overview
issues
email
webmail
SMS
MMS
IM
chat
fora
news
traffic
content
evidence
disclaimers
managing
related:
Spam
Networks
Kids online
Privacy
Security
|
Instant
Messaging
This page looks at Instant Messaging (IM) services.
It covers -
introduction
Unlike email, the various proprietary Instant Messenger
(IM) or Instant Messaging Systems (IMS) are synchronous,
dependent on devices at either end being online. Some
systems allows exchanges to be archived by participants
but IM is not a store-&-forward scheme.
In essence, IM is a presence technology (explored here
and here) that enables
users to communicate with text messages through a sort
of private chat room, generally on a one-to-one basis.
Typically, the IM system alerts a user whenever someone
on that user's list of IM contacts is online, with the
user then being able to initiate a session of exchanging
messages with a particular contact. Most systems allow
file sharing.
Unlike email, IM is not a global standard and not all
IM communications can pass between networks. It has been
promoted by individual internet service providers - notably
AOL,
which claims around 60 million subscribers for its service
in contrast to 55,000 for the Reuters IM system - and
software developers, whether on a standalone basis or
as part of a broader business application such as IBM's
Lotus groupware. Those schemes are essentially PC-based
(ie not mobile phone to mobile) and are generally incompatible,
with many US consumers accordingly using several services.
uptake
IM is probably the major achievement of AOL, an ISP that
was otherwise distinguished by its size, indifferent service
and 'walled garden' approach top content provision. Its
IM scheme was emulated by other ISPs oriented to home
users and vendors of corporate groupware.
In the US figures about market share are contentious.
AOL's Instant Messenger (AIM) and ICQ appear to dominate
the market, with claims of 140 million registered users
and a supposed 90% of the online population.
Actual use in the US is more uncertain: one 2001 study
for example suggested that 53 million people used at least
one of three services from home (41 million used AOL services,
Microsoft's MSN Messenger had over 18 million users and
Yahoo! Messenger had 12 million users).
Competitor QQ
in China claims to have garnered over 300 million users
(some with multiple acccounts), for a total of 110 million
active accounts as of early 2005.
A Microsoft promo text burbled that
Instant
messaging allows you to stay connected with family and
friends …
We are all trying to save time these days, and while
IM does not replace human interaction, it does offer
an ongoing opportunity to stay connected to family and
friends for a few short moments daily. Instant messaging
takes this concept a step further by creating an atmosphere
of instantaneous conversation that is both warm and
yes, even engaging.
A
September 2003 Washington Post article on use
of IM and blogs by kids
suggested that other sorts of warmth and engagement were
possible -
About
45 million American kids ages 10 to 17 are currently
estimated to be online, spending hours every day at
their computers. With the click of a button, they can
e mail rumors to scores of recipients for instant viewing,
permanently damaging a peer's reputation and social
life. Instant messaging (IM) is equally treacherous.
Like the calculating three-way phone call where one
person remains silent, two girls can hover at the same
computer screen, harvesting secrets from the messages
of a hapless member of their "buddy" list.
And when friendships sour, it is common for children
to steal each others' passwords and break into e-mail,
IM accounts and personal profiles, sending destructive
messages under assumed identities.
There
have been few solid studies of domestic uptake of IM in
Australia. A perspective from the US is provided by the
Teenage Life Online: The Rise of the Instant-message
Generation and the Internet's impact on Friendships and
Family Relationships report
from the Pew Internet & American Life Project, considered
in more detail in our discussion
of security and kids online.
IM technology
In contrast to the 'open' SMS regime, most IM schemes
are proprietary and restricted to transmissions between
desktops. A brief introduction to particular schemes is
here.
AOL competitors such as Microsoft, Prodigy (PIM), Yahoo!,
AT&T; and Tribal Voice have come together in the IMUnified
coalition. The intention is that the group will develop
an open standard, ideally reflected in a global standard
that is accepted by the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF) and perhaps tied
to unified addressing initiatives such as ENUM.
That work has centred on the nascent Session Initiation
protocol for Instant Messaging & Presence Leveraging
Extensions (SIMPLE) standard, primarily concerned with
business messaging and conferences.
As part of consent agreements associated with the AOL
Time Warner merger
AOL has agreed to work towards communication between its
IM scheme and those of its competitors. As of September
2003, amid complaints that AOL was dragging its feet,
the major development was establishment of a 'bridge'
that enables Reuters and AOL messages to travel across
their networks.
Some of the proprietary schemes include -
IBM
Lotus Instant Messaging & Web Conferencing, an enterprise
solution that features an IM gateway allowing secure
IM comunication between discrete organisations with
Lotus IM and communication with AOL IM users.
Apple's iChat, aimed at the domestic and education market
with broadband connections, features the iSight video
facility
Sun's Sun ONE Instant Messaging features IM, web conferencing,
broadcast messaging, archiving and user configurable
client lists, with compatibility with other proprietary
applications such as the Sun ONE Portal Server and Calendar
Server.
Sigaba Secure IM, targeted at major enterprises, offers
IM and chat capability with multi-person conversations,
end-to-end encryption and group messaging.
Effusia Business Messenger, aimed at smaller enterprises,
is a standalone IM system with broadcast and offline
messaging, encryption, invitation-only conferences,
drag-and-drop file transfer between users and monitoring.
issues
IM in the workplace remains controversial, given uncertainties
about effective use of groupware, suggestions that IM
degrades productivity, and worries about security. As
a presence technology its uptake by users outside the
workplace has raised other concerns.
As with email, many pundits and users argue that IM increases
productivity, for example enabling synchronous information
sharing across enterprises and supply chains without the
delays of email. IT managers in response have sometimes
highlighted potential security problems (notably the absence
of authentication, encryption and archiving), criticised
software acquisition and maintenance costs and asked whether
unstructured messaging acts as a distraction rather than
a productivity tool. Concern has focussed on claims that
some networks enable an unauthorised user to exploit an
IM connection to access a corporate network, potentially
introducing viruses.
Given our interest in the human side of technologies (and
scepticism about claims of 'information overload') we
were particularly struck by one comment that
Like
the early days of e-mail, this technology creates a
democratic system of information exchange that lacks
a definition of proper usage. Unlike with e-mail, IM
users know that the recipient's workstation is working.
When a user receives an instant message, it creates
a false urgency that many find impossible to ignore.
Still, the message represents an interruption for the
recipient, and it may be counterproductive to respond
immediately.
Enhancements
of corporate IM systems (with some spillover to domestic
users) are likely to include -
- greater
administrative control for managers, in particular scope
to remotely control IM functions from a central console
and monitor activity (particularly through central logs)
- encryption
of communications
- integration
with network and workstation directories, so that IM
software functions as part of the network
- inclusion
of audio (eg VOIP)
and video, particularly within corporate intranets
- development
of 'virtual workspaces' (eg shared 'virtual whiteboards')
and other online collaborative work tools
Instant
Message spam (aka spim) has emerged as an issue on some
networks in 2003, with unlucky recipients for example
being invited to open a link that's purportedly from a
contact but in fact downloads a virus that then utilises
the recipients IM address book. Radicati Group gained
attention for a report that projected some 1.2 billion
spims would be sent in 2004, of which 70% would relate
to adult content. Other analysts have taken a less pessimistic
view, arguing that the proprietary nature of IM networks
and action by network operators would inhibit the growth
of spim.
studies
Much of the more insightful sociological writing about
IM schemes is found in discussions about uptake of new
media and chat.
For a basic introduction regarding 'presence' issues we
recommend Alvestand's 2002 ISOC briefing
Instant Messaging and Presence on the Internet.
A dated but intelligent overview is provided in Elizabeth
Reid's 1991 dissertation
Communication and Community On Internet Relay Chat.
Introducing Instant Messaging and Chat in the Workplace
(PDF)
by Herbsleb, Atkins, Boyer, Handel & Finholt offers
insights about resistance within the workplace.
next page (chat)
|
|
blaw