AOL doesn't want to share
from the childishness dept
So now that Microsoft has finally unveiled its instant messaging service (which includes the ability to talk with AOL instant messenger users) and Yahoo! has a beta of pager that also has that feature, AOL has blocked their access. This is just plain silly and greedy of AOL. It's like making sure that no one can send AOL users email because they want everyone to use AOL email only. I hope they come to their senses.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Selfish? No!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
I'm no big fan of Microsoft, and I never have been, but in this case they're doing the right thing. They want the system to be usable by anyone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
The only thing AOL has on MS is its channel at this point in time. If AOL opens up the protocol, then when the next version of Windows arrives (which will of course include an instant messaging app), MS will extend the protocol, thereby eradicating AOL's channel advantage (since AOL will be caught playing catch-up trying to reverse engineer the extensions). If they get into that game, they lose (unless they think they can sign up enough people before the following Windows version to ship the MS-extension-compliant client - possible, but risky).
Besides, there are alternative ICQ clients out there so there's definitely a choice (not sure about AIM). Let's suck up the short term pain for some long term gain. And don't even mention and IETF efforts in this space (PIPR/IMPP), for risk of making me laugh. Without an extension mechanism and a means to enforce it, these standards mean nothing strategically.
It's cool to see Microsoft on the receiving end of these tactics. They've been dishing it out for far too long.
MB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
If Microsoft tries to takeover and bend the standard so everyone else gets screwed that's a different story, but they haven't done that.
In the end, the important thing in my view is the end user, and its in the end user's best interest to be able to communicate with everyone using one piece of software, just like email. If I had to have an AOL email account to send and receive email from other AOLers and a Yahoo! mail account to send and receive email to other Yahoo!ers and a MSN account to send and receive email to other Microsofties, wouldn't that be ridiculous?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
But, in our zeal to arrive at this happy place, let's not make any naive mistakes that could jeopardize choice in the future. Blindly opening up that protocol right now could give Microsoft leverage enough to co-opt it by implementing a client that did AIM+ICQ+MSstuff. You could *guarantee* that MS would not release the spec to their extensions. Then, in the next version of Windows, they bundle their messaging client which magiclly disables any preinstalled ICQ or AIM (but don't worry, they'll release a patch 4 months later, and post it with no public fanfare in an obscure corner of their website). Then, by the magic of network effects, everybody uses it. Voila, AOL loses.
No thanks. I'd rather suck up some short term pain for long term gain.
The jury's still out on whether AOL is much better - but at least they haven't proven things one way or the other yet, unlike MS.
MB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
Besides, I may very well be proven wrong on this one, but I don't believe MS will magically take over this market over night. Sure, they've come back before, but this is a market with a huge entrenched audience, and getting people to switch is not easy...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
Only until MS bundles their client with the next version of Windows. Then it's AOL playing catch-up to try and replicate MS's extensions, and MS doing the tweaking of their servers to lock out AOL people.
MB
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
However, Microsoft can (and almost certainly will) include its messenger client in the next version of Windows *anyway*. What difference does it make whether or not the other can communicate with it? I think that's a separate issue. At least with some way of communicating *now* then people will be able to use the systems together. If we simply block it now, how is that any better than someoen blocking it later?
I think it's interesting that everyone automatically jumps to the conclusion that Microsoft will want to block everyone else out of its messenger product, when right now they're doing the exact opposite! The fact that they'll bundle it with Windows will happen whether or not they can communicate with others, and I think people will have a much stronger case if all of the clients can communicate with each other before hand and Microsoft is seen moving *against* that. Whereas, waiting until Microsoft has it included, and *then* trying to force *them* to open up the standard is never going to happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
And the war continues...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Selfish? No!
Doing the "exact opposite" has been their MO for their entire existence. "Embrace and extend" starts by embracing. A wolf in sheep's clothing, for sure.
MB
[ link to this | view in thread ]