| 6:18 pm on Aug 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
|"We simply cannot find a way to justify continuing to work on it, or pay its network costs, which are not inconsequential," the post read. |
I wonder what's changed since that line in their previous announcement?
| 7:04 pm on Aug 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
| 8:21 pm on Aug 13, 2009 (gmt 0)|
before reporting a termination of a web service maybe the press should adhere to a waiting period after it has shut down to prevent such lame pr stunts.
| 1:22 am on Aug 14, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I would be interested in seeing the actual costs of running tr.im;
| 1:23 am on Aug 14, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I think they want sell it and to prove its worth they should keep going.
| 2:52 pm on Aug 14, 2009 (gmt 0)|
I am sure the cost is not too high to run it. I was surprised that they announced it would be shutting down. Right away it felt like a marketing ploy. What about you guys..did you feel the same?
| 10:47 am on Aug 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Won't the costs just be basic hosting/ server costs... maybe $50 a month? Whatever the cost, Surely they'd raise it from a simple advert on the homepage or a dontations box even!
|brotherhood of LAN|
| 7:16 pm on Aug 17, 2009 (gmt 0)|
Costs can't be that high. Not much overhead in a longurl->hash->shorturl conversion.
Sending 3xx responses is light on bandwidth.