JTK wrote:
>
> DeMoN LaG wrote:
> >
> > Jason Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Feb 2002:
> >
> > > applications to undermine their system? They have created their own
> > > IM network, and I think that they have the right to ask users to
> > > use the AOL software. I don't think it's anti-competitive.
> >
> > I agree entirely. I think they could strike a deal with some client
> > makers like Trillian, and say "Hey, you guys can freeload, but you can't
> > give people the software for free and not have ads in it and so we get
> > no money and higher operating costs on it". Either Trillian's makers
> > have to pay $xxx per month or something as a "licensing fee", or they
> > have to run ads for AOL in their software, like AOL has in it's software
>
> Christ, this planet is populated with nothing but dumbasses I swear.
> For whatever reason, you pay for AOL's "service". Ok, fine. So you
> then think you should have ads pumped at you? You're paying for an
> ad-pump service?
>
> Lambs to the fricken slaughter. Why don't you lobby congress that you
> want your taxes raised too while you're at it?
I didn't see anyone saying they were paying for IM or IM service. Do you
have a reading comprehension problem?
However, the TANSTAFL principle applies. You don't pay money and you
learn to ignore ads. More than 50 years of commercial TV proves that it
works. It's a no brainer that the same idea can work on the Internet.
Indeed, TANSTAFL is the rule. It is not my rule, Grasshopper. It is
Nature's rule.
Chuck
--
... The times have been,
That, when the brains were out,
the man would die. ... Macbeth
Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
