We have already seen the news that will bring us soon Mozilla Thunderbird 13 y Mozilla Firefox 12 and both have one characteristic in common: Integrate Instant Messaging.
We have already seen it before and I will show you again:
And the courier in Thunderbird:
In the case of Mail Client, I was testing version 13 that integrates this option, and at least for now it is very limited, since it simply allows using the accounts of GTalk, Facebook, IRC y Yahoo if i'm not mistaken, so any other service like XMPP it is ruled out unless it can be integrated through extensions.
The point I want to get to is which one do I use then for the Instant messaging? If you ask me, I only have one answer to give: None. From the outset, I do not see how adding these "extra" functionalities to both applications can improve their performance. If already, so much Thunderbird as Firefox consume a lot of memory, I don't want to see when they integrate a IM client. Unless they somehow manage to optimize resources even more, which I doubt.
The idea of integration does not seem bad to me, on the contrary, it can be very productive. A case of success would be, for example, if we check the Email online (Gmail, Yahoo ... etc) and therefore we only have to open the browser, so it would be very useful to have the IM client available. But in my case, I usually have both applications open the whole day, and I am one of those who prefer that they only do what they have to do, Firefox to navigate, Thunderbird for the mail. For messaging I have to Pidgin, which supports how much protocol exists and that function is 100% fulfilled.
I prefer developers of Mozilla spend your time working on the consumption of both applications, improving their appearances, and the basic options, than trying to implement something for which we already have a few alternatives. That is my opinion. What do you think?
I am one of those who think that it is better to do only one thing, but do it well.
+10
Well, I suppose that those of firefox do not know what to do, they want to recover the users who lost by chrome and it is clear, that our way of thinking is different from the way of thinking of most. I do not like the issue of the messaging client, simply because I see it limited and I ask a lot more from an IM client, such as saving the logs, showing the songs that I listen to in most players or having different smileys ... and it's of course it will be a while before firefox or thunderbird can do that.
It seems silly to me to do that ... why complicate life if we have Pidgin What is a multiprotocol client? What's more, users of Windows y MacOSX do Trillian Astra which is the same as Pidgin, but cooler. -http: //trillian.cachefly.net/trillian.im/windows/screenshots/trillian5-desktop.png http://trillian.cachefly.net/trillian.im/mac/screenshots/mac-infocard-l.png-
It's a fuss having to deal with more than one instant messaging client ... I don't know ... it doesn't hurt but I wouldn't buy it as the jewel in the crown.
I tried trillian astra in my hackintosh and it works quite well, I put ichat aside, which if I found it ugly was when I tried it on windows, I don't know, but it doesn't stick with aero or glue.
I see it quite well integrated into the theme: http://trillian.cachefly.net/trillian.im/windows/screenshots/trillian5-desktop.png
It seems ugly to me because it gives me a plastic pidgin feeling….
And why don't you change the skin? http://developer.ceruleanstudios.com/index.php/Full_Skins
Well, it shows that you are not thinking much like architects ^^ U
I'm going to give the example with the two most used: Gmail and Facebook chats. Like it or not, we all know that most people keep these two web applications that are written in JavaScript etc. open for a long time.
When we see this general behavior… isn't it the most logical thing to integrate this functionality directly into the browser? At least that way it can be optimized much better than being outside the core.
Obviously, comparing it with Pidgin and the like is wrong (at least on the Firefox side, I don't really know how they implement Thunderbird) because they don't even seem to want to approach that style of programs, but rather, the common chat style gmail or fb, which for me, does make all the sense of the world.
: )
But I still see a separate IM Client better. Let's say that for X reason you close the browser, or the mail client, or they close themselves due to a Bugs. What happens? That you lose the conversation you had with someone. In Pidgin you can have Gtalk, Facebook Chat, Yahoo and other protocols integrated in the same program without having to resort to different tabs (as in the case of the browser) to be able to converse.
Of course, we are talking ahead of the circumstances, it would be necessary to see what is the objective and the final proposal of Mozilla.
I also agree that clients are better aside, but, there it is: most users use those chats within the browser.
😛
I think that whoever uses the chat rooms on these sites and does not bother to open them from a client, will continue to do so even if they have the same client there "next door." More than to have it "twice" for that they have it in one, the one they already know and have already accepted and "is not complicated."
I don't agree either, it seems to me that wanting to integrate so many functions to the browser (or to the mail reader) will only make it much slower, a huge devourer of resources and with a lot of bugs to fix. I am a regular user of both, and like Elav I usually have them open practically all day, and I do not see that the functionality of any of them improves substantially, also as several have already mentioned for that we already have Pidgin, and in Windows / OSX there are applications Similar.
I was going to comment / add something, but I forgot it XD. The truth is that I agree 100% with the article and with the rest of the comments too, I would have little to add. (I'm almost sure I'll give "send" and I'll remember it).
I totally agree with the author of this article.
Oh my, I think it's great to have an embedded messenger in your browser or in your email, what's more, you don't even need to enter gmail or facebook, it's something interesting an example a company that uses a web interface can have all the registered users of the company so that notes are sent so you would not have another open program, it is clear that if a browser consumes a lot of resources as this will surely influence the option it will always be to deactivate it, in terms of appearance a browser can not change much for me it is a window with certain things that shows you, personally what a browser I am looking for is greater security, better use of resources and if it can be integrated other options that no longer have to have greater applications, better and better if it is multiplatform.
Actually I would like more if it were a plugin that activates these functions ... that is, that by default it comes OFF, and have the possibility / option to activate these new functions 🙂
Let it Be… Let your imagination FLY. If Mozilla wants to create a Better Web (For a More Open Web - #PWMA) WELCOME, so be it… AMEN