AOL Instant Messenger, more commonly known at AIM, used to be simple. AIM allowed someone to create a screen name, add buddies to the buddy list, and chat the night away. Those days are long gone.
Today to fit into the hip 'AIM World' a user must fill out their buddy info, have some witty away messages, and find a good buddy icon. It seems that the creators of AIM have changed their habits as well. They used to sit around and feel good because people liked the product they spent so much time developing - these days they are sitting around watching the money roll it. Expanding the monetization of AIM seems to be the most recent goal of the developers.
As seen in the picture above - an advertisement bar has been added to the bottom of the buddy info window (though, I can't say when...they slipped that one by me). Clearly the most effective option would have been to place advertisements in the Instant Message window so they would be viewed very frequently, but obviously that is much more intrusive, especially since an ad already appears at the top of the Buddy List window.
AIM is provided as a free service so it doesn't bother me that they host advertisements in their product, but it's beginning to become a little more concerning. Out of the three main windows of AIM (Buddy List, Instant Message Window, Buddy Info Window), two (Buddy List, Buddy Info) are now displaying ads. It started on the buddy list with a small square ad and now has expanded to another window with a small horizontal banner ad. I hope that they don't plan on crowding the IM window in the future with any ads because while I am a very loyal user, I think that would be the point where I begin shopping around for a new service to use.
The point I am trying to make is this: There is no problem with monetizing a free service - it makes a lot of sense. Giving something away for free can only last so long without funds...hence the ads. With that said, there is a fine line between paying the bills (and perhaps making a little on top!) and trying to turn a big profit. As soon as people realize that the developers are trying to do more than fund the service, they will likely be turned off and look for another alternative....which are not hard to find these days.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Monetizing AOL Instant Messenger
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Commit to Yourself With a Commitment Contract
Having trouble losing weight? Want to quit smoking? A commitment contract may help you succeed. It's not a new concept - contracts have been around for many years, but how many people have bound themselves by a contract which requires self-improvement? Brilliant!
The idea of a commitment contract is very simple: 1. Decide on a goal to achieve 2. Decide on a punishment in the case you don't succeed at your goal.
Let's explore an example - when I first heard about this I was reading an article about two buddies who made a pact to lose weight. The wager was $500 dollars per week. If one failed to lose the required amount or didn't keep the required amount off, they would have to pay $500 to the other party, who would then donate it to a charity of choice. After a year both had lost weight and kept it off with no payments necessary.
The Internet age makes it is easy to write a commitment contract. Stickk.com provides an easy to use website which allows you to send money in and track progress. It even offers public humiliation as an incentive.
It's an interesting concept - but I feel like the most important part of this whole deal is the friend. If you have someone doing it with you it adds an extra incentive. If you sign up on SticK.com and have an off week...I feel it would be too tempting to lie to save your money. All it would take is one time to convince yourself it's ok to cheat...and then all would be lost, just like cheating on a diet. A friend would keep you honest.
Need extra incentive for that hard to reach goal? Why not choose to donate the money to a charity you dislike? How about you agree to send an anonymous check to someone you dislike? I think it would work...if you had someone keeping you honest. Very interesting concept.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
The Armchair Economist
Back in college I read a book called The Armchair Economist. It raised some very interesting points. The most intriguing is the idea that airbags and seat belts actually cause more accidents.
People used to be scared to drive recklessly - In the event of an accident the driver would be thrown into a hard steering wheel or dashboard and through the windshield with little chance of survival. Today, drivers know that airbags and seat belts will greatly increase their chances of survival. The result is riskier driving habits with more accidents that are less fatal. So seatbelts and airbags actually cause there to be more of a bad thing (tho, slightly less harmful than before...).
Does this same phenomenon occur in other situations? Can rapid advancements in technology cause careless and hasty product development? I would venture to say that this might have been Microsoft's issue with the often criticized Vista..just some food for thought.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Why Rock Band is Pure Genius
Chalk this up as another episode of "Damn, I should've thought of that!"
But seriously...DAMN! The magic formula is now incredibly obvious: Take something that is amazingly (let me repeat: amazingly) out of reach for 99.9999% of population, and just make it more achievable.
That’s it???
It appears so. Think about it - Monopoly allows you to buy rich properties like the board walk (can you really buy a whole board walk?)...Super Mario lets you rescue a damsel in distress...and Sonic the hedgehog lets you gather hundreds of pure golden rings.
Make something previously unachievable almost a sure thing...and you'll make a previously unattainable amount of money in a short time. Rock Band is pure gold.
Blog-Wide Disclosure Policy
This policy is valid from 14 March 2008
This blog does not contain any content which might present a conflict of interest.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Can't Teach An Old Dog New Tricks
You can't teach an old dog new tricks, right? Little old ladies seem to be set in their ways - I think at this point I have come to terms with that as a fact of life.
With that said I wasn't surprised to see the little old lady, let's call her Margie, pull out her checkbook at the grocery store this afternoon. Unfortunately I was already past the point of changing check-out stands since my groceries were on the counter and there was a line behind me. Ugh!
Margie not only was trying to use a check to pay for her groceries, but she wanted to get $50 cash back by writing a check bigger than her total due. Isn't that exactly what a debit card does? If a debit card isn't safe enough for you - why not try out a check card. I have one and it is wonderful.
Instead of the normal 3-5 minute checkout process I was stuck standing there with Margie for 15-20 minutes. Quite miserable. The store can't risk alienating their customers who choose to use checks...but in the process they cause quite an annoyance for the larger percentage of customers who choose to use a less-antiquated form of payment.
In my opinion this is the equivalent of Speed Pass on the toll roads. Speed Pass is so much faster that they needed to create dedicated lanes to maximize efficiency. Why can't grocery stores have one or two lanes that are 'Check Friendly' and the rest be 'Cash/Credit Only'? Those people who insist on using checks might have to wait in line a little bit longer, but maybe that will cause the proverbial light bulb go on - who knows, maybe that will solve the problem all together!
Paper is so 1999.
