To Trillian or not.

WHY THE HELL ARE YOU SHOUTING?……………….
Dont use all caps when posting, it is insulting and akin to shouting n you prolly didnt intend to shout.
Read the posts here… do you really think everybody is lying?
We cannot and will not convince you to accept the claims of both cerulean and the members here…. YOU must make that decision.
If you dont believe the claims then certainly dont use the application.
Dont expect the members here to make decisions for you.

Try it, it’s free.
Dont like it?… delete it.
There comes a time when YOU need to make an informed decision… nobody here is willing to hold your hand…….. just do it.
There are more than enough words in this Trillian forum for you to make an educated decision.

Acutally there is an edit button… look for this >>

Hi Rafael,
If MSN functionality is important to you and you are wanting to ensure that it will work for you via Trillian I would highly suggest waiting until after October 15th to see if Trillian users will be still be able to connect to MSN legally… Or until Microsoft and/or Cerulean Studios/Trillian release an official statement regarding the resolution of the third party client license requirement… Just to be on the safe side.. As for the features of the original client that have been incorporated into Trillian, it is my understanding that only the newest version contains some of those features but far from all… and again it’s still a wait ‘n’ see approach as to whether connection to MSN via Trillian will even be possible after October 15th…

Actually you can have the same smilies on the pro version. I editted Zaz’s ultimate emoticons pack to show all MSN smileys, including the 6 hidden ones, all 64 Yahoo smilies, all AIM smileys (except the alleged hidden 2,500), and recently I updated the ICQ smileys to use those from MCPE’s pack. I have also given it jabber smileys based on the exodus client and used the original Trillian smilies and sounds for IRC.

They aren’t going to “guarantee” connectivity with anyone!. That would make them legally liable if Microsoft, Yahoo, ICQ, AIM or Jabber switched technology faster than they were able to keep up.

But Cerulean Studios has publically stated that 2.0 has been fully compatible with the newest protocols for both Yahoo and MSN since it’s official release, and that patches are now available for both Trillian .74 and 1.0 that will make those versions compatible with the only MSN protocol that Microsoft will be supporting after October 15th.

So they do state publically that the latest releases/patches do support the protocol that Microsoft themselves acknowledge will work after October 15th. What more assurance do you want?

As far as I’m concerned, Cerulean Studios has said that Trillian will work with MSN after October 15th. They haven’t guaranteed it, but then, then never have. I will concede that if they weren’t able to connect, it would severely hurt their business. MSN now has a big share of the IM market, and if Trillian couldn’t connect, the Trilly advantage would be tarnished for a great many users.

As for M$ going to SSL, I haven’t heard that one. SSL is a form of secure communication protected by certificate authorities like Verisign. It’s the same form of encrypted data transfer used when you purchase something online from a reputable site, as indicated by the https:// address and the little padlock symbol in the status bar of your browser. They could conceivably go with SSL encrypted instant messaging, but it seems like major overkill. If they wanted to block out unlicensed clients, it would provide them the means to do so.

As for the legal aspects, I really can’t comment. My gut feel is that if Microsoft wanted to raise a stink they could, since it is their network and their resources (read: $$) that supports the MSN protocol. But it would raise the ire of the anti-trust crowd, and do nothing good for their public image. This is why I believe they’ve tolerated the existence of Trillian, Miranda, and other third-party IM products that connect to their network.

I suspect that Microsoft wants to retain more control over their network, but that they’re willing to negotiate attractive deals with quality partners (like Cerulean Studios). The end result, in my opinion, is that some of the smaller, rinky-dink clients will eventually lose support for MSN and disappear, and the better-quality clients will survive and even thrive. But that’s just my not-so-humble opinion.

Thanks for the kind words. Opinions are like fingerprints; everyone has one. And I’m always happy to share mine. 😉

Thanks for the info about SSL, Jeff… And what you say here makes really good sense:

“As for the legal aspects, I really can’t comment. My gut feel is that if Microsoft wanted to raise a stink they could, since it is their network and their resources (read: $$) that supports the MSN protocol. But it would raise the ire of the anti-trust crowd, and do nothing good for their public image. This is why I believe they’ve tolerated the existence of Trillian, Miranda, and other third-party IM products that connect to their network.”

I wonder if the effect on their public image would be the same, or if it might be muted, if the other major IM’s followed suit though? AOL has made it quite clear in the past that it did not want third parties, Microsoft included, accessing its network and they have been suspiciously quiet regarding these newest developments…

And it would definitely be very interesting if very few third party clients were able to meet the expectations of MSN (and Yahoo and AOL, if they choose to follow suit). That would undoubtedly increase the success of the qualifying clients. Unless, MSN bases its fee, if one is required, on the size of the third parties user base. If they do have some sort of criteria for licensing fees, again assuming that there may be fees, that could make for some hefty amounts for the more popular third parties. Along these lines it is interesting to note that Microsoft does ask about the size of the user base for those third party clients seeking licenses and it does mention in an article that it will assess each application individually as seen here: ” MSN Product Manager Larry Grothaus didn’t specify the process of authorization, nor the terms by which third-party IM providers would have to abide. Instead, he said that Microsoft would follow-up with vendors who have filled out the form “on a case-by-case basis.”

“Each request will present unique situations based on the breadth of potential applications and will require individual follow up,” he said.”

It just seems to me that there is more than meets the eye, so to say, and I don’t think that we are being given a view of the”big picture” as of yet… Perhaps I’m too curious but… Enquiring minds want to know, lol K, that was bad, sorry, lol

and Dekker: I see that both you and I are fairly new to the forums here and it might be helpful for you to view the forum policies, especially the one below:

Etiquette
Take time to read our posting guidelines; they outline the basic rules for posting. Treat other members with civility and respect. Profanity, obscenity and pornography are not tolerated. This is a public forum and we want it to remain a friendly place where all kinds of people can feel comfortable.

Of course, we’re all entitled to our opinions and for the most part it’s not what we say but how we say it. This forum does not seem the place for flamebait and provacation. If you genuinely have a problem and are not able to express yourself in a manner that is appropriate for this public forum feel free to send a private message but please note that flames are not welcome via any avenue and won’t be responded to. Please respect the forum administration and don’t subject the entire forum to off topic non content posting just for my benefit. I certainly won’t encourage you…