Talk:SyncML

Tasmanian Angel 19:55, 27 October 2005 (UTC) :

Untitled

SyncML was a standard in itsef in the past, however with the merge to OMA SyncML in itself became just a language specification - a basis for data synchronization protocol (which is OMA DS). The article as it is now is somewhat confusing with terms SyncML and 'OMA DS'. Also, OMA as the owner of both terms strongly discourages use of 'SyncML' beyond its definition as a language. Article should clarify both terms and IMO majority of synchronization protocol related information should be shifted to OMA DS article (whic is yet to be created :) ).

Asanjeev 08:00, 11 October 2006 (UTC) : Tasmanian Angels suggestion sounds good. Leave the history of SyncML in the original article, add information about the representation protocol and move OMA DS related information (such as the spam about free services and compatibility lists) to an OMA DS article.

--Dgc03052 17:23, 27 September 2007 (UTC) One comment, the compatibility lists address one of the most frequently asked questions related to SyncML - what devices support it (or more specifically - does my device, or the device I am looking to get support it). It would be nice to keep a list about that, but barring that, I'm afraid product specific lists are the best available.

No privacy statement.

There is no privacy statement on the SyncML site. who knows what they do with your email password (eg. GMail).

i would be careful about them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.230.255.60 (talk) 23:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Extlinks

The tables are listed with external links. This is not good. We should link to the Wikipedia articles if there are any and remove the entries for those which do not have articles. Any objections? --DanielRigal (talk) 00:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

There won't be much left of the table if you remove all entries without Wikipedia article, don't you think? IMHO we should move the table to a new article "Comparision of SyncML clients/servers", instead of removing useful information. Ghettoblaster (talk) 22:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

The problem here is that Wikipedia is not a software directory. List articles on Wikipedia are only meant to be for lists of items which are notable within the inclusion criteria. Most software is does not fulfil this. I know that software lists can be useful but they don't really belong here. I don't want to destroy something useful that people have worked on. Is there somewhere else it can be moved to? Perhaps the Open Directory Project (http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Software/) is suitable? Once moved, it can be referred to by Wikipedia articles, so it will still be possible for people to find the lists. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I know that Wikipedia is not a software directory. However, this is not just a plain list of SyncML apps/services, but a detailed comparision. If we just move the external links to the Open Directory Project and delete the rest, we would lose this useful comparison. I agree that we should change the external links into internal Wikilinks if the SyncML apps/services already have an article. I suggest that we use WP:redlinks for the others (for now). This might motivate someone who knows more about these apps/services to create articles like in these lists: List of GNOME applications, List of KDE applications, etc. If no articles are created after some amount of time, we can remove those that are obviously not that notable. Right now I can't decide which of them are notable which are not. Ghettoblaster (talk) 18:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I think that sound like a good compromise. I have no fundamental objection to redlinks but I have found that removing them is a good/easy way to deal with the people who keep adding blatantly non-notable software to list articles as a type of spam/advertising. That said, I accept that we can't let such expediency spoil a good list where redlinks are justified. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I understant that having external links point to the commercial services makes them benefit from Wikipedia for free. But on the other hand, from a user's perspective, being able to click the working hyperlinks would make using the article much easier. I mean, I came here searching for the SyncML service to use. So please re-consider. --Visitor 17:19, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Zyb no longer availabe

As of July 31 2010. I removed this section

|-
|ZYB
|Online Community
|free
|{ {yes}}
|{ {yes}}
|{ {no}}
|{ {no}}
|{ {no}}
|{ {no}}
|
|{ {yes}}
|
|
|
|Partial support for uploading picture associated to contacts (vcard photo field).

-- Egil (talk) 14:36, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Funambol Server

There should be two rows for Funambol in the servers table - Community and Carrier editions. The license, cost, and most importantly list of features are different for the different versions.

According to http://www.funambol.com/solutions/licensing.php:
Community Edition is free under the AGPL3 license, and supports
Native SyncML Client Sync
Windows Sync (PIM)
Windows Mobile Sync (PIM)
Symbian Sync (PIM)
BlackBerry Sync (PIM)
iPhone / iPod Sync (Contacts)
Android Sync (PIM)
JAVA ME Email Client

Carrier Edition is not free (I could not find a pricing template) under "a traditional commercial license", and in addition to the features of Community Edition it supports
Windows Media Sync (files, videos, pictures)
BlackBerry Media Sync (files, videos, pictures)
Android Media Sync (files, videos, pictures)
iPhone / iPad Media Sync (videos, pictures)
Certified Carrier-Grade Scalability
High Availability and Fault Tolerance
End User AJAX Portal and Server API
Gmail / Yahoo! Contacts Import
Facebook friends pictures import
Over-the-air (OTA) Device Configuration
OTA Delivery of Mobile Apps
SMS Gateway Integration
Customer Service Rep (CSR) Web-based Interface
Monthly Phone Packs (Updates)
Funambol Technical Support
Funambol Training & Professional Services
Funambol Software Maintenance

The most important distinction to me is the file/video/picture sync, which based on the client and server tables currently on Wikipedia imply that you can use the open source version to sync files.

Google SyncML going away

Google's SyncML will be gone come February 2013: http://support.google.com/a/bin/answer.py?hl=en&hlrm=en&answer=2716936

146.90.239.38 (talk) 18:10, 15 December 2012 (UTC)