In a blog post late Friday, the Yahoo Messenger team announced that it’s cutting several features from the instant-messaging service as part of the broader attempt to bring new focus to the company. One of the features that will be going away is interoperability with Microsoft’s Windows Live Messenger.

The connection between Yahoo Messenger and Windows Live Messenger was a relatively big deal when it happened back in 2006, letting users of either service connect and communicate with users of the other, but it’s not as critical in this era of pervasive social networking and Facebook messaging.

Yahoo writes in the post: “Yahoo! Messenger will no longer be interoperable with Microsoft Windows Live Messenger as of December 14, 2012. Microsoft buddies will still appear on your Messenger contact list, but they will be greyed out, and if you try to send instant messages to them, the messages will not be delivered.”

As noted by AllThingsD, the decision to end the connection between the two IM services isn’t a huge surprise, given that Microsoft is in the process shuttering Windows Live Messenger and moving users to Skype for IM and video calls. That change will take effect in the first quarter of next year.

Microsoft and Yahoo remain partners in the Internet search business, for now.

Other Yahoo Messenger features getting the axe include public chat rooms, Pingbox, and some voice calling features.

Like what you're reading? Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline


  • B_Sack

    oh noes!

  • Guest

    We think this is for the best. Yahoo! Messenger lacks the audience to be viable, but Skype is a more vibrant partner. Win-win.

    • Guest

      Translation: we at MSFT want to reap the benefits from an Apple-like walled garden as soon as possible so let’s kill any partnerships (see a Surface-like pattern there?) and force as many MSFT users as possible to use crappy insecure Skype so MSFT can lock them in and refrain them from dumping MSFT for something that talks Open Standards and does not require a 90’s fat client to use. What’s next? An MSFT phone? Oh wait…

      • mouthbreather

        How does MS moving users from one of their services, WLM, to another, Skype (that happens to run across most popular platforms), create an Apple-like walled garden? It’s the logical decision given what they spent for Skype, its greater brand awareness, its cross platform nature, and MS’s future plans for it. How does Surface kill partnerships any more than virtually every major OEM embracing Android, or HP buying WebOS and promoting that at one point, or Intel supplying Apple and working on various non-MS OSes? It’s sounds like you’re the one still stuck in the 90’s. Today most players are comfortable being partners and competitors. See Google’s strategy if you’re confused.

        And “90’s fat client”? Skype runs on everything from mobile to desktop. Crappy and insecure? Apparently hundreds of millions of users disagree with you about it being crappy, and MS has made massive investments in Skype’s infrastructure to improve its performance and security. Which of course anyone but a troll would be able to acknowledge. Oh wait…

        • Data
          • mouthbreather

            If a vulnerability (since corrected) equaled insecure, then every service and OS would qualify. Oh, and nice dodge on everything else, including the upgraded infrastructure and improved security.

          • Bones

            The upgraded infrastructure aka SuperNodes run on Linux after apparently MSFT figured out they could not make it work on Windows. Rather embarrassing and funny you should stress the infrastructure point when MSFT’s own touted “server” OS can’t handle a bit of Skype traffic and has to resort Linux.

          • mouthbreather

            Skype’s back end always did. The topic was the upgraded infrastructure, not what OS it runs on. And I haven’t seen anything suggesting MS evaluated a move to Windows Server instead, only to conclude it couldn’t handle it and wasn’t possible. Maybe you can share your source for that?

          • Guest

            I don’t need to dodge on the “improved security”: I gave it all the professional respect it deserves.

            Yeah, vendors have vulns all the time, but this is on the high end of stupid: very easy to exploit and gives full control of accounts.

            And if this vuln was there after the “improved security” that doesn’t speak too much to the “improvements”. That just says that the improvements either can’t find crappy old bugs (that others outside can easily find) or they’re actually introducing brand new vulns.

            Last time I checked, you couldn’t hijack Google accounts this easily. And Google (and everyone else with a clue) has added two step verification to protect accounts. Something Microsoft refuses to do.

            Finally, it’s nice to see that Skype is a giant step backwards compared to, say, Messenger, by enabling IM worms to spread once again: Messenger at least disabled links.

            So much for that “improved security”.

        • Bones

          Clearly you are in denial. Obviously MSFT wants to become another Apple including the lock-in walled-garden. Ballmer has just about spelled that out. Did you miss the memo? This is just another step towards that goal. The Surface, Surface Pro and MSFT’s upcoming phone will really strengthen the MSFT partner eco-system. Or, more likely, maybe not. The very blunt comments from Acer’s CEO wrt Surface are unprecedented and show the size of the cracks in the MSFT partner eco-system. The lacklustre quotes from MSFT partners wrt Windows 8 sales and market uptake are telling. Obviously Google partners with a lot of companies. More importantly everybody wants to partner with Google (ok, maybe except MSFT and Apple). Why would you want to partner with MSFT when you can partner with Google? Or even Apple? Android and iOS keep growing like crazy. Guess that’s what happens when consumers and businesses can vote with their dollars in a market that has not been monopolized so they aren’t locked-in.

          • mouthbreather

            Your inability to defend your lack of logic != my being in denial.

Job Listings on GeekWork