Instant Messaging and Trashing Google

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

1. Dan
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:39 pm

   I dont think these results are counting the built in chat on Gmail’s site. That’s what I use, I never. Ever. Will download Gchat, but I use it all the time.

2. Dan
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:40 pm

   Oh. Missed that part in the article…

3. Deepak
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:41 pm

   Likewise .. I do 95% of my chatting using the integrated chat in gmail

4. Ian
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:41 pm

   Users are getting used to interoperability. As you’ve reported previously, Meebo and the like offer that. The interoperability deal between MSN and Yahoo was basically about putting the squeeze on AOL and locking out Google.

   Poor old ICQ, who were the first to popularise the whole medium as I recall, are completely out of the picture, it seems.

5. Ryan Stewart
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:42 pm

   Is Google’s strategy really to provide a downloadable IM client? I know they have one, but is that their strategy? Most people I know use the chat feature embedded in Gmail, and with the acquisition of GTalkr, one has to wonder if their strategy is, in fact, to provide a robust IM client that runs in the browser. That would be my bet.

6. Jon Gales
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:47 pm

   I don’t believe those numbers anyway. Yahoo more than twice the size of AIM? I was under the impression AIM had about 50% of the market and Yahoo/MSN grabbed the rest (discounting smaller players like GTalk). How are the figures calculated, if I log on via Meebo or iChat am I counted? There are a *lot* of users that don’t use the official client for each of the networks.

7. Adam
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 2:54 pm

   I think Jon is spot on. I have friends on all the networks; very few of them use or are fond of the (perceived to be bloated and ad-heavy) AIM client. I personally use both Trillian and the chat client built into Gmail, and a great many of my (admittedly largely geek / Bay Area) friends use Trillian or other IM aggregator programs. [Disclaimer: I am employed by Google, but I don’t work on anything related to the chat stuff]

8. Daniel
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 3:03 pm

   There’s a good strategy with Gtalk in terms of offering an open standard for other clients to use. They have extended the jabber protocols to support VOIP and have contributed open source libraries. This will allow for example third party clients to use voip over the Gtalk network without going through some sort partnership. Long term this seems like a good bet as it will pick up developpers.
   It may be a question of making concerted push to gain a critical mass of users, or perhaps simply waiting for an ecosystem to slowly develop around their network.

9. Oliver Tse
   

   July 24th, 2006 at 3:07 pm

   Actually, I never use GTalk in GMail. I only use the desktop version. Personally, the desktop version is more usable. I also tried using both at the same time and if you do that then strange things happen — you get your chats in GTalk in GMail but not on desktop GTalk.

   I do agree — very few of my friends use GTalk. Almost everyone I know uses Yahoo! IM and of course, because of that, I use Yahoo! IM as well.

   Perhaps, Google should think of doing something like Meebo, Goowy, etc. and consolidating the IM tools. I think that would be a better strategy than going at it alone.

10. George
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:15 pm

    Interoperability is a must. Any company that pushes the industry in that direction, does the right thing.

11. Ron
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:18 pm

    Michael, is there a point to all the Google-trashing? This is far from the first time you’ve indulged in it. Perhaps you are just being hip by going against some kind of imaginary “common wisdom.” They’re popular, so you bash them out of some kind of need to root for the underdog. Am I wrong? Whence springs your bias?
    In any case, I use Miranda and chat with friends over Yahoo, MSN, and Google Talk. When I initiate a conversation and have a choice of providers for a given contact, I use Google Talk because I can search the conversation in Gmail later, something that comes in handy almost every day.

12. George Hotelling
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pm

    That 44,000 doesn’t count non-Google Talk users of the Jabber network. Because Google went with the open XMPP IM standard, there are many more than 44,000 users for GTalk users to IM with. Google directly benefits from the network effect of using an open standard, and it seems like only a matter of time before the rest of the IM services have to get on the XMPP ship.

13. Pronob
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:31 pm

    Ron - I can see your frustration and seriousness in morally questioning Google trashing…but wait it is okay to trash Microsoft but not Google??

14. David Harrison
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:33 pm

    I was just wondering how accurate the MSN numbers are when the client comes installed on every Windows PC and once launched has a habbit of sticking around (and updating itself during Windows updates) even if the user of computer only used the client once years ago to see what it did.
    I’ve seen lots of home (and many business PC’s) running the MSN client in the background without the users even knowing what (or why) it is there.

