November 19, 2011 at 21:47Testing ICQ Web Clients
Hello.
I don’t know why, but I was always attracted by the dominance of web applications over desktop ones. Probably because it is the future, and everyone loves the future and someone wants to try it now. I think that after 10 years (or even earlier) on the computer, the average user will have something like Chrome OS and work as a terminal. We will see. Now, when I print this article in Google Docs, listen to music through Google Music and get distracted by messages from Imo.im, I will be glad for such an outcome of events. For myself, in web applications, I see three main advantages: mobility (quick start anytime, anywhere) and specific resource requirements (memory comes first) and simplicity.
1. Imo
2. Meebo
3. IM +
4. eBuddy
5. Trillian
6. Qnext
7. Tjat
8. KoolIM
9. ILoveIM
10. Icq2Go
Why review ICQ clients? Yes, because this question remained open for me for a long time, I was looking for something special, tried everything, determined and determined. And now in order.
The official site .
Messenger from one of the former employees of Google. In addition to text messages, it allows you to create video and audio chats, as well as transfer files. There is support for multiple accounts, works with protocols Windows Live Messenger, Skype, Yahoo Messenger, Google Talk, Facebook, ICQ, Jabber, Myspace, Hyves, Vkontakte and Steam. There is a nice design, convenient and concise interface. Message history is stored on the server (encrypted), which may not appeal to everyone.
Free of
charge No ads
Video and audio chats
Support for protocols popular in the Russian Federation
Nice design
Storing message history on the server
Notification of a message by an animation of the browser tab (Google Chrome)
Notification in the form of a pop-up window (Google Chrome)
Encryption of data encryption
Russian localization
No ability to view contact information
No additional statuses
Rare problems with authorization of new users
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
Provides access to a great many protocols that are little known to the average Russian user. It is worth highlighting AIM, Yahoo !, MSN, Google Talk, Facebook, MySpace, ICQ, XMPP. Here, as in Imo, communication with contacts takes place through a system of windows, but things are worse with the design (it is difficult to call a site ugly, but you can find a number of shortcomings that will catch the eye of any beginning designer). History is saved on the server. But at the bottom of the page, at times, a wide banner annoys with intrusive advertising, which is undoubtedly bad.
Free
Possibility to view contact information
Possibility to create widgets
Storing message history on the server
Data protection by encryption
Advertising
Lack of additional statuses
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
An easy-to-use messenger that, apart from the web, has spread widely to almost all popular mobile platforms: Java, Symbian, WP, Android, iOS, BlackBerry and WebOs. Among the protocols are MSN Live Messenger, Facebook, Skype, Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, MySpace, ICQ, Google Talk, Jabber, Yandex, Vkontakte and Mail.ru. The last three have appeared recently, which hints at attracting a Russian audience. Design pleases. There is a small opportunity to customize the interface (windows or tabs, compact or ordinary look - you decide). There is some similarity with Imo.
Free of
charge No ads
Nice design
Interface settings
Pop-up notification (Google Chrome)
Message notification via browser tab animation (Google Chrome)
Storage of message history on the server
Data protection with encryption
No additional statuses
No ability to view contact information
Distorted encoding from some messages
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
The first thing that immediately catches your eye when entering the site is the abundance of advertising, the second is 17 localizations and the absence of the Russian language, the third is the ban on sending messages to offline contacts. But the messages that go away in the html-tags from the sender and the incoming krakozyabras are not immediately apparent. The site claims support for Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, Hyves, ICQ, Google Talk, MySpace and Facebook (ICQ didn’t work for me today, went through AIM, but flew out right away; maybe there are problems with other protocols). Another bad thing is the lack of history, but everything is beautiful with the interface, convenient tabs and a nice look and a lot of smiles.
Free of
charge Nice design (with cut ads)
Interface customization
Notification of message by browser tab animation (Google Chrome)
Notification in the form of a pop-up window (Google Chrome)
Additional emoticons
Advertising
Prohibition of sending messages to offline contacts
Distorted encoding from some messages
Tags in sent messages
No history messages on the server (on a free account)
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
An unusual messenger with a very interesting, slightly futuristic window interface, where the inscription “Good Evening # username #>!” And a gloomy background are on the top in the 35th font. With the rapid movement of the windows, their braking is noticeable. There are very few settings, but there is the Russian language (though not completely) and support for multiple accounts with many protocols; The list is identical to Imo.
Free
Design (subjectively, of course, but it has something)
Russian localization
Advertising
Small performance problems
Lack of message history on the server (on a free account)
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
Another client with their strange design features. After entering the login and password, the user will see the image of the smartphone. The program window is located in the display area. Despite such an unhealthy idea (thanks to the mobile compact interface) it is very convenient to use it. It supports all the same protocols as all of the above messengers, it can also work with multiple accounts, but there is no possibility of transferring files.
Free of charge
Lack of advertising
Ease of design
Data protection with encryption
Lack of message history on the server (on a free account)
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
1 , 2 , 3 .
The official site .
A messenger that differs noticeably from all the others in its simplicity and minimalism, from a technical point of view. The client recalls the beginning of the 21st century (when web applications began to appear), because this is extremely untimely. Messages come after refreshing the page ( where to go in Moscow ) and have to reap, wait, reap ... In general, Ajax technology does not smell here, any action leads to page refresh (I am glad that this happens quickly because of the small size). You can log in via Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Facebook and ICQ.
Free of
charge Lack of advertising
Storing message history on the server
Russian localization
Support for old browsers
Lack of design
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
Unfortunately, when after writing this article I wanted to take screenshots, the site did not let me in, saying: “You have reached your access limit” (the situation repeated with the proxy), and I was left without screenshots.
The official site .
The similarity of Imo and Meebo, two, three years behind in development. The same protocols, but a dull and not modern design. Low functionality. It is distinguished from analogues by the presence of a WYSIWYG editor in the chat, that is, the recipient sees the text formatted as much as the sender wanted to see it - a rather rare opportunity among web instant messengers.
Free of
charge Lack of advertising
WYSIWYG editor
Dull design
Distorted encoding from some messages
Lack of message history on the server
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
1 , 2 .
The official site .
It’s dangerous to enter here without baner cutting, so immediately three billboards attack the browser. And it repels. In addition, nothing outstanding messenger shows. Minimum protocols, minimum options. There is a WYSIWYG editor, but it is only for customization: the person on that end will not see the formatting. It is possible to create video and audio chats.
Free
Storage of message history on the server
Video and audio chats
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
1 , 2 .
The official site .
And lastly, the official ICQ web client. One of the leaders of the review, and even it does not include support for additional statuses (this is some kind of critical illness of such applications). The design in the spirit of the desktop version of ICQ is pleasing to the eye: the tabbed interface is made with a bang, everywhere there are neat icons, smooth animation. The news feed is an exceptional feature of Icq2Go, it includes statuses that, for example, can be commented on, but I have never seen the use of this function in my entire long list. In addition to the main protocol, support for Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Youtube is included; in the news feed, you can follow their updates.
Free of
charge Lack of advertising
Nice design
News feed
Lack of message history on the server
Lack of ability to view contact information
Lack of additional statuses
Lack of encryption
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 .
Each web client has its own pluses and minuses, and I just showed part of them in this review. The choice is yours.
I don’t know why, but I was always attracted by the dominance of web applications over desktop ones. Probably because it is the future, and everyone loves the future and someone wants to try it now. I think that after 10 years (or even earlier) on the computer, the average user will have something like Chrome OS and work as a terminal. We will see. Now, when I print this article in Google Docs, listen to music through Google Music and get distracted by messages from Imo.im, I will be glad for such an outcome of events. For myself, in web applications, I see three main advantages: mobility (quick start anytime, anywhere) and specific resource requirements (memory comes first) and simplicity.
List of ICQ-clients participating in the review
1. Imo
2. Meebo
3. IM +
4. eBuddy
5. Trillian
6. Qnext
7. Tjat
8. KoolIM
9. ILoveIM
10. Icq2Go
Why review ICQ clients? Yes, because this question remained open for me for a long time, I was looking for something special, tried everything, determined and determined. And now in order.
1. Imo
The official site .
Messenger from one of the former employees of Google. In addition to text messages, it allows you to create video and audio chats, as well as transfer files. There is support for multiple accounts, works with protocols Windows Live Messenger, Skype, Yahoo Messenger, Google Talk, Facebook, ICQ, Jabber, Myspace, Hyves, Vkontakte and Steam. There is a nice design, convenient and concise interface. Message history is stored on the server (encrypted), which may not appeal to everyone.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge No ads Video and audio chats Support for protocols popular in the Russian Federation Nice design Storing message history on the server Notification of a message by an animation of the browser tab (Google Chrome) Notification in the form of a pop-up window (Google Chrome) Encryption of data encryption Russian localization No ability to view contact information No additional statuses Rare problems with authorization of new users
Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
2. Meebo
The official site .
Provides access to a great many protocols that are little known to the average Russian user. It is worth highlighting AIM, Yahoo !, MSN, Google Talk, Facebook, MySpace, ICQ, XMPP. Here, as in Imo, communication with contacts takes place through a system of windows, but things are worse with the design (it is difficult to call a site ugly, but you can find a number of shortcomings that will catch the eye of any beginning designer). History is saved on the server. But at the bottom of the page, at times, a wide banner annoys with intrusive advertising, which is undoubtedly bad.
Pros and cons of the client:
Free Possibility to view contact information Possibility to create widgets Storing message history on the server Data protection by encryption Advertising Lack of additional statuses Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
3. IM +
The official site .
An easy-to-use messenger that, apart from the web, has spread widely to almost all popular mobile platforms: Java, Symbian, WP, Android, iOS, BlackBerry and WebOs. Among the protocols are MSN Live Messenger, Facebook, Skype, Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, MySpace, ICQ, Google Talk, Jabber, Yandex, Vkontakte and Mail.ru. The last three have appeared recently, which hints at attracting a Russian audience. Design pleases. There is a small opportunity to customize the interface (windows or tabs, compact or ordinary look - you decide). There is some similarity with Imo.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge No ads Nice design Interface settings Pop-up notification (Google Chrome) Message notification via browser tab animation (Google Chrome) Storage of message history on the server Data protection with encryption No additional statuses No ability to view contact information Distorted encoding from some messages Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
4. eBuddy
The official site .
The first thing that immediately catches your eye when entering the site is the abundance of advertising, the second is 17 localizations and the absence of the Russian language, the third is the ban on sending messages to offline contacts. But the messages that go away in the html-tags from the sender and the incoming krakozyabras are not immediately apparent. The site claims support for Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, Hyves, ICQ, Google Talk, MySpace and Facebook (ICQ didn’t work for me today, went through AIM, but flew out right away; maybe there are problems with other protocols). Another bad thing is the lack of history, but everything is beautiful with the interface, convenient tabs and a nice look and a lot of smiles.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge Nice design (with cut ads) Interface customization Notification of message by browser tab animation (Google Chrome) Notification in the form of a pop-up window (Google Chrome) Additional emoticons Advertising Prohibition of sending messages to offline contacts Distorted encoding from some messages Tags in sent messages No history messages on the server (on a free account) Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
5. Trillian
The official site .
An unusual messenger with a very interesting, slightly futuristic window interface, where the inscription “Good Evening # username #>!” And a gloomy background are on the top in the 35th font. With the rapid movement of the windows, their braking is noticeable. There are very few settings, but there is the Russian language (though not completely) and support for multiple accounts with many protocols; The list is identical to Imo.
Pros and cons of the client
Free Design (subjectively, of course, but it has something) Russian localization Advertising Small performance problems Lack of message history on the server (on a free account) Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
6. Qnext
The official site .
Another client with their strange design features. After entering the login and password, the user will see the image of the smartphone. The program window is located in the display area. Despite such an unhealthy idea (thanks to the mobile compact interface) it is very convenient to use it. It supports all the same protocols as all of the above messengers, it can also work with multiple accounts, but there is no possibility of transferring files.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge Lack of advertising Ease of design Data protection with encryption Lack of message history on the server (on a free account) Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 .
7. Tjat
The official site .
A messenger that differs noticeably from all the others in its simplicity and minimalism, from a technical point of view. The client recalls the beginning of the 21st century (when web applications began to appear), because this is extremely untimely. Messages come after refreshing the page ( where to go in Moscow ) and have to reap, wait, reap ... In general, Ajax technology does not smell here, any action leads to page refresh (I am glad that this happens quickly because of the small size). You can log in via Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Facebook and ICQ.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge Lack of advertising Storing message history on the server Russian localization Support for old browsers Lack of design Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
Unfortunately, when after writing this article I wanted to take screenshots, the site did not let me in, saying: “You have reached your access limit” (the situation repeated with the proxy), and I was left without screenshots.8. KoolIM
The official site .
The similarity of Imo and Meebo, two, three years behind in development. The same protocols, but a dull and not modern design. Low functionality. It is distinguished from analogues by the presence of a WYSIWYG editor in the chat, that is, the recipient sees the text formatted as much as the sender wanted to see it - a rather rare opportunity among web instant messengers.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge Lack of advertising WYSIWYG editor Dull design Distorted encoding from some messages Lack of message history on the server Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
1 , 2 .
9. ILoveIM
The official site .
It’s dangerous to enter here without baner cutting, so immediately three billboards attack the browser. And it repels. In addition, nothing outstanding messenger shows. Minimum protocols, minimum options. There is a WYSIWYG editor, but it is only for customization: the person on that end will not see the formatting. It is possible to create video and audio chats.
Pros and cons of the client
Free Storage of message history on the server Video and audio chats Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
1 , 2 .
10. Icq2Go
The official site .
And lastly, the official ICQ web client. One of the leaders of the review, and even it does not include support for additional statuses (this is some kind of critical illness of such applications). The design in the spirit of the desktop version of ICQ is pleasing to the eye: the tabbed interface is made with a bang, everywhere there are neat icons, smooth animation. The news feed is an exceptional feature of Icq2Go, it includes statuses that, for example, can be commented on, but I have never seen the use of this function in my entire long list. In addition to the main protocol, support for Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Youtube is included; in the news feed, you can follow their updates.
Pros and cons of the client
Free of charge Lack of advertising Nice design News feed Lack of message history on the server Lack of ability to view contact information Lack of additional statuses Lack of encryption Screenshots
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 . 
Each web client has its own pluses and minuses, and I just showed part of them in this review. The choice is yours.