I understand everything that you said, but I am afraid I don't agree. I am somewhat astounded that you are defending the API cost based on the fact that it prevents irrisponsible coding. And I resent the implication of your last statement. Remember: sometime any cost is too much, no matter the merit. We don't all have the luxary of ready cash.
On Mar 25, 2:51 pm, Zweitze <zwei...@gmail.com> wrote: > I tend to think that Google wants to prevent that you write software > reviewing all your keyword bids... every five minutes. If you do that > using the web interface you need thousands of people for a small > account. With the API you would only need one computer, and skills in > asynchronous programming. In the end Google would have to purchases > dozens of servers so you can squeeze another penny from your bids. > > Note: in the beginning quota were free, but... limited. The number of > quota assigned to you was determined by the money spent by your account > (s). For every million spent in a year you got 100,000 quota every > month, or something like that. > That system had the drawback that small shops would have no money for > development, testing etc., so it kept the small parties small. > > In my opinion, if you write software where its merits do not exceed > API cost, you're doing something wrong. > > On Mar 23, 9:53 am, Phil <5000...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Besides the obvious extra income that the API generates. Am I right in > > understanding that the reasoning behind charging for API usage is to > > encourage most efficient use of the service? Are there any plans for > > the API charge to be reduced/removed if the code that calls it can be > > agreed 'most efficient'? For example, Adwords Editor (as a google > > application) dose not 'cost', but must use the API. Is the main reason > > that this application is 'free' is that it is trusted google code? Or > > is it because it is a 'human' interface tool like the website? I would > > hate to be cynical and assume that the whole thing was google's > > continual resistence to other people's code using it's service. > > > Those of us who work 'back of house' trying to improve the lives of > > those having to deal with long lists of activity are being negatively > > affected by the fact that (in the case of google, and google alone) we > > are costing extra money. It maybe 'relatively' small when viewed from > > the point of view of google's overall ad revenue, however from the > > point of view of small department budgets and extra £50 a week adds > > up. Especially when the department (in my case) is one person. In this > > economic climate those of us who are not directly fee earners have to > > be very careful to not appear as a drain on company resources. I > > wonder, yet, if the API charge has lead to a developer losing their > > job? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AdWords API Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to adwords-api@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adwords-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