15. Guk
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:34 pm

    Gmail and Gchat is for geeks and not for MSNers and other IMer chatters.

16. Chris
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:37 pm

    Does ANYONE really use Gtalk? I have a bunch of friends who work at Google and they are all using AIM. I think it is interesting how defensive everyone gets when someone questions Google. They have some great products and some, not so great products…

17. Colin Scroggins
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:37 pm

    I, too, use the Gtalk embedded within Gmail a majority of the time. Cutting this out of the stats definitely is causing some skewing of the numbers, as all the friends I know also chat through Gmail - even the ones who use non-Gmail services as their primary IM.

18. Sam Davyson
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:39 pm

    The market was pretty much bursting when Google Talk arrived after all. I use the service both within Gmail (A LOT) and using Adium. The saving of chats online and being able to quickly IM someone instead of emailing using the “Reply by Chat” feature is brilliant.

    Check the market share for Gmail vs Hotmail vs Yahoo Mail. You’ll see something similar, but I don’t think we’d argue over which product is superior.

19. Martin Gordon
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:39 pm

    Hate to say, “I told you so”, but…

    http://www.martingordon.org/bl.....listening/

20. Aaron
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:42 pm

    The thing is - I love that there’s nobody on it. I’ve got accounts on just about every system, but my close friends / business associates and I have agreed to use google chat, even, at times, their very lackluster client. A small user base means that all the majority of people I met in high school and college will never find and annoy the heck out of me. Seriously.

    I think it’s ironic that others above talk about y!/msn as a bright sign of interoperability, while gtalk is the only one in the field built off of jabber, the only real open standard for distributed chat messaging. It interoperates with anything that’ll speak the same protocol, including the open source jabber server I set up for internal messaging at my medium-sized company.

21. Fernando da Silva Trevisan
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:44 pm

    Ha. NOBODY uses iCQ anymore?
    Ok. I don’t use it too. But it was huge in the past. Where is iCQ ?

22. Ron
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:47 pm

    Pronob, no, as a matter of fact, Microsoft-trashing is not okay either, at least when it’s just for the sake of trashing, as this appears to be.
    Michael is willing to trash GTalk based on their (possibly inaccurate) adoption numbers, when in fact he has no idea what Google’s endgame for GTalk is or what they regard as success. Obviously this is the only external metric available to Michael, since unlike all the Web2.0 startups, Google doesn’t feel obliged to brown nose Michael and ask him to bless all their offerings, in the hopes that they’ll mention him on TechCrunch.
    Hmm… perhaps Michael’s motive for trashing Google is becoming apparent?

23. Ian
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 3:47 pm

    Where’s the money in this market? Usage statistics can be distracting.

    * the digital native kids - who are probably the biggest users but want it all free, will ignore ads. Dad’s not going to support them for long.

    * the geeks - who also want it free, and will block and ignore ads. They’ll find some hacktastic way to communicate that it takes a techie brain to understand. Good for them.

    Nope, the money isn’t there. It’s the mainstream. But they won’t be doing this until there is a real, universal network. And they’ll pay if it’s cheaper than their phone company. The company that charges reasonable rates and is able to guarantee service levels will win.

24. Bill
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:07 pm

    I think a little Google Trashing is in order. It’s just part of the game when you’re as successful as they are.

    They have mind-boggling capital and intellectual recources and have certainly helped build the perception they’re going to shake things up. Not just a little bit of swagger going on at the ol’ Googleplex I would imagine.

    Yet..beyond search, ads, and maybe maps (although that’s certainly impressive enough) what have they really pulled off that is impressive for the talent and cash they could throw at something? People point to Gmail, but if having a gmail account didn’t have that geek chic appeal…big deal.

    Mike is right..time for Google to actually kick some ass and make teams accountable for producing something that is truly innovative and stop throwing up Google-branded, often lamer, versions of old ideas.

    Me thinks the gobs of high-margin revenue they’re raking in with ads is covering up a very chaotic and inefficient organization that needs some leadership.

25. Josh
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:16 pm

    Funny, I half expected it it to be 53,651.

