What's the underlying tech?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Sander_Marechal Mar 13, 2009 3:30 AM EDT |
What's the underlying tech? I really hope they went with a proven, open standard like SIP just like they did with Jabber/XMPP and Google Talk. |
| jacog Mar 13, 2009 3:59 AM EDT |
Hmmmm, I have used the Google Voice (and webcam) thing in the past, and it required some Windows-only browser plugin. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 13, 2009 4:24 AM EDT |
After some cursory Googling around I think that it's not based on SIP but can interface with SIP. It looks a bit like a glorified vCard for VoiP services instead of a complete VoiP solution. We'll see. Many people have already commented that unless Google starts offering SIP for this it is likely to fail, as the world is divided between Skype on one side and a horde of open SIP providers on the other side. It's unlikely that a 3rd walled garden will fit in between. |
| Bob_Robertson Mar 13, 2009 10:41 AM EDT |
> It's unlikely that a 3rd walled garden will fit in between. I agree. I'm not sure what Google can offer to differentiate themselves. |
| tuxchick Mar 13, 2009 11:10 AM EDT |
Quoting: I'm not sure what Google can offer to differentiate themselves. Yeah, AOL already cornered the market on jailbait chatrooms, so if google wants a successful walled garden they're going to have to come up with something else. I suspect they'll take the opposite approach and use open standards, and figure out something to pull disparate services together, since that is the trend now anyway. Even for microshaft, sort of, with their 'unified communications', which of course is code for 'another way to glop MS cr@p together and make the same customers pay new money for the same stuff, but with a different name, and still not interoperate'. |
| Sander_Marechal Mar 13, 2009 11:19 AM EDT |
@tuxchick: At the moment Google Voice isn't using open standards. I hope they'll switch to SIP though. It's the protocol of the future. |
| theduke459 Mar 13, 2009 1:49 PM EDT |
I always find myself wondering why an organization that insists on using its own, dedicated email domain would not insist on similar control and branding for voice and IM communications? Ultimately I think this service will have only a niche appeal. |
| gus3 Mar 13, 2009 5:29 PM EDT |
Plus, their own, ah, "flexibility" on privacy matters doesn't recommend them well for something like this. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!