Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AOL To Charge for AIM Videoconferences

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the a/s/l dept.

gwoodrow writes "In some of my college computer classes, we discussed the necessity of some sort of profit to be made eventually from major software. AIM was often sited as a rare example of a large company offering up a free service that generated almost no profit whatsoever. Well, that's all changing. It seems that AOL will begin charging for both voice and video conferencing services via the buddy list. Some AIM addicts are surely getting worried that AOL may eventually charge for regular usage."

23 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. No they wont' charge for AIM by jkeyes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why charge for AIM when you can slowly put ads on the AIM conversation windows ala ICQ.

    1. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by crazyray · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ...and what makes you think they wouldn't do both?

    2. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by jkeyes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ..and what makes you think they wouldn't do both?

      Unless you mean offer an adfree service for money and ads for free, I don't think anyone would actually pay to then be shown ads, at least anyone with some sense.

    3. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by Moofie · · Score: 5, Interesting

      *raises hand* Yep.

      I hate those damn commercials. So far, they haven't totally eroded my desire to go to the movie theater, but they're on track to do just that.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by nametaken · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Same boat here. I actually timed the commercials at over 20 minutes at one of the last movies I was at. It's insane... but I keep putting up with it. I suppose the breaking point will be when they put a commercial break in the middle of the movie and call it "intermission". I guess we'll see.

    5. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by djwavelength · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not only do most AOL users not see that there is an internet outside of AOL, they have no incentive to go look. You want chat roots? AOL has them. Discussion forums? They have them too... AOL's communities cover everything from astronomy to zoology.

      All within the disney-like atmosphere of AOL's moderation. They actually use this as a marketing point: "The internet, sanitized for your protection."

    6. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by Brissie_lad · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We've had 10 to 20min of ads before the feature at Australian movie theaters for as long as I've been going to the movies - and thats a good 25+ years.

      --
      Slackware - because apt is for the lazy.
    7. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know... I don't mind ads for Coke or Pepsi, moviephone, hollywood.com, or something immediately relevent; I can put up with that. But when I go to see Spiderman 2, I AM NOT IN THE DAMN MARKET FOR A CAR, AND LIKELY NO ONE ELSE IN THE THEATER IS EITHER!

      --
      -- My Sig is a P228.
  2. Hmmm... by Lobo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder what this means for iChat?

    Just AOL IM or all using the protocol?

    --

    -------
    Bite Me Fanboy!!
    1. Re:Hmmm... by mrloafbot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Maybe apple will start adopting other open standards like jabber. I mean come on.. they throw a few bucks tworads jabber and poof! Everybody wins, apple gets a chat protcal everybody can use... apple gets something they can update and add features too and now they wont be tied to one of the major evil empires ( microsoft,aol ) But if you go along with that thinking why dont they release a version of open office for mac, and call it Apple works ( and this time it would )

  3. What about iChat? by wheresdrew · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How will they handle this if one person is using iChat and the other's on AOL or AIM?

  4. Alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are so many alternatives and other options, why would anyone worry? Yeah, okay, you might have to tell/convince your friends to use a different service, but free is a word most people can't ignore.

    Oh, and ads are annoying as hell (reason why I use Gaim).

  5. moved away from AIM long time back.. by deadmongrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yahoo and MSN offer very good audio and video conf. Somehow I feel AIM is much more bloated than the other two. Yahoo IM has seen a lot of improvements lately. the voice is pretty clear and the video is pretty darn good. Initially it would be difficuly for some to use another messenger, not to mention add everyone in your buddy list but AIM would loose out the cost factor, atleast in audio and video conf.

    1. Re:moved away from AIM long time back.. by whoever57 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Yahoo and MSN offer very good audio and video conf.

      MSN video conferencing is a non-starter because of its use of protocols that don't easily pass through NAT routers. SIP is supported in some routers, but H323 is supported by even less.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  6. Dumb idea... by John+Seminal · · Score: 3, Interesting
    First, I do not use AOL IM. But I have friends who do, and most of them also pay for the dial up service. If AOL starts adding on the charges, I think many of them will finally get DSL or a cable modem and use some other service. This is going to backfire and hurt their sales of dial up service, which are probably declining anyways.

    And even if all the other IM services start charging money, it does not matter to me. I could bang out a simple java program which uses sockets to send IM's back and forth with my friends. Anyone that wants to be added to the list can get the program emailed to them, no problem with platform. I know it sounds simplistic, but it is so simple to write in java. I bet there would be a ton of free open source alternatives within a few days.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  7. AOL is an unnecessary middleman. by YouHaveSnail · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What, exactly, are they planning on charging for? The only resources that are really important to make chat systems work are connections at each end, and some sort of directory to tell you what computer to contact to reach a given person.

    Now, I already pay for my connection, and my ISP thanks me for it once a month. The directory service can be implemented any of a bunch of different ways, including using existing protocols.

    AOL cleverly inserted itself into instant messaging by designing AIM to make the AIM servers a sort of middleman (at least according to my limited understanding of AIM workings). They did a lot to make instant messaging easy to use and popular, and in return they got a lot of influence in that sector. But if they're going to charge, they're going to have to add some sort of greater value than what I see right now.

  8. Re:Time to switch -- seriously by realdpk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps I'm dumb (yeah, opening myself up here), but I was unable to get Jabber to work as a server or a client. I could probably force myself to learn it, but in the time spent on that I could just send an e-mail instead. IM is supposed to be easy.

    Jabber seems to use XML for communications, making debugging it via telnet a royal pain in the ass. Why people use XML is beyond me... simple "USER foo\nPASS bar\n" has been good enough for years.

    Anyways, Trillian doesn't support Jabber (at least, the free version doesn't).

  9. Re:The FCC is now officially a joke. by burns210 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    atleast they wrote down some form of regulation to impede a company leveraging their monopoly. Microsoft got off with virtually no regulation, and neither AOL or Microsoft have to actually DO anything that will impede their monopolies.

  10. Actually, some people have to pay already.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Recently AOL changed their policy to lock out the AIM accounts of people who created those accounts while they were paying AOL members. These AIM accounts used to work fine, even after cancelling your AOL account (as you would expect, since AIM is a "free" service).

    Unfortunately, now you need to sign up again (and pay $$) to "rescue" your AIM account (and your AIM id, which everyone knows you as). And you need to remain paying, or else.... Yes, you get locked out again.

    Brilliant plan AOL.

    Aq

  11. Re:No they wont' charge for AIM: The real reason by aka-ed · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Charging for plain old chat would send the business community scurrying to other options. That would kill their plans to make money on vidconferencing and domain name-space.

    It's called a loss leader -- and why would they stop now when they've got enough critical mass among their captive market to launch a pay service within the free service?

    --
    I survived the Dick Cheney Presidency 7 to 9 AM 7-21-07
  12. Unless... by Cyno01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google offers gIM based on jabber with the launch of gmail. A custom client that could interface with gmail like MSN messenger does with hotmail, but based on an open standard would be great, and google has the recognition to draw people from AIM or Yahoo Messenger. It'd be even better if they offered add ons to services such as GAIM or trillian that combine all the major IM services. *sigh* Wishful thinking...

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  13. Re:It's like basic cable by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Much of Cartoon Network's "Adult Swim" lineup consists of 15 minute long shows, with no commercial breaks. There are, of course, commercials between shows, but surely you have better things to do with your time than watch those.

    Like reading slashdot...

  14. It's time for an international standard on Instant by digitalgimpus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wrote this the other day, if anyone is interested:

    It's time for an international standard on Instant Messaging