To find XMPP/Jabber related ports: psearch -c net-im -so xmpp jabber.
Aside from chatting, XMPP can be used for automation (via instructions), feeds and micro-blogging.The XMPP standard is approved by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force).XMPP is an open standard, rather than open software (it includes plenty of open software as well).Extended features of XMPP are defined by XEP's, which can be found at /extensions.Core features of XMPP are defined by RFC's, which can be found at.I was trying to make the point that there are ~new~ and current clients for XMPP as well, even if Pidgin looks like shit. XMPP is a different case, because it requires a friendly server (and the post installation configuration step where you select one), but that's not quite relevant for the 'looks like something from the 21st century' discussion, is it? Friends recommend it, people install it, use it, done. I highly doubt that most people read the description of the Telegram or WhatsApp apps. The rest of your points are certainly valid (marketing for XMPP sucks), but again entirely different problems. If you care about that, I'd say you have ways to save the 2.38 EUR if necessary. I know, Joe User isn't going to build it, but again: You need a server for this to work. We need some data extracted from a secret chat… * Really? Can you look at the Telegram screenshots? Let me bite this time:Īs in the duration of 551557906200 periods of the radiation corresponding between the two superfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atoms? Yes, I might. If you don't know what XMPP is, then yes - this client is not for you. You pick up Conversations because a) some friend tells you to install it and connect it to their server or b) you have a server of your own. You wouldn't need Conversations if you wouldn't have a server to use. I was talking about the UI (I think that's a rather pretty client, comparable to the current WhatsApp/Telegram/whatever thing).Īgain, comparing to Telegram (see disclaimer in my previous post: I use that as well):
0 kommentar(er)
