> it is interesting how a company was able to quietly move a large user base from open protocols to a proprietary protocol.
Some of us may believe Google is doing so for good reasons, some of us might not be sure - but that is all beside the point.
The point is that this is a massive show of power. And it has been applied quietly - no one (outside of Google) knew about this massive change in activity until this blogpost.
In any hands, that amount of power should be worrying.
That doesn't really answer my question though. The problem is that Google is handing over data, not what method is being used to try and access that data.
I invented the design for this protocol, Google stole it from me, and I have the digitally signed emails with Google to prove it. Not that anyone cares now.
I am confused with your fear. Google is just utilizing XMPP, they are not creating anything new, its open sourced. Plus the group that developed XMPP were formalized by the IETF.
They did not dictate anything, but proposed a protocol. It was adapted and changed.
Also, this is not part of a big, evil Google master plan. The engineers who developed it are well known and they presumably tried to do their best from a technical point of view.
I'm not acting as if it is Google's responsibility to support any protocols at all. It's just curious that Google would implement a protocol on their servers but not on their operating system. Am I demanding anything? No. I am blaming anyone? Not at all.
The personal attacks based on your perception of my comment are frankly unprofessional and completely unnecessary.
reply