Lee Revell wrote: >On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 16:59 -0500, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > > >>I'm afraid of management getting caught up in hype, offering a service >>to users and down the road realizing that they are locked into a >>proprietary protocol. I just did some googling and realize my fears are >>founded. The skype protocol is entirely closed as far as I can tell. >> >> > >It's only a matter of time before someone reverse engineers it. I would >not be worried. > > > is true ... and i know people disagree, but i don't see much point in the Skype creators keeping it closed-source - seeing as most people aknowledge that it is mainly about marketing, then as soon as skype has that market-share, what would be the point in keeping it closed/proprietary? i mean, once the majority of people are using Skype's program, why would anyone change to a different one (of which there is bound to be many after opening the source) when *everyone* they know is using Skype? also, the avalanche and speed of improvements that would eventuate would mean the next step in Skype's evolution after they've obtained a monopoly market-share - and it would almost be a self-perpetuating cycle. that's what i reckon, anyway, though i doubt the Skype team would see it that way :( however - when someone *does* reverse-engineer it, they might not have much choice! shayne if skype is "evil", then i would prefer a "good" program
