Is XMPP the 'Next Big Thing'

Open Standard Lover writes "XMPP (eXtensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) has been getting a lot of attention during the last month and it seems that the protocol is finally taking off as a general purpose glue to build distributed web applications. It has been covered that AOL was experimenting with an XMPP gateway for its instant messaging platform. XMPP has been designed since the beginning as an open technology for generalized XML routing. However, the idea of an XMPP application server is taking shape and getting supporters. A recent example shows that ejabberd XMPP server can be used to develop a distributed Twitter-like system."

Just what we (didn't) need !!

[Anonymous Coward]

E-Mail wrapped in an XML overcoat.

Is there NOTHING sacred that some lemon won't wrap in XML ???

Oh, no, wait ... I must remember to file my patent application for XMJPG ... a JPG file wrapped in XML for instant dissemination of boring holiday snaps to people who I became "friends" with by virtue of the fact they happened to be in the same universe as me and also owned a PC.

Brilliant !!

Re:buzzwords are my favorite

[samael]

Except that XMPP isn't a web technology.

Re:buzzwords are my favorite

[samael]

A twitter-like system could be built on top of xmpp. In much the same way that a gmail-like system can be built on top of SMTP/POP. That doesn't mean that SMTP/POP are web-based.

Re:Performance

[rdradar]

XML definitely has lots of overhead and not needed bytes. However, it is easily expandable, easily readable (by human too) and can support lots of different kind of needs. Because XMPP is meant to be the universal IM protocol, it needs to be easily expandable. Normal, byte based protocols are harder to expand for all kinds of needs and you have to spend more time learning them, all individually.

Thanks Google

[tmalone]

Say what you will about Google and privacy concerns, but this is one case of Google doing something good. If they hadn't used Jabber/XMPP for Google Chat, I doubt that we would be seeing this level of interest from others. Just about everybody that I chat with uses Google Chat now, and so, for the first time they all use Jabber capable clients. This is a very good thing. If Google goes out of business, or just becomes unpopular, the infrastructure will now be there to somewhat effortlessly transition to a new dominant IM system that is based on open standards, instead of going back to the days of MSN, AOL, Yahoo, and ICQ, all fighting each other and their users.

Re:Am I too late...

[mhall119]

Wouldn't it be easier to just make the fix in Pidgin and submit a patch?

Re:Just what we (didn't) need !!

[Sancho]

Well, happy IMing on unencrypted, stone-age, propertiary networks that force-feed you with ads and censor your messages, if that's what you want.

XML doesn't solve any of these problems (and they're not all problems.) There's no technical reason that any given messaging service couldn't use SSL, and XMPP is extensible, and an implementation of it can be made proprietary enough to require a client that will force-feed you ads. Any network can censor messages, assuming they can read them.

Your post is overrated.

Yeah, I know, this is Slashdot, where people like to spew completely uninformed pseudo-opinions, but this one is just too obvious.

Oh, sorry, I guess you covered all of that.

Re:buzzwords are my favorite

[Angostura]

Nope, mail hasn't become part of the Web, some mail systems have Web interfaces.