    Seriously, why are you all surprised and skeptical that it’s so low? You know what Google should do? Forget about IM. It’s already too fragmented and nobody wants a new player. They’re wasting their time.

26. Gordon Mohr
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:16 pm

    What were YahooIM’s equivalent usage numbers a year after their launch? (Yahoo Pager launched in March 1998.)

    I bet they weren’t that impressive. This is a market with entrenched competition that enjoys the benefits of customer and network lock-in. Yahoo slogged their way into comeptition over 8 years of dogged effort… but none of the current market leaders (A/Y/M) support truly open interoperability.

    Expecting a big bang in usage just because it’s Google or even has a good product is unrealistic. The market is still what it is. Check back in 5 years to see if it’s a success or not.

27. Peter
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:26 pm

    I didn’t know Google had an IM client. It makes me wonder if it’s any good.

    I like most of their other stuff - it’s all at least minimally competent - how bad would their IM client have to be to achieve such a low adoption rate? I wonder if it’s possible to achieve this low an adoption rate if one actually tried to do it. I mean, 80% of their users would have to be the engineers that built it, TechChrunch users, and third-party vendors.

    That said, I guess it’s possible that at least one of the higher-ups just said, “No IM right now - it’s not important to us at all, just lay low, sit back, relax, you’ll catch some heat, but don’t shake things up - I’ll make sure you get rewarded.” Happens all the time - it’s just difficult to believe that Google is this incompetent at anything. Sometimes things are always what they seem at first glance.

28. Jerry
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:27 pm

    Has Google succeeded in anything other than Search?

    GMail is overrated, Orkit and Picasa are not getting much traction, same goes for Google Personalization, Calendar, News, Froogle, etc. Yet, everyone is so enamored with Google thinking they can dominate the world with any Google product launch…

29. What Marketing
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:27 pm

    Google’s product marketing machine is an amateur operation. There is obviously no coherent product strategy. Can anyone honestly say that Google will or will/not invest in updates to Google Talk or Maps or Earth or Base or any number of other products?

    It is actually quite funny and ironic that for all the engineering brilliance, google is still amateurish at business strategy.

30. Arnie McKinnis
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:30 pm

    Market perception vs. Market reality — the perception (by the general market and specifically those “investors” in the tech market) is that Google is the 800 lb. Gorilla of the Internet Age. The truth is, they only lead in one category — Search — and they are a follower in all other categories. There is nothing wrong with this, in fact - perception IS reality.

    IM is just another category they are behind the pack — The Googleverse is dominated by Google Search (and Adwords) — the question is, with their cash reserves how long can they wait to creep of the category list?

    Other Categories Google does not lead — Maps, Email, Shopping, News, Finance, (do I need to go on….)

31. RBA
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:32 pm

    Microsoft proved with Passpor that having a leading Inernet destination (and a monopoly) is not enough to build succesful market share, and that throwing a service out there and see if the dogs eat it is not by itself a good strategy - I mean it’s not a strategy at all.

    Google may also be proving that in addition to that, building a decent service doesn’t necesarily add to the results. I agree with Gordon Mohr that we’re measuring products with a big difference in the time they’ve been around, but don’t forget that as Google may grow on this market, so may the other already well-established players.

    What this also defines are the barriers to entry on many of the markets Google is entering. If all-mighty Google can only scrap a tiny piece (email, maps, base, im and so on), imagine what it’d take a startup to enter and succeed on any of these markets. Yet, we’ve seen the YouTubes, the Diggs, the Skypes and the Technoratis make it thorugh some markets that might have been dominated by the big players. So yeah, interesting things are happening, and Google is still not much than a search box and an ad machine - and a darn good one at those two!

32. madhuri
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:35 pm

    Google Talk is best of the IMs so far with it’s integrated mail chat whether anyone agree or not:-)

33. Michael Jones
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:37 pm

    I think on that list we would actually be above Gtalk!

34. Bill johnson
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:39 pm

    I wonder how many users AIM or MSN has 1 year after launch? It doens’t seem valid to trash a product because it only has 1 year out there compared to the veterans thathave been around for 6+ years.

    How many users does Google Maps have compared to mapquest? And maps can get users much more easily because there is not network effect needed.

    Your post seems way off base in it’s scathing tone.

