On Mar 26, 7:15 pm, Phil <[email protected]> wrote: > I understand everything that you said, but I am afraid I don't agree. > I am somewhat astounded that you are defending the API cost based on > the fact that it prevents irrisponsible coding.
No, I never said it prevents irresponsible coding. The cost-principle is just a way of allocating a limited resources to parties that want to use the API. The allocation scheme is based on economics - you only purchase the resources that you can afford. The last thing that I want is an unlimited access to its functions - I think it will lead to a massive degradation of performance, to a level that my customers will not accept. (Note: this argument is derived from a discussion of paid parking in the city where I live. A lot of people disagreed with the paid parking spots. The argument was: imagine what happens when parking became free... no parking spot would be available at all!) > And I resent the implication of your last statement. > Remember: sometime any cost is too much, no matter the merit. > We don't all have the luxary of ready cash. If you don't mind my asking: What kind of merit does your software have, when its API cost exceeds the price customers want to pay? Note: The developers guide states that certain parties may be eligible for free quota. (See http://code.google.com/apis/adwords/docs/developer/index.html#adwords_api_intro_signing , "Although some advertisers ..." Maybe that's the route you should be taking. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AdWords API Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
