Talk:MSN Messenger/Archive 3

Version 2009

Since the current version of WLM isn't ever referred to anywhere as "Windows Live Messenger 2009" perhaps it should be denoted as "Windows Live Messenger (2009)" or "Windows Live Messenger (14.0)." --Resplendent (talk) 09:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Current screenshot - Privacy concerns?

The current screenshot contains a number of personal email addresses. Although the image probably won't fall victim to any kind of spam bot it still exposes these email addresses to the world (if they are real, that is?). Should the screenshot be removed or edited to exclude these emails? The same is to be said about the image in the file's history. Stoosh (talk) 03:24, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you. The current screenshots potential violate the privacy of the individuals whose accounts those email addresses belong to. I recommend the images be edited so that the email addresses are blurred or at the very least the files should be tagged with information like: 'Permission has been obtained to use this image by the individuals whose email accounts are shown'.- Jack ^(Talk) 04:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Screenshot problem

I'd like to say that the screenshot is not the standard WLM9. It is running with Messenger! Plus Live, which is not installed by default. 210.6.29.39 (talk) 14:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I've edited the caption, and agree it should be changed entirely. HuGo_87 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:46, 31 March 2009 (UTC).

CONTACT LIST LIMIT

http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/747/msn1000contactlimit1018.png

THE LIMIT IS 1000 WHEN YOU GO OVER THAT IT SHOWS NEW PEOPLE YOU ADD THEY APPEAR AS OFFLINE AND THEY CANT MESSAGE YOU EVEN IF THEY ADD YOU AND YOU ADD THEM THIS INCLUDES IF YOU BLOCK EVERYONE WHO ISNT ON YOUR CONTACT LIST ON YOUR CONTACT LIST OR NOT YOU CAN STILL TALK TO PEOPLE NOT ON YOUR CONTACT LIST IN CONFERENCES BUT NOT OUTSIDE OF IF YOU TRY TO COPY THE ADDRESS OF SOMEONE YOU HAVENT ADDED IN A CONFERENCE ADDRESS AND PASTE IT IN THE BOX ON THE MSN PAGER MAIN CLIENT WINDOW AND PASTE IT INTO THE BOX WHERE YOU WANNA MESSAGE OTHER USERS OUTLOOK EXPRESS JUST COMES AND YOURE PROMPTED TO EMAIL THEM TELLING THE TRUTH IF YOU DONT BELIEVE ME TRY IT FOR YOURSELVES —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.100.173 (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Windows-2000-incompatible Build 14

It seems as if "Windows Live Messenger 2009" (Build 14) now kicks out all users of old computers which can only run Win2000 (because XP takes too much ressources). Since I updated to "Build 14", the audio and video-connection to my parents has seized to work. That is a PITA, because I am abroad - and they just can't solve the problem.

I hope I can uninstall Build 14, and reinstall the old version ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.97.36 (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

server

this program does not work on windows server 2003

Screenshot image promotes xpango.com

The main application screenshot should be replaced. In the user status field, it is advertising xpango.com, encouraging users to sign up and get a free console. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sural (talk • contribs) 13:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Cleartype cannot be disabled in most recent version

Should it not be written in the article that cleartype cannot be disabled in the most recent version?--82.153.139.164 (talk) 12:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

I'M Initiative

Article originally noted that it had an ongoing lifespan, this has been corrected as the program has now concluded. Reference located on article.

Interoperability

"The announcement came after years of third-party interoperability success (most notably, Trillian, Pidgin)..."

Is that true? Surely Pidgin and Trillian did not allow messages to go directly between Yahoo and MS accounts? Jamie Kitson (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It's only true if you don't bother to make a distinction between Client-Side Interoperability, where client software lets you connect into multiple services with multiple accounts, and Server-Side Interoperability, where a client can connect into one service with one account, and have the ability to message clients using other services from that one account. So the current blurb here is certainly fuzzy. 99.58.56.97 (talk) 04:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

BREAKS SAMBA/CIFS!!!!!!!

http://aspiregemstone.blogspot.com/2010/10/windows-essentials-2011-breaks-samba.html

The "Live Sign-In Assistant", which is no longer optional in the 2011 package, completely breaks Samba/CIFS file sharing ability in Windows.

