<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for meandcat</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/meandcat/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/meandcat/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:23:20 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Notes: GTalk Videochat</title><link>http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/archives/2008/11/gtalk_videochat.html#comment-3705431</link><description>&lt;p&gt;melo:&lt;br&gt;no, i don't think in the long run walled gardens will win. i'm convinced they don't have a future, but unfortunetely, as you said, it's a long road.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;but going back on topic, i wonder when they will enable filetransfer through the webinterface. man, i'm totally blown away by the possibilities of that plugin. i'm actually thinking of using gmail but then again i'm hoping for apple to implement XMPP in mobileme not too far in the future... it would just be a perfect match!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">meandcat</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:23:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Notes: GTalk Videochat</title><link>http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/archives/2008/11/gtalk_videochat.html#comment-3702699</link><description>&lt;p&gt;i guess skype isn't interested in opening it's network to others because the benefit in that would clearly be on the other's side and not on skype's own side! &lt;br&gt;unfortunately they are the defacto standard in VoIP right now so people are forced to use it because everyone else is also using it. &lt;br&gt;i just don't see where the benefit could be for skype in giving people an option to choose from.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;concerning google's plugin i'm sure it could be easily accessed through other websites or even desktop clients. i think it would especially be interesting for the adium team: they (and the pidgin team) are working on signalling and media capturing for quite a while now but as far as i know they are'nt really progressing in that. that's what keeps them from offering VV features any time soon.&lt;br&gt;now the signalling and media capturing is exactly what that google plugin does. it's like that plugin solves all of adium's problems. what makes it even more interesting is that adium already uses Webkit for rendering it's chat windows, so it should be rather simple to access the plugin through adium and render an interface for it using webkit, just like it is inteded by google.&lt;br&gt;the question is more if adiums and google's licenses would allow that usage.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">meandcat</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:55:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Notes: GTalk Videochat</title><link>http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/archives/2008/11/gtalk_videochat.html#comment-3702117</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Skype using XMPP/Jingle? Haha, not anytime soon...&lt;br&gt;But the possibility of other sites using Google's browser plugin sounds very promising. In that case even standalone clients like Adium or even iChat could use it to offer standards based, GTalk compatible VoIP features.&lt;br&gt;If Google releases that little peace of code under an open source license the possibilities are huge!&lt;br&gt;But then again the naming of the components doesn't sound like Google plans to open the use of the plugin for third parties: &lt;a href="http://GoogleTalkPlugin.app" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="GoogleTalkPlugin.app"&gt;GoogleTalkPlugin.app&lt;/a&gt; and GoogleVoiceandVideo.pkg (instead of &lt;a href="http://JinglePlugin.app" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="JinglePlugin.app"&gt;JinglePlugin.app&lt;/a&gt; and JingleVoiceandVideo.pkg) sounds rather Google centric.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">meandcat</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:07:04 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>