35. Bill johnson
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:41 pm

    Also, for those that don’t know, AIM is very popular in the US, with Yahoo slightly behind. But outside the US you won’t find more than 10 people on AIM. Despite the Valley centric view of the web, most of the world’s internet users are not in the US.

36. jumper
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:43 pm

    if GTalk in Gmail were to have IM interoperability, man oh man…

    i think the reason why a lot of people are using MSN/YM is because a lot of their friends are on MSN/YM. if there’s a way to connect to these friends w/o using MSN/YM, then they wouldn’t have that many users (IMHO).

37. Paul
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:48 pm

    I continue to use Gtalk because it’s integrated with Gmail and my personalized search as well as available on my Blackberry. When I’m out and about, any search or conversation I have on my Blackberry is stored along with anything I do on the desktop, all searchable when I inevitably return to the office. Not to say others don’t have some or all of the same functionality, but it works for me.

38. Duncan
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 4:59 pm

    I’ve got a big problem with these figures Mike: the don’t include Skype, and most people I know these days use Skype for IM.

39. Michael Arrington
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:07 pm

    Duncan, I do too, but its what we have from Comscore.

40. Mick
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:15 pm

    Mike, can you post a link to the Comscore data or is it from a private report?

    The data you’re showing is global and NYT is showing US only.

41. Alex
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:28 pm

    How many more times shall we see this ‘open system’ vs. ‘closed system’ dilemma to understand, that:
    1. Closed system has a threshold and critical mass, but pays off by customer loalty FOR SOME TIME (only)! In the end - customers leave it for the sake of OPEN system. Need examples? Apple or Sun hardware + Unix vs. PC-Microsoft , AOL vs. the Internet … etc. etc. etc.
    2. In the end - the users DO migrate. They migrate to the most usable product meeting their needs in a real way.

    It’s some kind of a basic principle…

42. Chris
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:44 pm

    Who the heck is comscore? And how do they get these figures?

    Someone above posted where is ICQ? I used that quite a lot back in the late 60’s, AIM in College (in the US), then MSN and Skype now where I work in China (no one uses AIM here).

    Now, China… Where is QQ (tencent) in the stats?!?!?! Add that, and it will be a big contender to MSN!

43. blinking8s
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:50 pm

    I like google talk, but they dont have the client for osx. I hate the fact that every other chat platform is crowded with features only a teenager needs. Google Talk kept it simple and for that I thank them. But even when I do have my gmail open, I notice no one from my contacts is every online with it.

44. Nick
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 5:58 pm

    a) Obviously the methodology is flawed
    b) Google is trying to disrupt the IM marketplace by doing things differently (GMail GTalk client, Interop via Jabber etc). This is probably a good strategy - not something you roll heads for.
    c) You are bashing Google for going from nowhere to number 4 in the marketplace, while AIM has dropped from its dominiate position a year or two ago to be only third? Umm… I think perhaps they are the ones that need a product strategy.

    More at http://blog.voipally.com/2006/.....ring-june/

45. Drew Olanoff
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:04 pm

    The best feature of GoogleTalk is the gmail integration. How come Gmail is still invite only? Only techies use it and they’re already married to AIM. Open Gmail to the world and market that, and Google talk will grow.

46. Justin
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:10 pm

    People are just not used to having all their apps in one place. Everyone is used to having a browser and a seperate IM client - Google is ahead of themselves on this one and what they should do is open up Google Talk to other client’s screenames. I would totally use Google Talk if it allowed me to use my main AIM screename.

47. Ming Yeow
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:12 pm

    Yes, gmail integration is the best. No fancy icons or silly flash pictures, just software that works

48. jared chandler
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:20 pm

    a few points:

    MSN, AIM and Yahoo have had quite a lead time over Gtalk.

    Users of a particular flavor of IM have a social network already built. Porting it (the network of contacts) over to a new IM client, even one which has significant technical advantages such as Gtalk, takes time.

    I have friends who refuse to get on Gtalk, so I run YIM and MSN as legacy chat apps to talk to them.

    The adoption rate of Gtalk has nothing to do with the technical or business model aspects, rather it’s a function of the inertia of social groups and the time it takes to move them all onto a new platform.

