ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Jobs
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


Office applications Toolkit

Instant Messaging: Internal servers or public services?

Jim Boyce

Published: 15 Dec 2002 19:47 GMT

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

If you consider the implications that instant messaging (IM) has for your business, you'll find that it offers great potential for improving communication between employees and customers alike. IM software has advanced beyond text messaging to offer a suite of communications and conferencing applications.

However, once you've decided that IM has a place in your business, you face the difficult decision of choosing which IM solution to use. They are not all created equal, and many of the systems don't play well with each other -- at least for now.

One option is to set up your own internal IM solution using Exchange Server, Lotus Notes/SameTime, or another third-party application. Of course, this isn't always feasible, particularly for smaller businesses with a limited budget. A second option is to use a public IM provider, which offers the advantage of being inexpensive to implement and gives you the opportunity to begin taking advantage of IM without investing in new hardware or server software.

The current market
As I mentioned in my previous article, the public IM provider market is dominated by the big three: AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), Microsoft MSN Messenger, and Yahoo Messenger. These three applications essentially support the same set of features but they're not compatible with each other. If you use just one of these services, you won't be able to communicate with people using the other two. So the key factor in choosing between them is making sure you'll be able to communicate with clients and partners. You need to look at the list of people (external to your organisation) you would like to communicate with via IM and ask them which IM system they use. This will help you adopt a system that is compatible with important partners, vendors, and/or clients.

Of course, AOL has been mandated by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to open its AIM system to communicate with rival systems as a condition of approving its merger with Time Warner, Inc. AOL has continued to complain about the difficulties of making IM transparent but has nevertheless knuckled down and made some progress, initially working with IBM to test interconnectivity with IBM's Lotus SameTime IM application, a leader in the corporate IM market.

Although other IM vendors are under less pressure to provide compatibility with competing applications, the market is nevertheless moving ponderously closer toward an interoperability standard. Both Microsoft and AOL have thrown their support behind a developing standard called SIMPLE, which stands for SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions.

This IETF standard is based on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), a signaling protocol that is used to establish Internet telephone calls, multimedia conferences, and chat sessions. There are competing standards, but they have fewer supporters and certainly none with the influence of Microsoft and AOL. Thus, SIMPLE will most likely be the winner in the standards war for IM interoperability, which should really propel the corporate use of IM. However, that doesn't mean you need to wait a year until victory is declared in the standards war. You just need to enter the fray with your eyes open.

Next

Previous

1 2


  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendlyPrint with Konica

Did you find this article useful?
77 out of 145 people found this useful


Full Talkback thread

2 comments

  1. I feel we should be able to have more im like I am... Anonymous
  2. hello how are you Anonymous

Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:












Featured Talkback

In association with Intel
Why do so many (virtually all) software packages think that they are so important that they have to be started automatically every time the computer boots? What is the largest number of "speed access", "update check", "camera download" and whatever other background programs you have ever seen running? Of those, how many did you really need?

By: J.A. Watson

Read full story:
Annoying software: a rogues' gallery

Vista Upgrade Blog

Vista - Still Running and Stable After...

Six weeks ago, when I wrote Renewed Adventures with Vista, I wondered if Microsoft had finally managed to fix it sufficiently that I wouldn't be forced to give up on it after a few... More

Post a comment

Official MS Windows 7 Bloggers

Check this out: http://blogs.msdn.com/e7...spx Its an official blog "Engineering Windows 7" Nothing. That's what is revealed. Until there is real... More

5 comments

Microsoft's Mojave just a desert vista

It didn't seem fair to wade into Microsoft's “Mojave Experiment” advert quite so soon after the flat earth incident. But The Economist has no such qualms: in this week's issue, it wonders... More

6 comments