4 ms·

That's a really sad development. If companies like Google or Facebook had been as big in the 90s I bet we wouldn't have E-mail but a set of proprietary, incompa

That's a really sad development. If companies like Google or Facebook had been as big in the 90s I bet we wouldn't have E-mail but a set of proprietary, incompatible E-mail like services. It seems these giants get big with the help of standards and then they kill them once they have enough momentum. "Embrace, extend, extinguish" is not only a Microsoft thing.

kazen44 5y ago
another good example of this is Google's influence in regards to web standards. things like http2/3 and quic for one. and their influence on the browser market aswell.
- musingsole 5y ago
  It's now extending into the very infrastructure of software development with kubernetes.
  - spc476 5y ago
    it's just Google externalizing their training costs.
gorgoiler 5y ago
We had a set of proprietary incompatible email-like services. AOL and Compuserve — let’s use numeric addresses so it’s kinda like phone numbers, right?! Also, whatever MSN tried to be when it first escaped from the lab. Didn’t Novell have some kind of email-substitute messaging product that they tried to jam into their proprietary TCPIP competitor, as well?
- genewitch 5y ago
  All from at least 2.5/3.0 on was username@aol.com for email. They were also not good at security, as you could spoof emails coming from any domain if you used their smtp servers directly - but they had regular email addresses. I never used compuserve or prodigy, however ICQ used numerical user IDs.
marcosdumay 5y ago
The original email, from the 70's was a standardization of the set of proprietary, incompatible email-like services people had at the time.
- gilmore606 5y ago
  anyone else ever have a UUCP bang-path email address? good times.
tomcooks 5y ago
It's in the nature of capitalism to optimize and eat whatever resource is available to promote growth, companies are the result of this process and so is the forementioned EEE strategy. Noncompliance to said strategies is how you keep the sharks uninterested. This means don't use Facebook, don't promote Facebook, don't use Facebook logins in your app, etc.

kazen44 5y ago

another good example of this is Google's influence in regards to web standards. things like http2/3 and quic for one. and their influence on the browser market aswell.

musingsole 5y ago
It's now extending into the very infrastructure of software development with kubernetes.
- spc476 5y ago
  it's just Google externalizing their training costs.

gorgoiler 5y ago

We had a set of proprietary incompatible email-like services. AOL and Compuserve — let’s use numeric addresses so it’s kinda like phone numbers, right?! Also, whatever MSN tried to be when it first escaped from the lab. Didn’t Novell have some kind of email-substitute messaging product that they tried to jam into their proprietary TCPIP competitor, as well?

genewitch 5y ago
All from at least 2.5/3.0 on was username@aol.com for email. They were also not good at security, as you could spoof emails coming from any domain if you used their smtp servers directly - but they had regular email addresses. I never used compuserve or prodigy, however ICQ used numerical user IDs.

marcosdumay 5y ago

The original email, from the 70's was a standardization of the set of proprietary, incompatible email-like services people had at the time.

gilmore606 5y ago
anyone else ever have a UUCP bang-path email address? good times.

tomcooks 5y ago

It's in the nature of capitalism to optimize and eat whatever resource is available to promote growth, companies are the result of this process and so is the forementioned EEE strategy. Noncompliance to said strategies is how you keep the sharks uninterested. This means don't use Facebook, don't promote Facebook, don't use Facebook logins in your app, etc.