18 Mar
2005
18 Mar
'05
7:57 p.m.
Lee Revell wrote:
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 16:59 -0500, Eric Dantan
Rzewnicki wrote:
is true ...
and i know people disagree, but i don't see much point in the Skype
creators keeping it closed-source - seeing as most people aknowledge
that it is mainly about marketing, then as soon as skype has that
market-share, what would be the point in keeping it closed/proprietary?
i mean, once the majority of people are using Skype's program, why would
anyone change to a different one (of which there is bound to be many
after opening the source) when *everyone* they know is using Skype?
also, the avalanche and speed of improvements that would eventuate would
mean the next step in Skype's evolution after they've obtained a
monopoly market-share - and it would almost be a self-perpetuating
cycle. that's what i reckon, anyway, though i doubt the Skype team would
see it that way :(
however - when someone *does* reverse-engineer it, they might not have
much choice!
shayne
if skype is "evil", then i would prefer a "good" program
I'm afraid of management getting caught up in
hype, offering a service
to users and down the road realizing that they are locked into a
proprietary protocol. I just did some googling and realize my fears are
founded. The skype protocol is entirely closed as far as I can tell.
It's only a matter of time before someone reverse engineers it. I would
not be worried.