple on the same site adn even filter them by interest, age, status, much stuff... then we had those browser-plugins that allowed to leave notes on sites for other users of the same plugin. so it existed for years for isntant-message and forum communication style. and they all used this to track the user behaviour. ;P

Re:Brilliant? This is pretty damn old tech! (2, Interesting)

Wendell III (843903) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317387)

Well, there are some key differences in what Meetro is doing. First and foremost: it's a radius-based software which finds people in the vicinity of your current location. So imagine a scenario in which you pop open your laptop in a coffee shop and immediately see 20-30 people within a mile. You can talk to any one of them immediately, look at their profiles, etc. That's the PRIMARY gist of what we're doing here. On top of such functionality, however, is a multi-IM client with AIM, Yahoo, MSN and ICQ compatibility. So in that sense we see Meetro as a bridge product to a new type of realtime, location-based social net. Something in between IM and the phone-based buddy finders? It's an experiment, but one whose validity we are firmly confident in. We'll see where it goes!

Google buying its technology? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317094)

Interesting that MS has to take a lot of flack here for using its "unfair" financial advantage to buy out companies for their tech (drawing comparisons to a vampire) whereas it has been perfectly okay for Google to do the same.

Re:Google buying its technology? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317124)

I don't think most people care that Microsoft buys out companies. That's how business works. What most people care about is the process that MS uses to get to those companies in the first place. Sometimes, they can be a little...questionable.

Except on Slashdot. On Slashdot, everything that is done by Microsoft is bad.

Re:Google buying its technology? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317149)

Perhaps, but I believe MS has acquired many companies by offering to buy them out. Is this more or less "questionable" than Google's practices?

Re:Google buying its technology? (3, Insightful)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317144)

There's a perfectly good reason for that. Google has not used their purchases to smash their competitors out of existence. Take for example, Picasa. Used, publicized, integrated, and yet not accompanied by a huge push to take over that sector of the market. Or how about Gmail - beta pretty much forever, and then when it become open, there's no push to steal Hotmail or Yahoo customers. How about Blogger? There are APIs all over the place.

Google hasn't been "evil" with their purchases. In fact, pretty much everything they bought they starting giving away for free.

Re:Google buying its technology? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317203)

I don't understand.

When a company is bought out, the new owner gains its market position. How is gaining entry into a certain field by purchasing a company equivalent to "smashing" competitors out of existance?

When Microsoft purchased Hotmail, they gained Hotmail's market and mind-share. Did they smash competing services (such as Yahoo! Mail) out of existance? No. To do so, they would have had to have bought out all of their competitors. Being the corporate heavyweight that it is, MS is in a position to become a considerable force once it acquires some technology, but that's to be expected.

Google is also becoming a big player in the internet software industry and is starting to play like one. My original post was just pointing out how ironic it is for Slashdot to embrace Google's new-found power (rarely being skeptical) while continuing to bash MS for invalid reasons.

And what's this about Gmail staying out of the fray just because it's a perpetual "beta"? It's pretty clear that Gmail is definitely generating revenue for Google and has become quite popular. It certainly not a "beta" product. I think Google just slaps "beta" on its services to protect itself from the responsibility that is implied with a finished product.

And Slashdot... (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317358)

...has been "beta" for years.

Re:Google buying its technology? (1)

someonewhois (808065) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317211)

What's your definition of evil? Trying to make money (the same thing every corporation in the world should be doing)?

Re:Google buying its technology? (1)

Moridineas (213502) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317300)

Ok, so Google is allowed to buy companies and then give the products away for free.

And yet Microsoft giving away IE for free is different how? (well, because it came with windows).

but seriously, I don't get it. Google can come into diverse markets and because of their money from advertising, just release free software (software which I might add isn't cross platform..just like MS!)

Re:Google buying its technology? (1)

sethadam1 (530629) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317404)

People here LOVE to fight, don't they?

Google IS different, and you know it. When MS buys, they (historically) do so with the knowledge that they intend to do everything in their power to lock people in and make their way the standard. Then they close the APIs or change for access to them.

Google has yet to show that at all. APIs are plentiful. The software is free and promotes choice. Google has embraced open standards (RSS/Atom/cross platform JS-AJAX), all while MS has built web pages that rely upon ActiveX, "extended" RSS for Vista, and told us that IE will, once again, not support much of the CSS out there.

How can you tell me with a straight face that Google and Microsoft are comparable?!?!

In related news... (1, Funny)

apa666 (839909) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317097)

...Google apparently aren't working on a main battle tank or a replacement for the Space Shuttle either.

Re:In related news... (1)

Eric604 (798298) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317383)

This can't go on forever. All this publicity isn't good for anyone. Sooner or later Google will turn into a coke sniffing, fat, corporation. After it's death there will be rumors spread by die-hard-fans claiming Google is still alive and faked it's own death.
This post is probably overrated.

