XMPP versus SIMPLE/SIP
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.
Basically, the jist of the article is that SIMPLE/SIP is not as featureful as XMPP. It also says that SIMPLE/SIP only have basic presence and messaging functionality. The other features such as extended presence, contact list, contact list portability, offline message storage and other features are not yet specified.
The article concludes:
While SIP is relatively well established in some parts of the telecommunications industry, the SIP extensions for IM and presence (commonly called SIMPLE) still comprise an incomplete technology. Serious questions have been raised about the appropriateness of using a peer-to-peer signaling protocol as the basis for building scalable, manageable IM services and other presence-based applications. As a result, many operators are waiting for the protocol to stabilize before deploying any SIP-based messaging and presence services, and may avoid doing so at all.
XMPP (a.k.a Jabber) is a feature-complete, field-tested technology that has been widely adopted by service providers and enterprises alike, in part because of the existence of an extremely active developer community. While the core of XMPP has been stable since 1999, the work completed by the IETF’s XMPP WG now means that these technologies also meet the highest standards for privacy and security. IETF approval of the XMPP specifications has further fueled adoption and interest in XMPP, making it a leading contender as the Internet standard for presence and instant messaging.
And, of course, Google’s stamp of approval is the biggest feather in their hat. Does this tilt the battle in favor of XMPP?
