Archive for August, 2005

Google Talk

Thursday, August 25th, 2005

Judging from the creativity and diversity of Google Labs’ products, it seemed only a matter of time until they entered the instant messaging market. Therefore, it was no surprise for me to hear today that Google released Google Talk, an instant messenger application for Windows. It was simply the curiosity to see and try the new gadget they created.

The instant messenger market has evolved a lot in the past few years, from very simple applications to complex clients integrating all kinds of features. A recent study showed that teenagers consider e-mail “old-fashioned”, while instant messengers are their favourite way of communicating with friends. The major players in instant messaging world — AOL, ICQ, MSN and Yahoo — developed their own messengers and constantly added more and more features appealing to the young generation, such as avatars, animated backgrounds and music, graphic emoticons (smileys), webcam and voice communication, and so on. Other features tied the messengers closer to other services offered by the company’s site, such as news and stock ticker, weather data, online radio stations, electronic greeting cards for all occasions, and many more. Over time, these messengers became packed with so much stuff, that they no longer were only instant messengers, but information aggregators as well, loaded with extra features not related to messaging.

Other instant messengers were following closely. Developed by third parties, they didn’t attempt to integrate extra features, but to provide basic messaging with all proprietary networks for people who didn’t want to run Yahoo’s or MSN’s messengers, for instance, or who didn’t want to have several messengers running when they could have an all-in-one solution, or even to use instant messaging on operating systems not officially supported by the major players mentioned above. These third party messengers were facing a constant problem, though: they did not have access to the companies’ closed-source communication protocols, so they had to reverse engineer them. And, just when they thought they’ve got everything right, the companies were making slight changes to the protocols, just to keep those third party messengers out of their networks, because they weren’t bringing any revenues through advertising or associated services.

In the mean time, a new instant messaging system was being developed: Jabber. Being open-source and based on XML, it quickly became a success for alternative instant messengers, private and public messaging networks, and compatible messengers. Moreover, Jabber messengers can also communicate with proprietary networks.

The instant messaging market seemed saturated and well-balanced. Not to Google, apparently, since they released Google Talk. I thought, what could this new instant messenger possibly offer that the others don’t?

Google TalkThe answer is: simplicity. This is the first word that comes to mind when you run Google Talk for the first time. The installer is merely 899 kB, ten times smaller than MSN’s or Yahoo!’s messengers, and it doesn’t pollute your web browser with search bars or a new start-up page. The program’s interface is clean, white, simple to the point of austere, just like Google’s front page. There are no colorful buttons or menus, but a few text links that change color when you roll the mouse cursor above them. There are no tabs with extra information or services. The options for program’s functionality are very few and the only customization of the application window one can make is… resizing it. No skins, no colors, nothing. Shocking, eh?

Then, you add a friend to the list, using his or her Google Mail address, and open a message window to say a few words. It’s a white, clean, simple window, with no graphic emoticons, no different colors for nicknames, not even the ability to change your own nickname displayed to the other person! The only buttons present are for sending an e-mail to the person and to start a voice call. Where are all those buttons cluttered in most other instant messengers? What happened to my power of personalizing this thing? The white background burns into my eyes, aaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!

Just kidding. Don’t be fooled by the minimalistic design. Pleasant surprises start appearing after you use the program a little longer. Open two message windows and you’ll notice how they group together with only one conversation displayed at a time and the others minimized as horizontal bars (docked), thus minimizing wasted screen space. A single click makes another conversation active, hiding the previous one. Notice how different visual elements change color when you roll your mouse cursor over them. Observe how the Google guys implemented all the good graphical user interface principles into this application, making it so intuitive and easy to use. Its power is its simplicity. Its purpose is instant messaging — and it does that well. No point in invading your screen with birthday reminders, news alerts or online radio, or eating up your computer’s resources with heavy graphics and animations.

