I'm not sure I see your point. Yes, you are paying tax dollars for further development/research of Internet II, and I'm sure to some extent, the Internet itself. However, I'm unsure as to how your tax dollars help webmasters get paid even enough to pay their server bills. -gorman
Wow, what I had above didn't submit correctly at all. Let's try that again. -- quote -- Gorman, the subscription model will only succeed if there are no free alternatives and I believe that will not happen for a very long time yet. ---- It's already getting to that point. But that's sad; it means that quality sites are closing down. This problem needs to be corrected BEFORE these sites close, not after. -- quote -- I wouldn't pay a dime for the sites I
quote >> Gorman, the subscription model will only succeed if there are no free alternatives and I believe that will not happen for a very long time yet. > I wouldn't pay a dime for the sites I visit daily. Not because I'm a miser, but because most of the stuff I get from them, I could get for free elsewhere or because I can find "real-world" alternatives. I'd rather pay for a newspaper subscription, than to pay some news site. Last time I checked, you couldn't find a
Excellent points! "However, one good thing came out of the dot com collapse: people started to realize that they can't have their cake and eat it too." This is so very true, and I've often found myself saying the exact same thing. People have finally realized that they can't run a website or web-based company off of just ads, or out of pocket; they have now realized that in order to stay afloat they must employee some sort of a true business plan. The Internet will mo
To clarify a bit, I don't think their idea was very well thought out due to their lack of offering to paid users. They want to charge 5 dollars a month to not see ads; well, who in their right mind is going to pay that? It's all about planning, and it seems to me that this was a spur of the moment thing. Anyway, this can be done right; they just aren't doing it that way. -gorman
Well, a few variables come into play here. First, you have to look at their visitors. Most of them are strong members of the open source community, all of which who are use to getting everything for free. So kuro5hin isn't exactly the most ideal site to try out a membership system on. However, none the less, I think the way they are working their membership system leaves a lot to be desired. It is clear to me that the Internet is going to move towards this revenue model, the problem is that
I wonder if they realize alpha 7 of Winamp3 will support Winamp2.x skins?
It'd definitely be a convenience; but imagine visiting all of the skin sites and seeing the exact same skins on all of the sites. I just think it would ruin the uniqueness in quality all of the sites have. The feel of the content on every skin site differs, and I think that's something special. Again, just my thoughts -gorman
If you do end up doing this, I'd suggest an XML config file. You could allow any skin site (including the smaller ones) out there to submit an XML file that tells the program how to submit it; it would almost be like a mini-plugin. That would be neat; however, do make note of my views above -gorman
Here's the thing though, this would make the content of all of the skin sites nearly identical. Some people upload to them all, some upload some pieces to one and not the other, some only upload to one; this keeps the sites unique. People go to skin sites for the content mainly; the features, admins, ideas, etc. are all secondary reasons. If all sites have all of the files, which would end up happening if it was so easy to upload to them all, then most people would just start visiting one sit
Good work Chaz You've done an amazing job getting the page back together! I'm sure in no time at all you'll have way more uploads then you ever did. I'm glad at least one skin site was able to recover from full data loss; too bad we both couldn't have. Anyhow, best of luck with the relaunch! -gorman
WinCustomize Forums