In article <1795785.3JnrJO2cCl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > I don't know, I find it hard to take phone initiatives with their own
> >> > IRC channel seriously. :)
> >>
> >> Haha. Well, it least they are social. That is a quality of openness.
> >> WordPress has IRC channel and there's another dicussion group I'm involved
> >> in which uses IRC. They are fairly reputable people. The content and
> >> writing style is usually less formal... well, and I guess it's no
> >> exception to the way I treat UseNet posts... pretty much the same as IM.
> >
> > Yeah, but you don't see #nokia or #sonyericsson. Not that it matters,
> > just was the first thing I saw on their page. :)
>
> Yeah, I know what you mean. To me, IRC is always associated with MIRC which I
> first used when I was about 14. It was the first time I chatted online and I
> can still remember that it was with someone in Holland. I've barely used it
> since.
>
> Anyway, you might find the following interesting...
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/seekingalpha/070116/24232_id.html?.v=1
>
> "don't believe for a minute that Jobs's closed-box approach to cell phones is
> the right one. Growth is driven by choice. The Internet grew because, for
> the 80th time, it was the platform with no platform vendor..."
Actually, the "no platform vendor" aspect of the Internet has only
recently been a facet of it, with sites such as YouTube, Digg,
delicious, flickr and so on. Actual internet services is a pretty new
phenomenon and isn't really driving the internet, but taking advantage
of the drive that the major players already plowed with Google,
Netscape, Internet Explorer, iTunes Store and so on.
--
Sandman[.net]
|
|
