Sonork: Hot or Not?
-
Keep it simple... Actually I like the .NET Messenger UI, it's clean and simple, and most users can use it without any help. :) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Hrmm. i have to say it's been interesting reading the posts to this thread. one comment comes immediately to mind: "to each his own!" seriously, the critiques are noted, and most of the arguments i would have brought up (or will) have already been posted. first, sonork is _not_ intended to compete or work *just* like icq or msn or aim or...it's not really a public messenger: it's designed to work as an intranet/VPN app. in fact, the IM/file transfer/conferencing facilities are simply features built into the Sonork engine - Sonork is technically "a localization and data transfer engine". that said, we are primarily pushing it's IM incarnation for obvious reasons. about the gui - ur right, it's not full of bells and whistles and all the baggage that entails. you want to compare it to icq? then check the installer size, the installed storage space, and resource usage. also, is suspect that msn does a lot of what it does calling other applications/libraries/etc. in windows, so perhaps when u check memory used ur not getting the full story. the thing is, i use sonork every day - it's never crashed on me, and when other things are collapsing it tries it's darndest to keep itself up. the GUI is spartan, admittedly and intentionally, and mainly for the reasons just stated, but there is a LOT to it - many useful ways of doing things that u just need to get used to (which is not at all hard!). and if you *really* don't like the interface, but do like the concept, well, feel free to download the client source code and work some magic on it! try that with MSN or the others... admittedly help and documentation could be better, and we are working on that, however there is a lot of documentation and information available on the website, and i am pretty easy to find if you have a question (just keep it simple tho!). ;o) big points: privacy and security. ALL traffic is encrypted whether it be p2p messaging, conferencing, file transfer, etc. u wont get spam with sonork, especially in it's intended application (i guess that should be true of others, too but anyway...). seeing as our resources are rather limited, to say the least, what you're seeing is quite an accomplishment, and we are quite proud of what's been developed (migs is a coding wizard no matter HOW you cut it!) - and we have MUCH more planned for implementation when we can get to it. one thing is is very gratifying - the interest this community has shown - be it critical, supportive, or neutral. one thing you can be sure of i
-
Also, I like its small size. Anything that stays loaded for the duration that I am logged in should not consume a large amount of memory and resources. Also, due to this, Sonork runs quickly. Right now I have both Sonork and Messenger running... Sonork uses 4.5 MB ram and 162 GDI Objects and 4 threads Messenger uses 2.8 MB ram and 119 GDI Objects and 19 threads (huh, a lot of threads :( ) (From Task Manager) Small size, hmmmm, maybe... - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Are you kidding? Right now I have both Sonork and Messenger running. Here are the statistics from Task Manager: MSN Messenger: 7,332 KB Sonork: 1,100 K Kind regards Mustafa Demirhan Sonork ID 100.9935:zoltrix
-
Hmmm, I have only tried it for a day or so, but I'm gonna vote for...... NOT! I don't like the UI, it's really bad designed. The default settings sucks. I don't like the UI. Why do the world need another IM system. There's already plenty. I use Windows Messenger almost daily, and it works great. It's simple and does what I want it to... What is it that all you people like so much about Sonork, I must say that I don't get it. :confused: Did I mention that the Sonork UI is really really bad... (In the dialogs some buttons are flat and some are not, and all the captions and statics use bold text, urghhh...) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
I'm not realy into this IM stuff as I find it far too distracting, however I did use Trillian for a while and quite liked it. Anybody else used it and Sonork - if so how do they compare? Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com
-
I'm not realy into this IM stuff as I find it far too distracting, however I did use Trillian for a while and quite liked it. Anybody else used it and Sonork - if so how do they compare? Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com
Is the Trillian IM source code available, Because to me the advantage of sonork, its open thus devloper friendly And I can add it as an ADD IN to my own applications IDE or GUI, I relly think that is why myself and other developers are so keen on Sonork. Imagine a group of developers working on a project and via a toolbar they can send screenshots, exchange Files, and clipboards, some might have differnet applications etc open but if each application is sonork enabled they can work as a team much easier. I think if you judge sonork as purely another IM you will find competitors galore, but if you judge it by whatyou can develop on your own applications tp utilize the Localization and Data Trans engine it falls into an entirly different cattegory of application Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
-
Is the Trillian IM source code available, Because to me the advantage of sonork, its open thus devloper friendly And I can add it as an ADD IN to my own applications IDE or GUI, I relly think that is why myself and other developers are so keen on Sonork. Imagine a group of developers working on a project and via a toolbar they can send screenshots, exchange Files, and clipboards, some might have differnet applications etc open but if each application is sonork enabled they can work as a team much easier. I think if you judge sonork as purely another IM you will find competitors galore, but if you judge it by whatyou can develop on your own applications tp utilize the Localization and Data Trans engine it falls into an entirly different cattegory of application Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
Have you been looking at the Sonork source? I have, and I have never seen such undocumented code, no comments or anything... I don't know how many lines of code there are, but there are many. I think I could make my own "developer colaborate thing" faster than I could integrate Sonork into my applications... BTW, is'nt there such a thing built into VS.NET? - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Hrmm. i have to say it's been interesting reading the posts to this thread. one comment comes immediately to mind: "to each his own!" seriously, the critiques are noted, and most of the arguments i would have brought up (or will) have already been posted. first, sonork is _not_ intended to compete or work *just* like icq or msn or aim or...it's not really a public messenger: it's designed to work as an intranet/VPN app. in fact, the IM/file transfer/conferencing facilities are simply features built into the Sonork engine - Sonork is technically "a localization and data transfer engine". that said, we are primarily pushing it's IM incarnation for obvious reasons. about the gui - ur right, it's not full of bells and whistles and all the baggage that entails. you want to compare it to icq? then check the installer size, the installed storage space, and resource usage. also, is suspect that msn does a lot of what it does calling other applications/libraries/etc. in windows, so perhaps when u check memory used ur not getting the full story. the thing is, i use sonork every day - it's never crashed on me, and when other things are collapsing it tries it's darndest to keep itself up. the GUI is spartan, admittedly and intentionally, and mainly for the reasons just stated, but there is a LOT to it - many useful ways of doing things that u just need to get used to (which is not at all hard!). and if you *really* don't like the interface, but do like the concept, well, feel free to download the client source code and work some magic on it! try that with MSN or the others... admittedly help and documentation could be better, and we are working on that, however there is a lot of documentation and information available on the website, and i am pretty easy to find if you have a question (just keep it simple tho!). ;o) big points: privacy and security. ALL traffic is encrypted whether it be p2p messaging, conferencing, file transfer, etc. u wont get spam with sonork, especially in it's intended application (i guess that should be true of others, too but anyway...). seeing as our resources are rather limited, to say the least, what you're seeing is quite an accomplishment, and we are quite proud of what's been developed (migs is a coding wizard no matter HOW you cut it!) - and we have MUCH more planned for implementation when we can get to it. one thing is is very gratifying - the interest this community has shown - be it critical, supportive, or neutral. one thing you can be sure of i
about the gui - ur right, it's not full of bells and whistles and all the baggage that entails. you want to compare it to icq? then check the installer size, the installed storage space, and resource usage. also, is suspect that msn does a lot of what it does calling other applications/libraries/etc. in windows, so perhaps when u check memory used ur not getting the full story. the thing is, i use sonork every day - it's never crashed on me, and when other things are collapsing it tries it's darndest to keep itself up. I don't compare it to ICQ, because ICQ have a horrible GUI with way too many popups and adds. I like the size of Sonork, but you could make a way better GUI and keep the size. The GUI is cluttered, hard to navigate, and the dialogs are ugly (sorry). Why are some of the buttons flat and some are 3D? It's confusing. the GUI is spartan, admittedly and intentionally, and mainly for the reasons just stated, but there is a LOT to it - many useful ways of doing things that u just need to get used to (which is not at all hard!). and if you *really* don't like the interface, but do like the concept, well, feel free to download the client source code and work some magic on it! try that with MSN or the others... I love a spartan GUI. It's possible to make a simple (spartan) GUI that's easy to navigate, I don't think yours is that. big points: privacy and security. ALL traffic is encrypted whether it be p2p messaging, conferencing, file transfer, etc. u wont get spam with sonork, especially in it's intended application (i guess that should be true of others, too but anyway...). How is it encrypted? seeing as our resources are rather limited, to say the least, what you're seeing is quite an accomplishment, and we are quite proud of what's been developed I can understand that. I also love a lot of your features. It's great that I can send and receive files even when I'm bahind a NATing firewall, I just love that. It's not that I hate your program, I just hate the GUI. Now don't give me that talk about that I can just download the source and make my own GUI, how many corporations or private users would do that. Users can't, and corporations don't wanna waste the time/money to do it. And if I finally make a new cool GUI for Sonork, what will happen when you find a bug in some of the , let's say, socket code, and fixes that bug. Then I would have to integrate those changes into my own compiled version. I think not. It's the same thing people say about Lin
-
Have you been looking at the Sonork source? I have, and I have never seen such undocumented code, no comments or anything... I don't know how many lines of code there are, but there are many. I think I could make my own "developer colaborate thing" faster than I could integrate Sonork into my applications... BTW, is'nt there such a thing built into VS.NET? - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
I absolutely agree. I couldn't see one function that had comments about its purpose in life, params etc. I had a quick look at the class view using ED and there appears to be more structs than classes, too many globals and global functions etc. And I couldn't find any documentation of any sort. How do these folks maintain and work on this mass of undocumented and uncommented code? I see very little value in releasing products like this as "open source". In fact I get really annoyed and very frustrated at many "open source" projects because of issues like this. I've invested a lot of time and energy trying to use some, and in the end given up and written my own, which is what I should have done in the first place. After being burnt several times now I doubt that I'd consider using free, open source code again. As they say there is no such thing as a free lunch. I certainly wouldn't consider using Sonork in an app of mine as it currently stands. I'm pretty sure Trillian isn't open source. So Colin, have you or any other CPers incorporated Sonork into their apps? Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com
-
I absolutely agree. I couldn't see one function that had comments about its purpose in life, params etc. I had a quick look at the class view using ED and there appears to be more structs than classes, too many globals and global functions etc. And I couldn't find any documentation of any sort. How do these folks maintain and work on this mass of undocumented and uncommented code? I see very little value in releasing products like this as "open source". In fact I get really annoyed and very frustrated at many "open source" projects because of issues like this. I've invested a lot of time and energy trying to use some, and in the end given up and written my own, which is what I should have done in the first place. After being burnt several times now I doubt that I'd consider using free, open source code again. As they say there is no such thing as a free lunch. I certainly wouldn't consider using Sonork in an app of mine as it currently stands. I'm pretty sure Trillian isn't open source. So Colin, have you or any other CPers incorporated Sonork into their apps? Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com
Actually I think that some OpenSource programmers remove all comments from their code before releasing it. I mean, I have seen a lot of OpenSource applications without any comments. How do people maintain such code? I would go crazy if I should maintain my own old code and didn't have any comments... X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Actually I think that some OpenSource programmers remove all comments from their code before releasing it. I mean, I have seen a lot of OpenSource applications without any comments. How do people maintain such code? I would go crazy if I should maintain my own old code and didn't have any comments... X| - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
Actually I think that some OpenSource programmers remove all comments from their code before releasing it. That would require effort on their part, so I don't think that's the case. :-D I mean, I have seen a lot of OpenSource applications without any comments. How do people maintain such code? I have absolutely no idea. Some days I think I spend more time writing comments than code. For complex code I write a lot of comments which tell me why I did something in a certain way, and not in some other way, so a year down the track I don't go and waiste time heading down paths I've already visited. I would go crazy if I should maintain my own old code and didn't have any comments... Me too. :-D Maybe if you don't expect it to have a long lifetime or you don't really give a sh#t you can. Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. Version 4.01 just released, with a C++ Class View that actually works. www.getsoft.com
-
Is the Trillian IM source code available, Because to me the advantage of sonork, its open thus devloper friendly And I can add it as an ADD IN to my own applications IDE or GUI, I relly think that is why myself and other developers are so keen on Sonork. Imagine a group of developers working on a project and via a toolbar they can send screenshots, exchange Files, and clipboards, some might have differnet applications etc open but if each application is sonork enabled they can work as a team much easier. I think if you judge sonork as purely another IM you will find competitors galore, but if you judge it by whatyou can develop on your own applications tp utilize the Localization and Data Trans engine it falls into an entirly different cattegory of application Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
i did try trillian - for about a week. it's a nice idea in some ways, but it was buggy (at least when i tried it a few months ago) and awkward. has it been fixed since? besides - sonork is not just about "chat" - it's a bit more than that, really. irc and icq are fine if that's are what you're looking for (umm...yeah, right. hehe). Bob Johnson SonorkID: 0.20 bob@sonorkdev.com bob@sonork.com --------------------------------------------------------------- * Sonork! - THE Professional Instant Messaging Solution * --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.sonork.com http://www.sonorkdev.com SonorkDev! - PO Box 6362 - Plymouth, MA - 02362 tel: +508-523-5063