Linked by Howard Fosdick on Thu 8th Nov 2012 02:24 UTC
Windows Microsoft is discontinuing Windows Live Messenger in 1st quarter 2013, forcing users to switch to Skype. Most would want to switch to Skype anyway with its more advanced capabilities, and the switch makes sense to Microsoft, since they purchased Skype for $8.5 billion last year. However, the move may be seen as typical Redmondian high-handedness by those using Messenger with dial-up. Technically Skype works with dial-up but in practice most agree you really need broadband for decent use. Will everyone view Messenger as replaceable by Skype?
Permalink for comment 541378
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by shmerl
by zima on Thu 8th Nov 2012 06:38 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by shmerl"
Member since:

"Winner" was already in my post between quotation marks for a reason.

But there's another scenario: a mild balkanisation of sorts (also related to story), what's already the case - ICQ lives on in CIS, ~western mobile has its WhatsApp, ~eastern mobile has LINE, my place has an IM network essentially limited to this one country. People don't care that much for communicating with non-buddies; conversely, they care where their buddies are, not much about tech aspects.

Then there's... Skype, tying it all together a bit (in the sense that, from what I see, it's "oh, you don't use that IM network? Then let's skype!"); and people seem mostly content with the way things are, they certainly don't care much that Skype for example is closed (oh yeah, and a non-federated ~XMPP network is what took off in western mobile world)

Email emerged, matured in a different era, with vastly different demographic.

Reply Parent Score: 3