With Google Talk, Google questions the direction taken by the other instant messengers when they added so many unrelated elements, and takes us back to the basics of instant messaging. Google Talk is probably the most functional, non-intrusive, efficient and well designed messenger out there, doing only what it is supposed to: sending and receiving messages. It’s like a hammer in the toolbox; you expect it to work well, not to turn glittery pink or dark blue to reflect your mood.

I love the voice chat of Google Talk. It sounds crystal clear, even better than Skype, without delays or interruptions. Getting the microphone close to the speakers doesn’t make them whistle; I’m really curious how they solved this problem of microphony! It doesn’t require a fast Internet connection either; in my test, it performed excellent with a peak of 6.4 kB/s throughput which can be easily sustained even through dial-up. The communication quality is displayed by 5 bars, like the signal meter of a cellular phone, and so far I did not notice any voice chatting problems through firewalls or routers.

Text messaging, as I said, is very basic, but functional. There are no graphic smileys, no offline messages or group chats. But, messaging uses the Jabber protocol, so other people with Jabber-compatible messengers can connect to the Google Talk network. Also, it supports Unicode, so all the characters specific to various languages will be properly transmitted and displayed.

Overall, Google Talk appears to be the beginning of a wonderful thing. It is just the bare messenger now, with basic functionality for messaging and voice chat, but with an enormous potential for further development. In time, new features will most likely be added, but I’m sure Google will keep the interface as simple and functional as possible. At the moment, it is probably too early to switch to Google Talk from another instant messenger because you will most likely miss some features or have difficulties finding your friends. Google Talk uses, after all, Google Mail accounts, which are available only on invitation from an existing member. In the future, however, I expect Google Talk to grow, improve and turn into a serious competitor to the major messengers out there. Keep an eye out on its development. I know I will; can’t wait to kick out that Yahoo! Messenger monster!

Update: Others’ interest in Google Talk is amazing. Reviews and personal experiences appear on countless blogs, even a Google Talk page on Wikipedia appeared. I have learned that the Google Talk servers support TLS encryption for messages which works for Gaim, for instance, but is not yet implemented in the Google Talk client (messages are sent in plain text, which is easier to eavesdrop on). Text can be formatted with bold or italic by enclosing it between asterisks and underscores, respectively. Text can be even made bigger or smaller by holding the Control key while rotating the scroll wheel on the pointing device, with the input box active. The main window can be set to stay on top of all applications with a simple registry change, and there’s an “easter egg” built in as a game. Some people went as far as editing the executable with specialized tools to change the color theme, as described here.

According to one of the developers, Google Talk clients will soon appear for other operating systems; the Windows development team was ahead of the others. Google Talk is only based on Jabber protocol, but it doesn’t include GPL code, so it will not be open-source either. That would break the license for the voice chat protocol as well. Google didn’t indend to create another one-client-for-all networks, but their own Jabber-based messaging network. What’s great about it is the excellent client that is going to cover most used operating system, but also embracing other instant messengers people got used to.

There’s one not so obvious aspect regarding this client: corporate messaging. In recent years, instant messengers started replacing telephones and voice mail in medium and large corporations. Creating private messaging networks for various companies has been a competitive business. Google Talk is a functional, powerful, bare platform to build a custom corporate client on, with cutom requirements or interface or add-ons. Using Jabber also lowers licensing costs for the company messaging server, too. Considering that Google provides so many free services for millions with little advertising, the company still needs to make a revenue somehow. With Google Talk on portfolio, I bet they will be targeting corporate messaging soon, as well as other related services.

Random synapses to create software reviews

Wednesday, August 24th, 2005

Given my interest for trying out good, free, specialized new applications, I’m going to start publishing software reviews. I know, I know; the gazillionth software review site is not exactly what the Web lacked, and I’m not some guru in the software industry whose words can make stocks go up or down. But hey, I’m not affiliated with any company, my reviews don’t need to be approved by a superviser, nor do I need to be cautious about risking revenues from advertising. So you can expect unbiased reviews that try to scratch below the surface and give you a complete picture.

