Actually clients like Everybuddy also have their own systems (Jabber/[IRC]) which users can use to connect to each other. So if AOL's networks didn't exist then Everybuddy users would still have instant messaging. The AOL client people on the other hand wouldn't. A better analogy would be the following: Suppose I live somewhere where I can use the phone for free as a service of my government. You are saying that I shouldn't be allowed to call anyone in an area where they have to pay for the phone because I don't have to pay for it... The argument could even be made that clients like Everybuddy are adding value to AOL's network by allowing their client's users to connect with more people...
DeMoN LaG wrote: > JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED], on 02 Feb 2002: > > >>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? >> >> > > I don't pay for AOL's service: > http://www.aim.com/get_aim/win/latest_win.adp?aolperm=h > http://www.aim.com/get_aim/linux/latest_linux.adp?aolperm=h > > Did you pay for AIM? I get AIM for free because at the top of my buddy > list there is a little ad banner that I never look at. And there are a > bunch of things that pop up and annoy me by default. Trillian doesn't > have these. Trillian has no advertising at all. Thus, AOL pays money > for bandwith and networking expenses for their AIM network, and they > don't get money from advertising because no one uses the AIM client and > AOL gets screwed out of money. That's like saying it's OK for people to > just walk into my food store and just eat produce off the shelves, > because we provide the service of selling food so you should be able to > eat it for free. The logic doesn't hold water. In fact, it doesn't > hold anything > >