Jabber? (5, Interesting)

vidarlo (134906) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317104)

If I where google, I'd go for a solution based on Jabber, as this allows
  • Connectivity with other nets (MSN/AIM/Yahoo!)
  • Connectivity with other jabber users
  • Allows a p2p structure, which is cheap for google
The fact that the technology is there, might be impotrant for google, since it is a solution that just has to be deployed. Only problem might be how servers cope when they get 100K users, and how google will ensure connectivity with MSN et al without being sued for something...

Re:Jabber? (1)

eobanb (823187) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317168)

wow, wtf.

Here are your recent submissions to Slashdot, and their status within the system:

2005-08-10 14:30:01 Google IM Client, Revisited (Index,Google) (rejected)

I linked to five or six articles, plus a past slashdot story, and a couple of them talked about Jabber, and being multi-protocol, and talked about p2p, and Apple. But this article? It links to some stupid blog.

The editors can go fuck themselves, frankly.

Re:Jabber? (0, Offtopic)

CrackedButter (646746) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317220)

Plus they cannot spell. Its Cheque, not Check. Dumbfucks.

Re:Jabber? (1)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317365)

Google can probably rely on mass media support.

Can you immagine the headline from MSNBC competitors - "MSN cuts off users of Google's IM service from their friends!"

They dont care when the protocol gets changed to stop a few users of Jabber or Gaim, but if it was Google getting disconnected it would be a Story (tm), and a PR nightmare for the IM service that tried it.

Re:Jabber? (1)

oldman1080 (63173) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317372)

That's actually not a bad idea. But let me expand on that. Why shouldn't google create an entirely web-based solution using AJAX? Clearly with Google Maps, they have demonstrated how powerful AJAX can be. I haven't had the chance to personally implement AJAX myself yet, but I wonder if it can be used to "push" out from server to client(web-browser).

Think about how advantageous this would be. Not only would they be able to update all the IM clients instantaneously on the server-side but this could remedy all the 3rd party client-breaking shennanigans that MSN, AIM, or Yahoo messenger is always trying to pull!

Something I don't understand.. (1)

danielk1982 (868580) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317138)

Why is Google releasing products that have little to no chance of being profitable. Don't get me wrong, I like gmail, google news, picasso, desktop search etc.

But does google actually make any money of them?

Re:Something I don't understand.. (1)

MrShaggy (683273) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317229)

This couild be an ad-based thing like MSN.

Re:Something I don't understand.. (3, Interesting)

bleaknik (780571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317237)


Gmail has context sensative ads. Most messages have advertisements for related topics. For example, I became aware of through a gmail ad. They made a dime on that one, I'm sure.

Google News is a repository of information. Of course they make money on it. If nothing else, they learn their user's habits.

Picasa, in case you didn't know, has several venues for Google to make a profit. First, google gets a better understanding of how images are cataloged by their users. This makes services like more efficient, and possibly even "smart". Second, Picasa is paired with a "Order Prints" function which shells out to several different photo printing services including Wal-Mart, Shutterfly, and Life Pics. This, I'm sure makes a small profit. Third, it integrates with Blogger and Tivo, which I'm sure there is an indirect revenue stream from these services as well.

An IM client could be huge for Google; I'm sure they could find ways to make a profit. Context sensative ads (similar to Trillian's Wikipedia lookup feature), regular advertisements (like AIM and MSN's advertising), and the ability to shell right out to their other revenue sources like, gmail, and picasa.

Information is valuable these days...

Re:Something I don't understand.. (1)

TooncesTheCat (900528) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317321)

I remember when Gmail came out the big celebration over having a gig of email storage. Then their were the talks about the context sensitive ads so I would have to worry about German dungeon porn companies advertising at the top of my gmail inbox if I'm at work. The thing is I only saw the ads for about 2-3 weeks. Havent seen a advertisement at the top of my Gmail inbox since then, and I got Gmail the first week it came out.

And no you fuckers I'm not using POP3 I'm regular gmail webmail ( [] )

Re:Something I don't understand.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317394)

Have you read an e-mail recently? Look on the right side of your browser.

The context-sensitive ads don't appear on the main inbox page, they appear when you read an e-mail and they pair the context of the ad with the specific content of that e-mail.

Web-based client? (5, Interesting)

helmetnerd (905678) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317139)

It doesn't have to be their own IM network. I could see Google coming out with a web-based IM client for an existing protocol, in line with their web-based desktop philosophy. I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing a nice lightweight AJAX-stylee IM client built into my google account for when im not at home.

Re:Web-based client? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317356)

Now THAT'S a good rumor... as it is accurate.

