Many Internet services displays advertisement on their websites and use it as the main revenue generating source. The revenue that is generated is then used to cover the hosting costs, pay authors and engineers, and maybe even the site operator. Many sites would not simply be there without advertisement, or at least not in the form they are currently.
Microsoft, just like Google and other Internet companies, displays advertisement on several of its properties. When it comes to the email services Hotmail and Outlook, advertisement is displayed to free users of the service. Microsoft, unlike Google, does not scan emails to better target ads on its sites, but advertisement is still displayed nevertheless.
If you do not like that at all and prefer a cleaner interface without ads on Hotmail or Outlook.com, then you can subscribe to an ad-free Outlook and Hotmail for $19.99 a year.
What you get for that?
The term graphical ad is confusing, as it may mean that textual ads can still be displayed on both sites. It is not really clear if that is just a bad choice of words but I'd assume that Microsoft would not charge its users $19.99 for an ad-free environment when it turns out that the environment is not ad-free after all.
Outlook or Hotmail accounts expire after 270 days of inactivity. A subscription prevents this from happening so that accounts will never expire as long as the subscription is active.
The main question is this: would you pay $19.99 for an ad-free experience on Outlook or Hotmail? Or on other sites and services like Gmail? Or are ads something that you do not mind, considering that you get the service for free as a consequence? Or do you use other means to get rid of advertisement, ad blockers for instance? (via Caschy)
Ghacks is a technology news blog that was founded in 2005 by Martin Brinkmann. It has since then become one of the most popular tech news sites on the Internet with five authors and regular contributions from freelance writers.