Talk:Dyn (company)

Advertising? Comparisons?

I'm a little concerned that maybe the article seems to be written like an advertisement. I'd be glad for this company if it really is this good, but the way the article is written makes me skeptical since I can't find anything negative. I like that No-IP's article seems more balanced. What do other people think?

It'd also be nice if there was a comparison page about this kind of service, but I've too little experience to write one myself yet.ZeniffMartineau (talk) 08:28, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree, this is just a free advertisement for DynDNS. Don't get me wrong, they offer a great service, but this is just an advert. POV surely Gezzed (talk) 13:12, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I've pointed two buy outs they've done in this year. In the one case with some users expressing the downgrading of the services. In the other the user concerned about new limitations that maybe arise from the merger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.167.107.194 (talk) 23:54, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, this is just advertising. Its been submitted and pending deletion. bryanahughes 15:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Free accounts almost dead

They're now timing out the old free accounts if you don't manually kick their website every month. I've moved to Hurricane Electric. Is there any interest in a list of Dynamic DNS providers within Wikipedia ? 2001:470:1F09:1657:B48B:CC28:9272:2334 (talk) 10:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

1/22/2024 - Free accounts are still working for some without logging in every month. No official announcement or source on whether that will continue or not, but VIP status and free dynamic dns hosts still function. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.8.248.33 (talk) 12:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Free Accounts Officially Dead

Email messaged sent Monday April 7, 2014 18:37:11 +0000:

To our Dyn free hostname users:

For the last 15 years, all of us at Dyn have taken pride in offering you and millions of others a free version of our Dynamic DNS Pro product. What was originally a product built for a small group of users has blossomed into an exciting technology used around the world.

That is why with mixed emotions we are notifying you that in 30 days, we will be ending our free hostname program. This change in the business will allow us to invest in our customer support teams, Internet infrastructure, and platform security so that we can continue to strive to deliver an exceptional customer experience for our paying customers.

We would like to invite you to upgrade to VIP status for less than $20 -- a 25% discount good for any package of Remote Access (formerly DynDNS Pro). By doing so, you'll have access to customer support, additional hostnames, and more.

Here's how you get this done in two easy steps:

- Login to account.dyn.com.

- Click here to add Remote Access to your cart at the 25% off VIP rate. The discount will be applied upon checkout.

We thank you for your usage of Dyn through the years, and hope to continue to support you through Dyn Remote Access or other products for years to come. Visit our FAQ page or this blog post for more information.

Dyn
Global HQ
150 Dow Street – Tower Two
Manchester, NH 03101

Conrad T. Pino (talk) 20:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Why is this email, which amounts to a press release, posted here? It is probvably technically a copyvio, but in any case it doesn't belong. If the droppign of free accounts is a relevant bit of the company's history, then mention it in the article, cited to a company published statement, and to a 3rd party news report, if possible. But this email doesn't belong here.DES ^(talk) 17:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

POV

I see no negative comment, and essentially no 3rd-party sourced opinion about the company -- not reviews or reactions. Does everyone think the company is as great as its owners do? If so, cite someone saying so. If not, quote and cite that, from reliable sources only of course, in either case. Or does no one care? in that case, notability might be questioned. DES ^(talk) 17:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

RE: POV

DES Thank you for your feedback. The "Culture" section has been removed, which should help with any POV disputes. Now the page simply states what the company does and gives a brief outline of evolution. There was at one point a section on this page detailing negative reviews, but these were removed as there were no sources other than non-reliable chatroom sources. Searched for reliable sources making similar claims, but could not find anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choedl (talk • contribs) 18:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Choedl, are there even any positive sourced 3rd-party reviews? has anyone written and published any sort of independent evaluation or analysis of this firm in a reliable source? (By the way, replies usually stay in the same section unless it gets very long.) DES ^(talk) 22:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

History Section Cleanup

Is anyone willing/interested to attempt to take on a cleanup of the History section of this entry? The early timeline is extremely inaccurate, based on some equally inaccurate statements in the cited articles. As the original founder it would be a conflict of interest for me to make changes myself, but there are some public record documents that show the timeline, in particular the "Background" section of the court filing in Dynamic Network Services, Inc. vs. Timothy Wilde, Case 1:06-cv-00037-JM in the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, available via the RECAP archive at http://ia600408.us.archive.org/33/items/gov.uscourts.nhd.29230/gov.uscourts.nhd.29230.6.0.pdf (full document list at http://archive.recapthelaw.org/nhd/29230/), and many pages of Internet Archive copies of old dyndns.org web pages.

Specific things that are wrong in the current History section:

• DynDNS was originally founded by me, in high school, with several others who have never been clearly/publicly named/acknowledged. Jeremy, Chris, and Tom joined at later phases in the company's growth.
• We never had anything to do with accessing lab computers and printing remotely (except if our users used our services that way, which they certainly could); DynDNS was first started by a group of geeks wanting static hostnames for our dynamic IPs so we could run a small IRC network (and other servers).
• We were never open-source; we used lots of open source technologies, and supported the open source community, but DynDNS itself was never open source.
• We were not "community-led", we were volunteer-based, but that's very different.
• The $25,000 upgrade proposal was not an "or we will shut down" proposal, it was a "to continue to grow and thrive" proposal. Saying it was required to stay open is disingenuous. (http://web.archive.org/web/20010302173659/http://www.dyndns.org/proposal.shtml) The proposal was fully funded by June 3 2001: http://web.archive.org/web/20010603122123/http://www.dyndns.org/donate.shtml
• The donation model did not continue until 2008 with DynECT, it ended in October 2002 (http://web.archive.org/web/20021005004747/http://www.dyndns.org/corporate/changes.php), a process that started with the launch of "donator-only" premium MyDynDNS services in mid-2001 (http://web.archive.org/web/20010623035004/http://www.dyndns.org/)

The section could certainly be further expanded as well; the "news" archives of dyndns.org visible through the Internet Archive (selected links above as citations) provide plenty of fodder. The LLC formation and incorporation (also discussed in the court documents) are dates that are probably worth noting, at least.

Thanks for taking the time to look at this! —Krellis (Talk) 22:28, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Request partially fulfilled (read the template comment). Regards, VB00 (talk) 04:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with October 2016 Dyn cyberattack

WP:NOTNEWS - there's attacks all the time and stub can be dealt with in a section at target. Widefox; talk 19:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• Withdrawn due to scope of affected sites and timescale. Let's see. Widefox; talk 21:22, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
• Leaning towards oppose. There are not attacks like this all the time, as I understand it, this is unprecedented in scope. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, sounds very newsworthy. DDoS attacks growing in size. Difficult at this point per WP:RECENTISM as to long-term encyclopaedic value WP:10 year test. Widefox; talk 19:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. The attack has been called by a few sources unprecedented in size and complexity. There are also implications for US national security (giving the timing of the presidential elections), which make this notable in itself. There is way more coverage in reliable secondary sources for the event than for the company. Finally, this event (and its implications for cybersecurity discussed in the sources) is what readers are most likely looking for, not information on the company.--DarTar (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• Agreed. -- Zanimum (talk) 19:50, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

• I will now bold my Oppose !vote. As the attacks continue throughout the day into a now third wave, the notion that this is a run-of-the-mill event becomes ever more untenable. If, in the dystopian web future, we look back on this as a routine thing, we can merge -- assuming, that is, we still have access to the web as we huddle in the ruins. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2016 (UTC)