With all these connectivity deals, is Reuters Messenger becoming another Trillian?
Our connectivity model is on the server layer. We have one client that connects to the data centre, and then our data centre fans out the appropriate protocols to the right service provider. Say we have a Reuters Messenger user and an AIM, and two users want to connect. Reuters Messenger sends an IM message; the message is sent to our data centre; our data centre detects that it's receiving an AIM user and then it will route the message to the gateway -- which connects with the AIM data centre. It is a total server-to-server infrastructure, as opposed to Trillian, where it aggregates many clients into one interface.
Will you allow Reuters to connect AIM and MSN?
When we have MSN connectivity, yes. But we haven't yet announced that.
Why is IM important for financial brokers?
It's a very complementary tool for voice. It provides data elements for voice. Voice has limitations. You have to tell a story and it takes time. Brokers love the fact that IM can push something to you, you see it and it gives value. It helps them to make more deals than they could with existing communications tools. They can do it faster with IM than with forms.
Microsoft thinks the potential for IM is voice over IP. Do you agree?
From an adoption and deployment perspective, I think Microsoft is getting ahead of itself. Corporate deployment cycles are incredibly complex. It's unlikely that big corporations will embrace every element of Microsoft in that strategy.
4%
4%
