I'm just curious here...
What other type of IM is there.. I thought all IM's used text?
(I'm not being a smartass... I feel like I'm missing something)
I was referring to file transfer, video, and audio conferencing, stuff that takes considerably more bandwidth that is also included in the MSN and other IM clients.
This is nothing to do with protocols and standards, it's to do with who uses a service that Microsoft pays for. Would you allow anyone to walk in off the street and make calls on your phone?
I agree with your first point. I think a more accurate analogy would be "Would a public establishment allow anyone to walk in off the street and make calls on their courtesy phone?" MSN is getting something out of providing the free service even if it is not direct cash, it's adding value to the MS user. A public establishment would love to get you in the building.
The fact that one party on the end of any IM is not using the MSN IM client and instead using GAIM etc.; (a) Costs MS little for text only messages, and (b) still provides value to the MS user being able to talk to their friends. As an avid GAIM user I hope MS resolves to allow some connectivity to third party clients even if it's text IM only.
Cryptonomicon is a great book. Along the same lines as your book analogy IBM probably has the intelligence to know what is going on behind the scenes at SCO. This intelligence would be much like American cryptanalysts who had the scoop on the Japanese navy but managed to keep a lid on it until they could take maximum advantage of it.
This is what you get what you cross NHRA with Tool Time. Building stuff like this is time consuming, but especially good fun for children to watch and learn about innovation.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm just curious here...
What other type of IM is there.. I thought all IM's used text?
(I'm not being a smartass... I feel like I'm missing something)
I was referring to file transfer, video, and audio conferencing, stuff that takes considerably more bandwidth that is also included in the MSN and other IM clients.
"Help, Help, IM being repressed"
This is nothing to do with protocols and standards, it's to do with who uses a service that Microsoft pays for. Would you allow anyone to walk in off the street and make calls on your phone?
I agree with your first point. I think a more accurate analogy would be "Would a public establishment allow anyone to walk in off the street and make calls on their courtesy phone?" MSN is getting something out of providing the free service even if it is not direct cash, it's adding value to the MS user. A public establishment would love to get you in the building.
The fact that one party on the end of any IM is not using the MSN IM client and instead using GAIM etc.; (a) Costs MS little for text only messages, and (b) still provides value to the MS user being able to talk to their friends. As an avid GAIM user I hope MS resolves to allow some connectivity to third party clients even if it's text IM only.
Cryptonomicon is a great book. Along the same lines as your book analogy IBM probably has the intelligence to know what is going on behind the scenes at SCO.
This intelligence would be much like American cryptanalysts who had the scoop on the Japanese navy but managed to keep a lid on it until they could take maximum advantage of it.
This is what you get what you cross NHRA with Tool Time. Building stuff like this is time consuming, but especially good fun for children to watch and learn about innovation.