49. Deeter
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:27 pm

    I’m surprised at your reaction… you are very well aware how recent google talk has been out, why would you compare it to msn, yahoo, aim?

    I have never downloaded the client myself but use the embedded chat on gmail all the time. I like how archived conversations show up in search query. I agree with Nick (#44), they are doing things differently.

    I could be wrong here, but I perceive from your earlier posts that you do not appreciate google’s products. TechCrunch is considered a respectable blog, why ruin the reputation through biased rants? just a personal thought..

50. Dan
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:29 pm

    While these numbers are VERY poor it fits with the Google strategy of ‘Ready, Fire, Aim’

    Will be interesting to watch over the next few months….will they focus or cast it adrift????

51. Milo Riano
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:37 pm

    I have more than 200 people on YM, 300 people on MSN and I sent them all the message about gtalk when it was launched and have tried to make them use it ever since. So far only seven of them ended up using gtalk.

    I frequent internet cafes a lot primarily because of DOTA Frozen Throne, and I have yet to see an internet cafe that have even installed gtalk on it.

52. Milo Riano
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:42 pm

    The power of MSN is in the corporate level. I work in a company of nearly 150k people and MSN is pushed in every project.

    Live Communication Server works together with MSN and is legally implemented by companies since it archives conversation across all its clients and activites can be monitored as companies favor security heavily.

    Btw, usage of gmail and gtalk are not allowed same as with my friends who work in very very large companies.

53. vivek puri
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:43 pm

    Come on guys stop this loop. Same cycle every day. Either Om Malik or Rafat Ali or Michael Arrington write about a article and the other 2 and more need to copy. Atleast this not expected from you guys. Only reason the techies come here is for news which is not in other places. We dont want to read the same news 3-5 times with similar comments. Don’t behave like a newspaper where you need to print what others are printing. Sooner or later one of you will get dropped off from someone’s RSS. Shot term user gain wont take your site anywhere.
    -V

54. Milo Riano
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:47 pm

    vivek — I second that. I have even read this post in a very popular non-techie blog for bloggers. Can’t understand why he has to write that, probably to get a trackback.

55. Graham
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:51 pm

    do a statistically valid poll of gmail users to find out how many real users there are (including embedded chat). you have enough readers to get this done… now i’m curious.

56. bored
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 6:59 pm

    Why use anything but the embedded gtalk? I use it so I don’t have to run another darn application on my computer. Plus if you want to keep a log of all your conversations with trillian or AIM, they are kept on the local machine. Not very helpful when I’m at a different location.

    I bet as more non-techie office workers realize they can chat without installing something on their computers (which their IT dept might prohibit) and without their IT folks keep track of it (without keyloggers of course), gtalk’s numbers will jump.

57. firemillen2
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 7:31 pm

    This article reminds me of another I read about an analyst who has a sell rating on GOOG. His stipulation is that Google is spending a huge amount of cash on all these new projects and their business model is “throw it on the wall and see if it sticks.”

    the results of gtalk seems to prove his theory right. Google is great at search but are they a one trick pony? Is everyone buying GOOG stock expecting too much? What if their gpay, desktop, online apps, etc etc don’t pan out…then you’re looking at a 100+ million market cap for a PPC search engine.

58. Nick Gavronsky
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 7:35 pm

    Just another google product with no real direction, kind of just thrown out there because they can. Dont get me wrong, I think google is great and use manyt of their services, but I think the chat thing is just going too far.

59. ashok pai
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 8:00 pm

    i use the gmail chat through the web browser all the time. and its mighty useful too! one login does it all. since the gchat desktop version is fairly bare, id rather prefer to use the browser edition! for the desktop chat software i prefer yahoo over msn. msn seems too clossy, while yahoo has been very good with usability - i like the yahoo set of features since long. the move to open up the IM by the major companies like yahoo and MSN is a welcome decision. i hope that everyone is truly free to interconnect like email! open standards is the way to go anyways. tired of propreitary stuff by MS and co.

    anyways - coming back to chat
    - the voice quality on the standalone version of gchat is amazing, something thats not rivalled by yahoo and msn.
    - skype does a good job now with both video and voice.
    - yahoo does a good job with all the 3 but not good in any single one.
    - msn is not bad in video and voice.

60. Pro SEO
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 8:26 pm

    SHOCK HORROR! Google have created something that isn’t instantly a market leader!

    I think it shows the success of google when we can make a story news worthy just because google come fourth.

    Hands up, Who wouldn’t mind owning the fourth biggest Instant messaging service on the internet? That’s what i thought.

61. Ramki
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 8:32 pm

    Google hasn’t been as successful with other products as compared to its Search. Even there it hasn’t been successful with its Blog Search etc.
    It seems to be introducing products for the joy of introducing them. Better product management is required and they should try to follow up on the beta releases faster and release them as a product quicker. Orkut hasn’t had any improvements in the last couple of years and even GTalk has remained the same since its introduction. (I am not talking about the bug fixes and the minor corrections which keep happening, but major releases.) Maybe, they have to change from a typical engineering driven company.

62. Brad Lauster
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 8:43 pm

    For the people asking about ICQ: AOL purchased Mirabilis (ICQ) in 1998.

    See these for more information:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icq
    http://www.internetnews.com/bu......php/21011

63. EvGen
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 9:05 pm

    While it may be valid to say that google managed a fair showing just by coming in fourth, this is not the real story here. Once, in the distant past, when I worked at Yahoo the internal joke was that we could copy any cool idea out on the net and just by putting a link to the cloned service on the MyYahoo homepage make the new offering instantly the second or third-largest service in the category. If google’s other services suck so much that it can’t leverage its massive central role as the search engine of choice to get people to use the services then what exactly does that say about the emporer’s fashion sense?

    If you take away search and ad placement (yes, that is a very, very big “if”) you are left with google maps and everything else. Google Maps is third in its category at the moment but destined for fourth if Microsoft puts out a decent maps service in Windows Live. After these three services are accounted for then fourth place _is the best google has_ out of all of its remaining services. When you dive into other “flash in the pan” internet activities like news, shopping, social networking, blogging, photos, and other services you will discover that google drops out of the top ten in most cases.

    We are not talking about new services here either. Several of the minor google properties have been slowly failing and fading into obscurity for four or five years. I think it is quite telling that no one at google has the balls to take these services out behind the barn for the “old yeller” treatment, admit the failure, and move on to a second try. Even Microsoft has the humility to recognize its failures and try again.

64. pireland
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 9:44 pm

    I love Gtalk… mainly because everyone ISN’T on it… or at least they haven’t found me yet. I talk to the people I want… unlike my AIM and MSN buddy lists that get flooded as soon as I get online.

65. Buyo
    

    July 24th, 2006 at 9:45 pm

    Rarely have I read a post which so hilariously refuted its own hypothesis. “Comscore does not include Google Talk usage within Gmail itself (where it is embedded)”. Precisely. The point is that Google Talk’s integration in Gmail, as many people have pointed out, makes it unnecessary to run an another annoying and redundant panel. I suggest you use your head and figure out a real analysis.

66. Rodney Joyce
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:11 am

    Think it’s time they put up some Google ads…

67. Thomas Isaksson
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:30 am

    Am I the only one who think it’s a bit silly that you seem to think GMail/GTalk is so popular just because all you tech-savvy people use it?

    The big mass out there do not use GMail/GTalk, they do not read sites like techcrunch, they probably dont even use a chat software at all. Those who do will stick with what they are handed, and in this case it would be one of the top 3 depending on which broadband provider they have.

    I see this all the time when Google-lovers stand up to defend Google. Look outside your bubble and realize the big group of people who just USE the Internet are not the slightest interested in Ajax, Web 2.0, new technology etc - they just use the first service that is handed to them and sticks with it until something better is handed to them.

    I like Google’s search and Ad services, in fact I haven’t used anything else for years. The search engine is superior to anything else IMO, but the fact so many use MSN search, AOL search etc proves my point.

    My 5 cents.

68. LostInBrittany
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 1:07 am

    TechCrunch publishes another anti-Google post, I guess it must be Tuesday…

    Only to add my 2 euro-cents, I do all of my chatting using the integrated chat in gmail, as most of people I know.

    And about the precedent comment :

    “The big mass out there do not use GMail/GTalk, they do not read sites like techcrunch, they probably dont even use a chat software at all. Those who do will stick with what they are handed, and in this case it would be one of the top 3 depending on which broadband provider they have.”

