 |
 |
Things aren't going to be used unless they are easy to use. Instead of IRC, why not this? http://www.tufat.com/s_flash_chat_chatroom.htm It's $5, and it's much easier to open a new tab then to fire up an IRC client, connect, set nicks, etc. Matt Kolb wrote: > On Oct 17, 2007, at 2:58 PM, Ray Hernandez wrote: > >> Since we are talking about collaboration, is there any interest in >> "corporate" instant messaging? Our department has expressed interest >> in the past in having instant messaging that would be internal to our >> group. We haven't actually made the jump yet, but I have played >> around with it. >> >> We have toyed around with the idea of rolling out a Jabber server. >> The software we liked was >> Openfire(http://www.igniterealtime.org/projects/openfire/index.jsp). >> It has support for LDAP and Kerberos, which makes it n easy fit for >> us since we could use our MSU kerberos service for authentication. >> >> The nice thing about Openfire is that it can interface with other >> Jabber-compatible service providers so you can add people from >> outside the university to your buddy list and it takes care of the >> rest of the mojo. >> >> I'd love to see a campus messaging service like that, but maybe >> external providers are sufficient enough for our campus. > > We've been using IRC at ACNS for some years now > (http://irc.acns.msu.edu). I'd like to see a chat server that was > used more broadly (and was provisioned from centrally). > > I'm not a jabber fan, but I understand why it would make sense to > choose that option. Do any other departments use IRC or other chat > which they host? > > ./mk >