Unlike previous versions, it CANNOT be removed without removing every bit of the Live Essentials package.

What a load of broken, shitty crap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.199.209.183 (talk) 13:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm guessing a slightly more NPOV tone (losing the insults would be a good start) might have made your edits more acceptable, although the sourcing is still pretty weak. 99.58.56.97 (talk) 04:48, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

RE: "all users of versions 8.1 and newer need to update to the latest version"

I just tried installing 8.0 and MSN Messenger 7.0 and it wouldn't let me. It said I have to update. I'm trying to install an older version so that I can handwrite to the 5% of my friends who also have an older version still. Maybe I'll switch messengers, but I need one that works with Windows Live Groups. But anyway, the point is that maybe this should be mentioned somewhere. I don't know exactly how far you have to go before you stop getting this error because I'm giving up for now, but MSN Messenger 7.0 forces you to update. I had an older one going just fine, but I just formatted and I don't know which version it was. I'll try 6.0 later, but I'm done for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.67.222 (talk) 10:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Mac version

I think that Mac version should be merged into this article. Both would benefit from having all the information in one place. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 08:56, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

 Done. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Update

Hm... today I just noticed a notification to upgrade to the latest version of Windows Live Messenger. I have version 2009, I wonder if anyone else has noticed this too? —Platinum Lucario talk 06:25, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed too!! The message appears EVERYTIME you start the messenger. There is no option shown like "remember me later" or something like that. Since this message appears now in this "insisting" way, I wonder if they will force all the version 2009 users to update in a few days, like this is the way they've gone in the past. And I don't know what kind of update they will offer me, if it is just the version 2011 or if it is an updated version 2009 (maybe with more restrictions then the old version). I was searching in the net for information and didn't find anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.168.133.135 (talk) 10:05, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Citation needed

I included a "citation needed" tag on the sentence "On the same date, a version of Windows Live Messenger for Zune also became available." The reason and rationale which led me to do this is that the sentence in question does not mention any sources, e.g., it doesn't say "Microsoft released a Zune version of Windows Live Messenger". Please verify with two (or more) sources and add information to that section. --Marceki111 (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merged

Windows Live Messenger ←→ Messenger (Microsoft service) - Microsoft no longer uses 'Windows Live Messenger', Microsoft just calls it as Messenger.Humphreyyue (talk) 06:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - The article Messenger (Microsoft service) already exist and refers to the Messenger protocol. Windows Live Messenger remains the client for Windows 7 and below users to connect to this protocol. Other clients, including the Messaging app in Windows 8, Web Messenger, various Windows Live Messenger clients for iOS, also connects to this protocol. Further, the most recent release of Windows Essentials 2012 still contains Windows Live Messenger - and that is the title of the program. There's nothing that indicates the removal of Windows Live from its official name, not yet. --Damaster98 (talk) 07:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
• Support: Messenger (Microsoft service) is custom proprietary protocol behind the client currently known as Windows Live Messenger. These two topics are hard separate, and even if done so, they share quite a lot in their scope. Two articles seem to be impractical. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 09:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose: Actually, the protocol is Microsoft Notification Protocol and the service is Microsoft Messenger service (in whatever name). There several clients listed under Microsoft Messenger service#Software, both official and 3rd-party. I believe there are significant differences between the clients, the service, and the protocol itself. If there was a useful merger proposal I believe it would be to merge the service into the protocol as they are almost always used together. One could argue merging the clients into the protocol as well but this is stickier in my opinion since there several official as well as 3rd-party implementations. Uzume (talk) 11:46, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose: Wikipedia:Summary style is the answer. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merger from Messenger Mobile (Microsoft)

Hi. User:Damaster98 has proposed Messenger Mobile (Microsoft) article to be merged into this article.

