RSS
Twitter
Yahoo Wants Users To Pay For IM Interop
from the sounds-positively-bad dept
Yahoo is apparently considering the idea of offering interoperability with other instant messaging platforms - but only if you're willing to pay. Of course, they (and every other IM provider) should have been offering IM interoperability years ago - but seemed to disregard the idea that the network effect would be a good thing. Now they want to charge people for a feature they should have added years ago? Doesn't seem worth it. They're adding an artificial barrier for no particular reason other than they hope to squeeze a few extra pennies out of users, rather than realize the overall benefits of letting more people communicate with each other. It's more "walled garden" thinking on an internet that is increasingly recognizing the value of open communication. It may net them a few pennies in the short run, but it just opens up a wider opportunity for others in the long term.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Benefits of the walled garden
The more open an IM scheme, the more potential for IM spam.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Benefits of the walled garden
Yeah. Um, that's it.
You need to make up your own language, and only speak it instead of english, because then it makes it so that people can't swear at you.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Why pay when a better product does it for free?
I have been using Trillian for years (for free) and it lets me connect to AIM, Yahoo, MSN, ICQ and IRC all at the same time. 1 chat client, 1 buddy list, 0 cost.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Why pay when a better product does it for free
Heaven forbid you mention Trillian. Mike here is already aware of it. Next story.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Why pay when a better product does it for free
can I mention Jabber safely? :)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment