Replies

That's the impetus behind stuff like ActiveX and ASP.NET - to create channels where you can do cool stuff, but only if you use MS browsers and MS servers. So if you want to do that cool stuff, you have to buy the server from MS, because they sure aren't giving that away for free, unlike the client end.

Exactly, but you'll have to convince others on this thread of that. And just because you managed to pull that off, doesn't mean that your catbird situation will continue even if somebody else starts offering a better free client end and less and less people have your client in their home. You may still offer good stuff, but you have lost control of the power to create cool stuff for YOUR client. The other guys might not be so willing to develop their new market dominating client in the way you want in the future. Things change, times move on. I don't think Microsoft is dumb enough to ignore Firefox.

Right - if you lose control of the client end, there's not so much incentive for those broadcasters to spend extra money on your studios. After all, what's the point, if most people can't receive that cool content anyway?

There's nothing inherently wrong with that business model, of course - if you're in the business of selling software, you want to create some way of differentiating yourself from the pack, something that makes your stuff more attractive than the other guy's. It only becomes a problem when you get into - ahem ;) - monopoly situations.