Support: I myself support this merge. Content seems relevant and size seems not to be a matter. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:29, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Windows Live Messenger not yet discontinued/terminated; article inaccurate for the time being

Several times on this article it states that Windows Live Messenger has already been discontinued/terminated; this is currently untrue. Though a download link is no longer provided on an official Windows web site, the Windows Live Messenger servers are still online, and it is still possible to log in and use its provided services. For the time being this article is inaccurate (though I can provide no source to prove this) and should be considered for reversal until a more reliable and up-to-date source can confirm that the servers are officially closed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.43.45.197 (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Codename Lisa (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't work anymore, not even in China. Maybe it meant for people using the Chinese version? I don't even see people still using it, maybe Microsoft China still wants to keeps some jobs for the Messenger team... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.100.18.215 (talk) 05:56, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I couldn't connect to Messenger using either Kopete or Pidgin for months. I found some time to investigate the problem a couple of weeks ago. I then noticed that even Windows Live Messenger wouldn't let me connect, saying I should update, so it wasn't just yet another protocol change. I also read about the shutdown/merge then. I then realized that I could still use my account via Outlook.com. Shortly after, I realized that I can now use my account normally again, via either Kopete or Pidgin.

Either Microsoft has recently reopened Messenger (I live in Quebec), or the situation is really complex (logging via Outlook.com would allow you to re-start using your account?). Confused --Chealer (talk) 22:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, me and my friend still use this though...Mainland USA, talking on it right now. I think all we had to do was set it to compatibility mode with Windows Server or something, but saying it doesn't work anywhere is clearly false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.103.85.111 (talk) 05:52, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Persistent editing problem

Hi.

A problem that persists in regard to discontinuation is the occastional self-contradictory edits. For instance, I recently reverted an edit by Saint1997 (I hope you are seeing this, dear Saint1997, so that you can discuss if you wish) that claimed Messenger is not discontinued in China despite the article body citing Microsoft's announcement. The problem with this edit is that it has taken "discontinued" to mean "completely killed". This is not true. A discontinued product is simply not produced or updated anymore. For example, Microsoft Expression Web is discontinued but still works and can still be downloaded.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 02:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Re: Persistent editing problem

 When discussing servers, discontinued absolutely means 'completely killed'. Being able to find the program still does not matter, it's being able to connect to the servers that let it work as a messenger. Saying the program is just discontinued and not killed, just because you can still find the 'product' is misleading, and does not reflect the actual availability of use of said program.

????

This is technical jargon for experts. The lead paragraph should state what Messenger does, for the benefit of those who don't already know. This article does not tell me anything. An expert wouldn't bother looking it up, so who will read this? Beginners. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.147.118.175 (talk) 20:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

...what -66.130.245.213 (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Overcoverage in discontinuation section

Looks like there is an edit war going on in the § Discontinuation section of this article. I see at least two instances of back and forth reverts beyond what WP:BRD allows.

Now, I don't know what Codename Lisa meant by low-quality; she has a very strange sense of ... I want to say politeness? Anyway, what I see there is a big atrocity, a huge violation of Wikipedia fundamental policies. First, its only source is messengergeek.wordpress.com, a personal blog that is not qualified as a reliable source because it is self-published. Second, it is heavily biased, masquerading Microsoft's act of not pulling the plug on whatever Messenger-compatible and Messenger-incompatible communication infrastructure it has as an act failing to deliver a promise, mixing the issue of Microsoft Messenger service with Windows Live Messenger. Third, it lacks due weight because all this blow-by-blow reporting is besides the point: WLM is being merged into Skype; there will be no more development on WLM. That's all. Microsoft has never promised nor is obliged to disrupt existing clients or destroy the old communication infrastructure with extreme prejudice just to say that they have moved on.