Rumour about a rumour (3, Interesting)

alphakappa (687189) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317148)

Where is the story about rumours that Google would buy Meetro... This looks like a way to get people to visit the meetro website.

Orkut (1)

WhiteFoxBR (834957) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317171)

I think that if they make a instant messenger that uses Orkut [] database will be really cool.

It was all rumours when Britney was pregnant, too- (0, Offtopic)

purduephotog (218304) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317174)

- which just means, well, nothing. Businesses do not disclose financial obligations based upon speculation, unless you're being investigated by an agency of the government.

Check back in 3 months.

How about fixing GMail first? (2, Interesting)

DoktorTomoe (643004) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317225)

GMail users are experiencing problems since friday if their adress consists of non-alphanumerical characters. While emails arrive at, they do not arrive at Google claims to ignore these characters, and many people have choosen to give their adress to their contacts with points.

Google has not yet responded to bug reports.

I certainly hope this is a temporal problem and emails are not lost.

Re:How about fixing GMail first? (2, Funny)

bleaknik (780571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317250)

My Gmail account is labeled as "beta". I wonder if they all read this way...

Re:How about fixing GMail first? (1)

TopShelf (92521) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317257)

My first response that you're wasting your time with a bug report posting in this thread. But then again, if they're not responding to the submitted reports, those guys are probably just reading /., so maybe you've got the right idea!

Re:How about fixing GMail first? (1)

multipartmixed (163409) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317314)



Thanks. Glad I keep backups on another server!

No, wait, I got mail two hours ago, and that's all that I'm expecting (checked against backup).

Does this maybe only happen when you didn't sign up with the dots in your alias?

> I certainly hope this is a temporal problem and emails are not lost.

So, you think Google will time-travel to retrieve your lost e-mails? ;)

Re:How about fixing GMail first? (1)

otomo_1001 (22925) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317360)

My account with works fine. (note: that isn't my address)

I am thinking it is a problem somewhere else, not gmail.

right move (2, Insightful)

rafi (55956) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317232)

people are saying: "next IM? -no space on the net", but the same was with email - there were also thousends of mail providers before google and anyway google succeded!

Why not? (2, Insightful)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317247)

Google could take IM any day, if they bought skype they wouldnt even need to do much re-branding!

Im still waiting for google calendar, theres just no good calander/task program thats remote, syncable, and cross-platform, unless im missing something..

Mozilla Sunbird? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317292)

Mozilla Sunbird is Mozilla Corporation's stab at your problem. It might be worth checking out. tml []

location based functionality (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317277)

Why hasn't anyone touched on the cool new things Meetro offers like the fact that its location based, detects wifi location and has a slick visual based interface?

Bandwidth issues? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13317278)

All I can say is LOL cable modem server, hey everyone check out this video! Funny Airplane []

We can call it Goober... (1)

milatchi (694575) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317293)

, then when I want to message people I can say, "Give me your Goober," or "Let me see your Goober."

Google would be insane to buy Meetro (2, Interesting)

debunkingfrauds (907571) | more than 9 years ago | (#13317389)

Meetro's key innovations. Their elevator statement is. Let's go into desperate internet cafes and ask them to setup 802.11b (hah 1!) and install Meetro clients (hah 2!) and get these internet cafes to register with Meetro their Geo-coded locations (hah 3!). The idea is if all three stages are done, the 30 people on Meetro can login at anytime and Meetro will automatically announce where you are to your friends. hah 1: Internet cafes aren't cool places where you bring your laptop and surf a little on 802.11b. It's a cigarette-smoking place full of loud noisy teenagers dying to pwn you on the internet. hah 2: The typical internet cafe already has at least 5 instant messengers, and all of them have 500,000,000 more users than Meetro. hah 3: Internet Cafes don't want to be found. They pirate software--a lot of it. They don't want walk in traffic of socialites wanting to meet each others (come in, spend 5 minutes, and then leave). They want internet addicts who stay for hours. Look, Meetro WILL generate a temporary buzz. Oh geo-coding!! HOW COOL!! Oh little brother snooping!! How CONTROVERSIAL!! Meetro is in beta and they are lost. Many instant messenger out there has been so-so followers with no clear innovations. Perhaps I am being too harsh, but Meetro does not have a gripe on what people really want. If people want to fuck. They will use a sex dating site. If people want to meet up, what's really at stake is a good calendar or events planner. Franklin and the 5,000,000 workgroup email solutions are already fighting in this space (admittedly to no-one's satisfaction). There's like 30 members on it now--why would Google buy this? Who ever submitted this story is just getting Meetro on the map, getting it on Slashdot to make it legit. You have to do what you can to promote your business, but this is clearly astroturfing.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?