Comments on: Battle for Mobile Instant Messaging http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/ Mobile, Security, Web 2.0, Pipe Dreams and More Sun, 20 May 2012 10:20:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: It’s hip2b2 (Mobile, Security, Web 2.0, Pipe Dreams and More) » Blog Archive » OMA IMPS Why Bother? http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-585 Wed, 18 Oct 2006 01:23:01 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-585 [...] So with these three (3) simple reasons (of course, there are more) alone, it is pretty clear that support OMA IMPS is still important if an IM provider would like to penetrate the mobile phone network market. For more discussion on the existing open standards IMPS protocols, check out this previous blog of mine. I also did a comparison between SIP/SIMPLE and XMPP. [...] […] So with these three (3) simple reasons (of course, there are more) alone, it is pretty clear that support OMA IMPS is still important if an IM provider would like to penetrate the mobile phone network market. For more discussion on the existing open standards IMPS protocols, check out this previous blog of mine. I also did a comparison between SIP/SIMPLE and XMPP. […]

]]> by: Migs http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-105 Tue, 23 May 2006 12:57:58 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-105 Now that I'm reading through the IMPS spec, more inputs: 1. IMPS is very flexible in specifying client capabilities. 2. IMPS can degrade to low bandwidth conditions. 3. IMPS (in my opinion) has a revenue environment in mind, while the others assume a "free" scheme. Now that I’m reading through the IMPS spec, more inputs:
1. IMPS is very flexible in specifying client capabilities.
2. IMPS can degrade to low bandwidth conditions.
3. IMPS (in my opinion) has a revenue environment in mind, while the others assume a “free” scheme.

]]> by: wyuwp http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-53 Fri, 14 Apr 2006 07:11:12 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-53 good case against XMPP. but, SIP/SIMPLE is also a clean protocol based on HTTP. actually, it is even simpler than OMA IMPS (formerly WV). why not SIP/SIMPLE? since push-to-talk is probably VoIP'sh already. good case against XMPP.

but, SIP/SIMPLE is also a clean protocol based on HTTP. actually, it is even simpler than OMA IMPS (formerly WV). why not SIP/SIMPLE? since push-to-talk is probably VoIP’sh already.

]]> by: Migs http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-52 Fri, 14 Apr 2006 04:02:53 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-52 I have a theory on why OMA IMPS is favored over XMPP by some vendors. It uses HTTP, which is well-supported by mobile data gateways and is request/response based. XMPP on the other hand uses a different TCP port and keeps the connection open - not wire(less)-friendly. I have a theory on why OMA IMPS is favored over XMPP by some vendors.

It uses HTTP, which is well-supported by mobile data gateways and is request/response based.

XMPP on the other hand uses a different TCP port and keeps the connection open - not wire(less)-friendly.

]]> by: wyuwp http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-44 Tue, 04 Apr 2006 04:30:29 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-44 plain packetize as in BASE64 encode the data? that is interesting. but how do you do this and still keep XMPP compliance? or this portion is non-compliant? also for OMA IMPS, how do you intend to support this? via JAIN or Parlay? plain packetize as in BASE64 encode the data? that is interesting. but how do you do this and still keep XMPP compliance? or this portion is non-compliant?

also for OMA IMPS, how do you intend to support this? via JAIN or Parlay?

]]> by: Roger D http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-43 Tue, 04 Apr 2006 03:24:27 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-43 Hi, we have implemented extensions/plugins in the open source XMPP. We have looked at JAIN before and we see future services for it and it is still in the concept stage. You can check out our mobile IM in this site, www.yehba.com. The one in the download site doesn't have the file transfer feature but in our lab and for the enterprise version we have it, yup it can MIME or just plain packetized payload. We are still studying the OMA IMPS specification and it will be good to have support on it. Hi,

we have implemented extensions/plugins in the open source XMPP. We have looked at JAIN before and we see future services for it and it is still in the concept stage.

You can check out our mobile IM in this site, www.yehba.com. The one in the download site doesn’t have the file transfer feature but in our lab and for the enterprise version we have it, yup it can MIME or just plain packetized payload.

We are still studying the OMA IMPS specification and it will be good to have support on it.

]]> by: wyuwp http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-42 Mon, 03 Apr 2006 13:13:18 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-42 hello, i have heard you guys in the news before. so i presume that you are extending the Jabber open source XMPP server for your application? or are you using JAIN? or writing one from scratch? i have yet to see your client but i presume that you use XMPP for communications between the mobile and the messaging and presence server? how do you implement file transfers? SIP/SIMPLE and OMA WV do not provide IM file transfer. however, XMPP might since you can embed MIME content on it. is this accurate? do you have plans of supporting OMA WV to allow most phone's built in presence and messaging clients to work? hello,

i have heard you guys in the news before. so i presume that you are extending the Jabber open source XMPP server for your application? or are you using JAIN? or writing one from scratch?

i have yet to see your client but i presume that you use XMPP for communications between the mobile and the messaging and presence server? how do you implement file transfers? SIP/SIMPLE and OMA WV do not provide IM file transfer. however, XMPP might since you can embed MIME content on it. is this accurate?

do you have plans of supporting OMA WV to allow most phone’s built in presence and messaging clients to work?

]]> by: Roger D http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-41 Mon, 03 Apr 2006 07:22:38 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-41 Hi Hip2b2, Our team have made the same study on what to use for our own Mobile IM implementation and decided to use XMPP on the server side. The system is versatile that it can also accomodate SIP/SIMPLE. While the client side on the mobile is our own protocol, this is due to the text that SIP generates for the signalling and XMPP is also a bloated protocol (XML). Since the mobile is using GPRS it will be expensive for the user, until the mobile operators decided to have gprs buffet meal, we'll stick to our protocol. Hi Hip2b2,

Our team have made the same study on what to use for our own Mobile IM implementation and decided to use XMPP on the server side. The system is versatile that it can also accomodate SIP/SIMPLE. While the client side on the mobile is our own protocol, this is due to the text that SIP generates for the signalling and XMPP is also a bloated protocol (XML). Since the mobile is using GPRS it will be expensive for the user, until the mobile operators decided to have gprs buffet meal, we’ll stick to our protocol.

]]> by: It’s hip2b2 » Blog Archive » XMPP versus SIMPLE/SIP http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-3 Mon, 06 Mar 2006 23:54:28 +0000 http://hip2b2.yutivo.org/2006/03/06/battle-for-mobile-instant-messaging/#comment-3 [...] While browsing the Internet, I bumped into a Google Ad saying, “XMPP versus SIMPLE/IP”. This ad was sponsored by Jabber.com (which sells a commercial Jabber XMPP server). This is basically in relation to an article I wrote about Mobile Instant Messaging. [...] […] While browsing the Internet, I bumped into a Google Ad saying, “XMPP versus SIMPLE/IP”. This ad was sponsored by Jabber.com (which sells a commercial Jabber XMPP server). This is basically in relation to an article I wrote about Mobile Instant Messaging. […]

]]>