« Audible.com | Main | Triumph of the Nerds »


I don’t understand why Microsoft thought they had a valid argument when arguing for “open standards? regarding IM compatibility across the market. Like AOL later argued, Microsoft has a lock on the Windows software program, which not to mention makes a lot of money for their company. A company like Microsoft has gotten so big it feels like it can do basically whatever it wants—including hacking AOL’s IM operating system. Personally, I think that these two companies (among others) sought out to utilize instant messaging just like it were talking on the phone. However, it doesn’t seem like you can charge the same rates as talking on the phone…or charge at all for that matter. This seems to be a result of services offering instant messaging for free and now they are unable to charge for something people are used to having at no additional expense. If services did decide in the future to charge people for the use of instant messaging (outside of the costs of obtaining a computer and the software that comes with it), it would seem necessary that Trillian help by offering interoperability—all the services must be able to talk to each other, otherwise many will be hesitant to spend money on something that will restrict them.