    I beg to differ, I know lots of non-tech-savvy people who use gmail, because they find it simpler to use, always available (not only at home) and very user-friendly.

69. Jay
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 1:37 am

    Does Google really care? I’m sure they built it so workers could chat internally and then released it out to the public in case they wanted to use their Gmail accounts for chatting too.

    If you notice, they don’t even promote it within Google Pack by default.. this shows how much of a sub product this really is.

70. tim
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 1:38 am

    comescore uses a panel of Internet users that is recruited using Random Digit Dialing (RDD), supplemented by sizable numbers of other panelists including, work and university panelists recruited online.

    recruits download and install the software that enables comScore to monitor a households/work/uni Internet use

    Instant Messengers have different behaviors than other digital applications. With Instant Messengers, comScore is able to count Unique Visitors and Duration by tracking the calls that a users Instant Messenger clients makes over the Internet. Unique Visitors for these IM applications are counted when the user launches the application, which is consistent with how other Digital Applications are reported. However, duration is not tracked until the user sends a message to another user. The send of the message is the starting point of the duration credited to the IM application, and the next URL request outside of the IM application is the end point of the duration credited to the IM application. Pages being credited to IM applications is limited to messages sent; messages received is similar in concept to pushed traffic (i.e., there was no user request).

    comscore technology observes instant message packets transmitted to and from panelists machines and can detect the difference between when a user sends an instant message, and when information is forced to the users messenger application, (i.e. when a stock quote is automatically updated in an instant messenger application). comScore does not record the content of Instant Messages.

71. Peter
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 2:07 am

    Seems a lot of folks are into dissin Google ‘product strategy’ - whatever that is supposed to be. I’m not buying it. I’m not buying that Google product strategy/marketing or anything else is ‘bad’. They may release a crap product every once in a while - in between their sensational products - but that doesn’t earn a ‘bad’ or ‘disorganized product strategy’ label.

    I have a feeling that the critics in this case are looking at Google’s product marketing, finding it doesn’t match Microsoft’s, and automatically assuming it’s bad, because most folks, I think would say (incorrectly), that Microsoft’s marketing was good/great and should be replicated. I beg to differ.

    When I look at Google - when I think Google - I think ‘innovation’, I think ‘tools’, I think ‘the future of the internet’, ‘the future of computing’ - i.e. Google is working towards building ‘the operating system of the internet’. Microsoft had Windows, and Google has a web of web services/tools/platforms/technologies that enable the internet - that enable computing in the 21st century.

    This product strategy looks a little bit different than Microsoft’s - it’s not as obvious. Microsoft’s product strategy was about enforcing and celebrating their monopoly with ties-in and myriad other deceptive and devious trade practices. They had that luxury because computing was so young. We all knew what they were doing ahead of time.

    With the internets, though, the game has changed. Google needs to provide interoperability in their individual tools, but you’d better believe there are a whole bunch of really smart, highly-paid people at the Googleplex planning very carefully exactly how Google is going to take over the future of computing. The longer they can keep people from figuring out exactly what they’re trying to do, the better. This is not a 3-year ROI we’re talking about - you need to think more like 20 or 30 years ROI. Now, you’re getting the picture. Think 10,000 or 100,000% returns.

    Do you see Google Earth, or do you see the beginnings of an advanced location-based services platform that can easily integrate with third party tools? Do you see a crappy spreadsheet app, or do you see a tremendous cash cow of online Google Office, ready to be utilized by a burgeoning global audience? Yes, at first glance, a lot of Google’s apps seem to be going off in different directions - something us geeks used to praise companies for doing (R&D, anyone?) - but if you look a little closer you might see the next evil monopoly coming down the pike. And this one has three heads.

72. Al
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 2:39 am

    I think this article should have been about how difficult it is to measure this market place. The conversations here point out important mising figures that represent the current market trends i.e. where are the figures for :
    Skype, Meebo, Gtalk within Gmail, Trillion, Adium etc….
    and in particular what about real-world actual usage rather than installed base, that is the true story here.

    regards
    Al

73. maique
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 2:55 am

    gtalk within gmail and via adium.
    i use it all day long.

74. James
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 3:58 am

    I use trillian, mainly because I have to interact with so many people, but I have to say that it’s sad to see Gtalk so far behind because of all the chat clients it is by far the sleekest and least bloated of them all. I really dig the look and feel of Gtalk although I almost always connect through Trillian rather than Gtalk.

75. Rick
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 4:25 am

    The blackberry version of gtalk is absolutely fabulous. The problem is that there’s no one to talk to.

76. Anonymous
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 5:25 am

    Based on number of people who say they use Google Talk in this thread, I suspect there’s a large overlap between the 44K Google Talk users and the 53k TechCrunch readers.

    Check out the new poll here: http://gigaom.com/

    I think the same people who read TechCrunch and use Google Talk also read GigaOm.

77. Taylan Pince
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 7:18 am

    I don’t use anything other than Google Talk now, I even deleted all other messengers from my machines. I also only use the built-in Gmail client, I don’t really know anyone who uses the actual application. My clients and friends from all over the world switched to Google Talk and Skype. I doubt those numbers are accurate, and even if they are not, who cares? Google Talk is the best, no IM service can compete with it. Sad to see the that TechCrunch is still in the same anti-Google spirit.

78. Stephan
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 7:54 am

    I can’t believe the number of people who use MSN Messenger. To me the MSN Live client sucks but maybe that’s because I like the minimal feel of software.

79. Alex
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 8:07 am

    There was also a good article in BusinessWeek last month that trashed Google on Gmail, Finance, Orkut, etc., and provided some nice numbers and a nifty chart.

    http://alexcastro.typepad.com/.....lity_.html

80. Hunter
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 11:04 am

    95% of the users that I know use Gtalk, but use the one embedded in Gmail. If fact, I had about three people that I chatted with before the embedded version came out. I, myself, have accounts on all the systems, but use Gaim(PC/Linux) and Adium(Mac) as the interfaces.

81. michael
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 11:26 am

    I like many here also only use Google Talk via Gmail. Maybe thats still insignificant? Who knows (comsScore certainly doesn’t). I only recently (two months) started using the account via the Gaim client. Is comsScore counting other clients???

82. RYK
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 11:36 am

    1. Figures a definetly suspect as they leave out SKYPE

    2. No way Gtalk is this low

    3. What about ICQ?

83. RYK
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 11:37 am

    BTW, Gtalk team won the “Founders Award” at Google recently, so there is some accountability going on over there

84. NoAlWin
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:08 pm

    I also tried using both at the same time and if you do that then strange things happen — you get your chats in GTalk in GMail but not on desktop GTalk.

    That is because GMail client has a priority value 24 and Google Talk has a value of 0. I like to chat using mi Jabber client (Psi) instead GMail, so I configure Psi to have a higher priority. Values can be from -128 to 127, but negative values doesn’t receive messages.

85. ET
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:16 pm

    Actually, I use GMail & GTalk to keep contact with my very close friends.
    Gmail replace for good the others web based emails, like yahoo or hotmail.
    They services are great, fasters, no flash ads, cross browser, the gtalk embedded is fantastic, the concept of “off record” conversation is totally cool, and automagically saves my conversations, what can I said…

    I’m not afraid with these numbers, ppl will find the right path when yahoo & hotmail lack of innovation and pushes ads to pay the large bandwith for the been on the top of that list.

    My 2 cents.

    ET.

86. Keith
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:27 pm

    Well…. this is hard for those who has been using several applications. Try Miranda IM, which allows you to connect to several network protocols with a single software. Furthermore, it has over 350 plugins! Anyway, just a second thought, Google Talk isn’t going to last long. Google is just concentrating too much on their search engine and buying up domain names!

87. skype
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:41 pm

    my skype client says there are 5.3 million users online at the moment. this is more than google talk’s unique visitors for month. can’t estimate skype’s unique visitors but guess it is between yahoo and aim maybe

88. tprzepiorka
    

    July 25th, 2006 at 12:50 pm

    I think Google wanted to help push the Jabber movement with GTalk. I personally like the UI of GTalk and cant stand the annoying flashy icons and stuff that people have on MSN. I think that eventually the majority of non-geeks who use IM clients will realise the benifits of Google Talk and eventually convert.

    I think that what Google wants is for Jabber to succseed which means that I can use the client i want and talk to all my friends who use other clients.

    -Tprzepiorka