Stay tuned, the first review will be here shortly…

XHTML 1.0 Strict validation

Saturday, August 20th, 2005

Standardisation is wonderful, especially in communication. Oversimplified, it is like a dictionary that defines words and how they can be used, so a message is correctly formulated by the sender and correctly understood by the receivers. The Web works with the help of many standards, many developed by Word Wide Web (W3) Consortium. Unfortunately, in too many cases, both web site designers and web browser creators choose to ignore to a certain degree these standards. The results are immediate: the web site doesn’t look and work the same way on different browsers, operating systems, displays. That’s so annoying!!!

Being powered by WordPress, this blog is XHTML and CSS compliant. WordPress creators opted for XHTML 1.0 Transitional, which is more flexible and allows certain elementes to be accepted. But I’m not using any of those deprecated elements, not even targets for links so they open in new windows. Why not change to XHTML 1.0 Strict, then?

Only one file needed to be edited and voila, Random Synapses is now validated as XHTML 1.0 Strict. Which means, anyone using a web browser compliant to this standard, like Mozilla Firefox, will see the site exactly as I have designed it. Internet Explorer, on the other hand, might have problems correctly displaying certain elements (not necessarily on this site, but probably on others) because of its reduced standards compatibility.

New URL for Random Synapses

Friday, August 19th, 2005

I never thought my blog needed a better URL until my cousin suggested it. After building the custom theme, a domain name seems another good step forward, so there you have it, an easier to remember address: www.randomsynapses.org . Don’t forget to update your bookmarks and live feeds to the new URL!

Getting more spammers than readers

Saturday, August 6th, 2005

Yeah, it’s a sad day for my blog — its comment counter has reached and exceeded the 1,000 figure. “Whoa, one thousand comments, duuuuude that’s awesome,” some of you might think… And you’d be wrong. Of those 1,000 comments, less than 50 are legitimate. Everything else is spam.

Poker spam clearly stands out from the crowd with most comments. Viagra and Cialis tablets are next on the list — some bargain, at $3.99 a dose. I guess the nerds who get turned on by hardware specs instead of members of the opposite sex really need those blue pills in their rare ocasions away from their keyboards. Number three: loans and insurance. Not as many as I expected, but still a noticeable number. And I don’t even qualify for those “great offers” from another continent. The rest of the list is pretty insignifiant, with links to weird BDSM stuff, and others that don’t pop into my mind now.

Having reached this milestone down the filthy road to Spamville, I can only be thankful for Dr Dave’s amazing Spam Karma, a complex plug-in for filtering out spam in WordPress, now at version 2. It has caught almost 700 of those comments since I installed it, with only two false positives and one legitimate comment tagged as spam (it contained a collection of URLs, too many of them apparently). Before SpamKarma, I had to check my blog daily and manually remove bad comments. It wasn’t a problem when this blog was very little activity and I only had to deal with 3 or 5 messages a week. Now, when it gets hammered by search engine spiders, newsreaders, vulnerability exploiters and spammers, if I don’t get 15 spam comments a day then I wonder if my webhost’s server is having problems.

I have reached the conclusion that spam cannot be stopped. It can be slowed down or filtered, but we, the netizens, will be engaged in this constant battle for a long, long time. Spammers breach new holes, we need to plug them. Considering the ratio between legitimate and spam comments and generalising it to the entire Internet activity, we can realize the scale of this garbage flowing in on our sites, inboxes and anything open to public. Nowadays, the Internet heavily promotes spoofed e-mails, open proxies, fake identities and personal data theft, instead of legitimate communication. It has become a world of machines, of automatic programs harvesting information for illicit purposes, of specialized tools finding vulnerable computers to exploit and millions of e-mail addresses to attack, where people are merely subjects tormented by the dark side of their own creation. It’s sad to see that, in a few hours, these words will be read, indexed and processed by more processors than brains.