Oh, and BlueFenixReborn, please don't ever put a {{cn}} in the article lead; use {{citation needed (lead)}} instead. Fleet Command (talk) 16:19, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

BlueFenixReborn didn't violate BRD. What he did was another B, nor an R. Of course, I haven't checked the edit thoroughly but it looks like a good faith attempt. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 01:42, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

There's only two possible instances of violations of BRD that I see you possibly identifying. The first, where 184.12.189.54 simply reverts the edits (even though with reasons) arugably is. The second one (mine) is not. It was a response to what Codename Lisa said was lacking about the edit, and therefore the stated reason for her removing it. I understand what you mean about WP:SPS. I won't lie that it probably is heavily-biased: I have no hesitations admitting that. But I think you're misinterpreting when you say that we're "masquerading" Microsoft's not pulling the plug as failing to deliver a "promise" to "disrupt" or "destroy" the old communication infrastructure "with extreme prejudice" just to say they've moved on. As a matter of fact it ironically may be the opposite. Microsoft Messenger service and Windows Live Messenger are basally interconnected and related. I agree with you though that it may be advisable to move at least some of this to Microsoft Messenger service. I haven't taken a look at WP:DUE yet. I'll do that tomorrow. And I got ya on that {{citation needed (lead)}}. -- BlueFenixReborn (talk) 08:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Executable program file as citation

The statement "As of February 2015, Windows Live Messenger is still included with Windows Essentials" is sourced to http://g.live.com/1rewlive5-web/en/wlsetup-web.exe, which is given the title "Web installer", publisher Microsoft and access date May 8, 2014. This is not a third party source (see WP:SOURCE). I also don't believe "publication" or "published source" is intended to include executable program files. Unless there is a published source in the normal sense of the term, I think this amounts to original research. I am not disputing the factual accuracy of the statement, just the sourcing. Nurg (talk) 10:21, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

It is for all intents and purposes a 3rd-party source: There is no bias, and it is impossible and ludicrous for one to consider that there is. It is simply executable code. As empirical as possible. And before you jump on me (as you already have actually) and say that I'm conducting OR, I'm really not. Comparing this to OR would be like comparing the statement "Roses are red" to OR. I am simply writing down what I see. There's nothing analytical, interpretative, nor synthetic about it at all.

Why does it matter if the original author of the policy page did not happen to think of executables as he was compiling the page? That does not disclude it as a valid source. Policy is a representation of logic and reason, not blind canon and authority. And if you really need to, may I direct you to WP:Ignore all rules and WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY. -- BlueFenixReborn (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think people, that don't really know about MessengerGeek, would know what is "MessengerGeek".

In the "revival" section, which in a nutshell, seems pretty much a advertisement for Escargot, says "The second revival attempt began in 2017, by valtron, a MessengerGeek forum member, in the form of an alternate server named Escargot". However, i'd doubt the average Wikipedia reader and editor would know about MessengerGeek's existence. I'm sure it's like that since valtron has never shared his real name. --66.130.245.213 (talk) 04:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

update: that was me, unconnected since sometimes i'm lazy. --Chazpelo (talk) 00:40, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

A year later...

I don't get what is the point with a whole section dedicated to Escargot and Reviver. Compared to the AIM page, in which the AIM revival, Phoenix is just 1 sentence. Yet on this article, there's a whole section dedicated to Reviver and Escargot. It also serves as an advertisement of sorts, I removed the sentence "As Of 2020, the service attracts over 1,000+ users and widely supports all Messenger versions up to 14.0 (2009) As well as Yahoo! Messenger 5.5." because it felt like it was written by a person part of the Escargot service, it appears that it was written 2/3 days ago (as of writing this) In fact, I'm 95% certain that the entire section was written by a bunch of people from the Escargot service. Honestly, this should be compressed into one or two sentences, something along the lines of "After Windows Live Messenger shutdown, there has been two revivals. The first was Messenger Reviver, and the second is Escargot". -Chazpelo (talk) 04:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

"Flash Communications" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Flash Communications. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 7#Flash Communications until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 03:55, 7 September 2021 (UTC)