Miranda IM

Page 2 of 197 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 1968

Thread: AIM Protocol Discussion

  1. #11
    Join Date
    October 2005
    Posts
    6
    Good news. I will be watching this intently. I am just waiting till it's more usable (Add contacts and so forth).

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightwish
    Aim oscar - that's actually good news. Not that I personally need it that much (i'am rarely on aim), but aim is an important protocol and the missing oscar support was often causing frustration for people who wanted to use Miranda but decided against because it only supported toc.

    @all
    Give this guy a break and don't hammer with feature requests (they can wait until the basic functionality is stable enough)

    He has already done a nice job with the toc2 plugin, actually saving an important feature of Miranda (AIM connectivity). Now, with AIMOSCAR things can only get better - we all know how often it was requested and and now it seems it will finally become reality.

    For me it works... At least I can login, wasn't able to test more, because nobody was online (my aim contact list IS small :) ).
    So far, it's working perfectly for me, absolutely no issues whatsoever. Given how long I've been dying to see this... THANK YOU SNAPHAT!

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Drugwash
    It's being worked on, however regarding ICQJ, the ICQ features have priority, so I guess it's much better if two people take care of the OSCAR protocol, each one with his own goals. The future can bring a merge or whatever, but for now, let's be thankful there is someone that does the job (and it does it well).
    Besides, as long as there are two separate official clients, it's better to have separate protocols in Miranda too, just in case.
    Sounds fair, and i look forward to to said code merge. (If it happens)

    Dont' worry, I'm definately pleased that it's being worked on!

    Yes, there are 2 seperate official clients, I don't get how that means we need two plugins. In case of what? Since the servers they use are identical, if one goes down i can simply log into the other the same way, If you mean a client incompadibility, then i could simply use an ICQ account instead of AIM and vice versa.

    My main issue is that If given the oppotunity, i would have 1 login instead of 4. the current ICQJ allows me to shrink that to 3 with AIM users only being slightly gimped.

    Sorry if i sound rude or pushy, I'm just trying to understand your perspective here :P
    Last edited by TychoQuad; 25 Oct 2005 at 6:23 AM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    2,775
    Quote Originally Posted by TychoQuad
    Sounds fair, and i look forward to to said code merge. (If it happens)

    Dont' worry, I'm definately pleased that it's being worked on!

    Yes, there are 2 seperate official clients, I don't get how that means we need two plugins. In case of what? Since the servers they use are identical, if one goes down i can simply log into the other the same way, If you mean a client incompadibility, then i could simply use an ICQ account instead of AIM and vice versa.
    I don't think that icqoscar and aimoscar are 100% identical. In fact, they cannot be, because icq uses numerical UINs and aim uses alphanumerical screen names (yes, that IS quite a difference from a programmers point of view, because a icq uin can be stored in a single integer value while an aim screenname requires a string).
    My main issue is that If given the oppotunity, i would have 1 login instead of 4. the current ICQJ allows me to shrink that to 3 with AIM users only being slightly gimped.
    Actually, if you have a ICQ uin and don't have/need an aim screenname, then ICQJ should already do the job (mostly). However, think about people who have AIM as their main protocol (maybe the same sn for years) - they probably don't want to sign up for a icq uin only to use the oscar protocol.

    Since I'am not a protocol guru, I cannot say if it could be possible to merge aim and icq oscar. Imho aol and ex-mirabilis were trying to merge their protocols but run into some difficulties.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    August 2005
    Location
    Newark, DE, US
    Posts
    708
    There are differences in what aim sends for packets as compared to icq... The packets tend to be similar, but icq has specific features that it uses; which, do not even exist in aim and I assume the reverse also happens. One example is that there are a number of statuses that aren't supported in aim, which, causes differences in the packets. If you look through the some of oscar's SNACs you'll see what I mean- aim tlv, icq only tlv, yada yada yada.

    However, apparently that doesn't mean you cannot use an icq number to sign into the AimOSCAR plugin.... b/c I just checked and you can... and apparently you can with the regular aim client also.

    But, I really think the differences in features is why AOL never merged AIM with ICQ. I think they wanted to include different features to target different user bases.

    Perhaps, the philosophy is: "have one piece of software do what it is suppose to do and do it well". As opposed to, let's merge the icq and aim software and include separate features for both in one bundle. Honestly, I believe that's the way to go with how aim and icq currently work on the protocol side.

    I doubt, that's what happened with AOL though, but I do stand by my decision to create a separate plugin, because I feel that merging AIM and ICQ into one plugin will cause the plugin to become bloated and may lead to alienation of one of the user bases(Probably AIM's because it didn't start off attempting to support aim). I think there will be a question of balance, no matter who programs the plugin, because the developer(s) are likely to code for whatever part they use more. If you look at current aim and icq software today, most clients are made for one or the other and even most of the multi-clients keep separate bases for their icq and aim support.

    In short, I don't believe that merging either into one plugin is going to be good for the project in the long run, expecially not at this stage of the game.

    -A

  6. #16
    That's cool, and I totally understand. It's your work, your say.

    Lets just say I'm still looking forward to a "bloated" plugin then :)

  7. #17
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    9,533
    Here's a couple of things I noticed 3 days ago in v1.1, when I last ran my Miranda:
    -Does not react on global status change (with clist_nicer+, at least).
    -ICQ and AIM disconnected twice that day, both at the same time (AOL servers issue, I believe). While ICQ status icon went instantly to Offline, the AIM OSCAR one stayed unchanged (I was Away on all protocols).

  8. #18
    Join Date
    April 2005
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    658
    I have noticed that an "AIMOSCAR" folder is always being created - this is probably like ICQ and TabSRMM and etc to keep various files there, that's just fine but that folder is not being created just in the Miranda dir, I have noticed it sporadically showing up on my desktop and even in a different drive(!), for this matter, drive E:\.

    Perhaps it should be checked and specificied to be created Only in the Miranda dir. ;)

  9. #19
    Join Date
    March 2005
    Posts
    9,533
    Oh, I thought I have already reported that. I must have dreamt of it. :-)

    Yes, it happened to me too, to find an AIMOSCAR folder in the root of the C drive (abnormal), besides the one in Miranda's main folder (which is normal, I guess; that's where the avatars are supposed to be stored, for now).

  10. #20
    Join Date
    August 2005
    Location
    Newark, DE, US
    Posts
    708
    It's where profile & away html files are stored. I was just grabbing the current directory, apparently, it changes. So I'll have to make a change for that.

Similar Threads

  1. MSN Protocol Discussion
    By borkra in forum Protocols
    Replies: 2314
    Last Post: 12 Mar 2015, 4:54 PM
  2. Yahoo Protocol Discussion
    By Gena01 in forum Protocols
    Replies: 701
    Last Post: 27 Sep 2014, 10:31 PM
  3. ICQ Protocol Discussion
    By Joe @ Whale in forum Protocols
    Replies: 2303
    Last Post: 10 May 2013, 11:35 AM
  4. IRC Protocol Discussion thread
    By nowotny in forum Protocols
    Replies: 370
    Last Post: 3 Apr 2013, 6:20 PM
  5. SIP Protocol Discussion
    By paul_sh in forum Protocols
    Replies: 206
    Last Post: 5 Aug 2011, 9:19 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •