Re: Why two different messengers, MSN and Windows Messenger?
From: Jonathan Kay [MVP] (msnewsreplies_at_jonathankay.com)
Date: 08/12/04
- Next message: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\): "Re: unmountable boot volume"
- Previous message: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\): "Re: XP SP2 Firewall question"
- In reply to: Peter Sale: "Re: Why two different messengers, MSN and Windows Messenger?"
- Next in thread: Licantrop0: "Re: Why two different messengers, MSN and Windows Messenger?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:29:34 -0400
Hi Peter,
As long as the router supports Universal Plug and Play (UPnP), you shouldn't have to forward
anything. But regardless, the functionality for this feature is basically the same
regardless of what client you're using with the exception that Windows Messenger must be at
least installed for the feature in MSN Messenger to work.
____________________________________________
Jonathan Kay
Microsoft MVP - Windows Messenger/MSN Messenger
Associate Expert
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/
Messenger Resources - http://messenger.jonathankay.com
All posts unless otherwise specified are (c) 2004 Jonathan Kay.
You *must* contact me for redistribution rights.
"Peter Sale" <psale@adelphia.my-leg.net> wrote in message
news:usRRdfJgEHA.3024@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Hi Jonathan,
> Thanks for the quick reply.
>
> So, which Messenger, MSN version 6 (or v5) or Windows Messenger version 4.7,
> will give me the most reliable connections for Remote Assistance sessions,
> especially if my PC is behind a NAT Wireless Broadband Router? And yes, I
> know that I need to forward port 3389 on my router.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Peter Sale
> Santa Monica, CA USA
> To email me, just pull 'my-leg.'
>
> --
> "Jonathan Kay [MVP]" wrote ...
>> Greetings Peter,
>>
>> Well, they both perform different functions. Most notably, MSN Messenger
> 6 has support for
>> display pictures, custom emoticons, has a different interface, etc.
> whereas Windows Messenger
>> supports SIP-based communications services, Exchange IM Server, etc.
> Which one you use is up
>> to you if you're simply using the most basic functionality, connecting to
> the public .NET
>> Messegner service) and a matter of personal choice. However one thing to
> keep in mind,
>> Windows Messenger must still be installed on Windows XP in order for MSN
> Messenger to retain
>> full functionality (Remote Assistance, Whiteboard, Application Sharing,
> etc.).
>>
>> MSN Messenger is centered around MSN technologies (Hotmail, MSN Member
> Profiles, MSN Mobile,
>> etc.) whereas Windows Messenger is centered around Windows technologies
> (Exchange Server,
>> Office Live Communications Server, Windows Netmeeting, etc.).
>> ____________________________________________
>> Jonathan Kay
>> Microsoft MVP - Windows Messenger/MSN Messenger
>> Associate Expert
>> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/
>> Messenger Resources - http://messenger.jonathankay.com
>> All posts unless otherwise specified are (c) 2004 Jonathan Kay.
>> You *must* contact me for redistribution rights.
>>
>
>
- Next message: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\): "Re: unmountable boot volume"
- Previous message: Michael Solomon \(MS-MVP Windows Shell/User\): "Re: XP SP2 Firewall question"
- In reply to: Peter Sale: "Re: Why two different messengers, MSN and Windows Messenger?"
- Next in thread: Licantrop0: "Re: Why two different messengers, MSN and Windows Messenger?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
