My Web Alert - Automated Website Monitoring

---

This was the website for MyWebAlert. 
The content is from outside sources that mention this site.

~~~

 Way back in 2007 I first learned about My Web Alert from a 2007 Euro Tech News Blog Post which follows:

27/02/2007
MyWebAlert - Website Availability Monitoring Service for only $4 a month
Hype or something useful? Well it's free (even though their page title [as above] states $4 per month), a service that monitors websites by testing http responses etc. Though there's no mention of money, presumably there'll be a paid for version in the future. The results of their probes are Emailed to you once per month, it does all seem very painless.

Then I read this article and became a bit more skeptical about the site's services. Eventually the site's domain registration expired and the site disappeared from the web. We will probably never know the reason why the original owner of the site allowed the domain registration to expire, but it probably had to do with the fact that he/she couldn't successfully monetize the endeavor.
Recently I discovered that the domain was available, so I bought it with the goal of recreating some of its original content from archived pages. Unfortunately there were no usable archived pages of the original site although other subsequent owners had used it for a variety of purposes. Nevertheless I decided to keep the spirit of the original website intact via comments from outside sources.

2020 update:
The problem with the business model probably has to do with the fact that there are so many service that accomplish these kinds of alerts, many are free. We were looking into instances outside the normal "is my website down?" type of query and got loads of examples. There are many sites that provide critical infrastructure services that people rely on for very serious reasons. For example, this site would not have reached its intended audience without the assistance of the SEO masters at TNG/Earthling, especially CEO Bob Sakayama, who used state of the art digital tools including artificial intelligence to achieve high ranks for our most important keywords. His work enabled the site to cut through the layers of competition and provide motivated traffic from the demographics most beneficial to us.

The Results Circa 2007

 

Where’s the business model in Web 2.0? Don’t ask MyWebAlert.

 

By tim, on February 19th, 2007
Today IT Week has my piece on the lack of any business model in Yahoo Pipes, a thought underlined by an unusual press release which popped into my inbox. It is from John Earley of MyWebAlert, a company set up to monitor web site availability. Press releases are not usually so dejected:

Following a series of reports (copies available) that proved website availability is miserable in both the public and private sectors, we had thought folks would pay a paltry sum for monitoring and management services. This has proved not to be the case. Having sunk the investment in the software and architecture, we have abandoned hope of a business plan and are now making the service available free-of-charge.

Intrigued, I took a look at the site. The About page confirms this gravity-defying business endeavor, but looks forward to a bright tomorrow “somehow”:

There is no fancy business model, the Company can exist without revenues. It is managed in the belief that somehow, the momentum that it creates, will bring about a means for expanding the range of services that it offers.

It appears that the strategy is working, at least in terms of expanding the business. That’s presuming that site overload is the reason for what happened when I tried to sign up:

One presumes the outage will be short-lived, bearing in mind the company’s raison d’etre.

Incidentally Web site monitoring is also available from Netcraft and no doubt others. For a fee.

 

Free hack monitoring from MyWebAlert

MyWebAlert - Website Availability Monitoring Service for only $4 a month MyWebAlert - Website Availability Monitoring Service for only $4 a month Hype or something useful? Well it's free (even though their page title [as above] states $4 per month), a service that monitors websites by testing http responses etc. Though there's no mention of money, presumably there'll be a piad for version in the future. The results of their probes are Emailed to you once per month, it does all seem very painless. Posted by Steve Karmeinsky

 

---

---

 

More Background on MyWebAlert.com

 

MyWebAlert.com was an early website monitoring service that emerged during the mid-2000s, when businesses, schools, public institutions, and independent website owners were becoming increasingly dependent on reliable internet access. The company offered automated website availability checks, security monitoring, and performance reporting at prices intended to make professional monitoring affordable for organizations with limited technology budgets. Its services included checking websites from geographically separated monitoring locations, identifying possible website defacement, and providing information about downtime that could otherwise go unnoticed.

The company became particularly interesting in 2007, when its managing director, John Earley, publicly acknowledged that customers were unwilling to pay even modest subscription fees for website monitoring. Rather than abandon the technology immediately, MyWebAlert announced that it would make its services available free of charge. This unusual decision attracted attention from technology journalists and raised questions about the economics of emerging internet businesses.

Although MyWebAlert never became a major name in website infrastructure management, its history provides an informative example of the opportunities and difficulties confronting small software-as-a-service companies during the Web 2.0 era. Its approach to affordable monitoring, its attention to website security, and its unconventional business strategy illustrate how internet entrepreneurs were experimenting with services that would eventually become routine components of online business operations.

The Origins of MyWebAlert.com

MyWebAlert developed during a period when website reliability was becoming a serious operational concern. By the middle of the 2000s, businesses were increasingly using websites to communicate with customers, publish information, accept orders, and provide services. Educational institutions were developing online resources for students and parents, while government agencies were expanding the availability of public information through their websites.

As these activities moved online, website downtime became more than a technical inconvenience. A malfunctioning website could interrupt sales, prevent customers from accessing information, damage an organization's reputation, or leave visitors wondering whether a business was still operating. Even organizations that outsourced their website hosting needed some way to verify that their websites were actually available to the public.

MyWebAlert addressed this problem by providing an independent monitoring service. Rather than relying exclusively on information supplied by a website's hosting company, customers could register their websites for automated external checks. These checks helped identify periods when a website failed to respond properly and provided information that could be used to investigate recurring availability problems.

The precise founding date of MyWebAlert and the complete history of its original development have not been firmly established in the surviving independent sources. However, the company was operating and receiving technology press attention by the mid-2000s. Contemporary reporting identifies John Earley as its managing director and a principal public representative of the business.

The company's original corporate ownership structure, financial backers, and complete staff roster are not well documented in the available reporting. Its operational history is more clearly established through contemporary articles discussing its monitoring technology, pricing, security features, and business strategy.

John Earley and the Company's Management

John Earley played a central role in communicating MyWebAlert's services to the technology press. As managing director, he explained both the technical advantages of the monitoring system and the company's efforts to reach organizations that might otherwise consider professional website monitoring too expensive.

Earley's public comments emphasized practical website protection rather than elaborate enterprise software. He recognized that smaller organizations could suffer significant consequences from website outages or unauthorized changes, even when they lacked the financial resources and technical staff available to large corporations.

His explanations of the monitoring architecture also demonstrated an understanding of the limitations of traditional internal network management systems. A monitoring system located inside the same network as the website it supervises may not provide a complete picture of how that website appears to visitors elsewhere. External monitoring locations can offer a more independent assessment.

Earley also became associated with one of the more unusual public statements about the economics of an internet startup. In February 2007, technology writer Tim Anderson discussed a press release from MyWebAlert explaining that the company had invested in its software and technical infrastructure but had been unable to persuade sufficient customers to pay for the service.

Instead of presenting its situation as a conventional success story, the company openly acknowledged that its original commercial assumptions had not worked. That admission became an important part of MyWebAlert's historical identity.

How MyWebAlert's Website Monitoring Worked

The central purpose of MyWebAlert was to determine whether registered websites remained accessible and functioning. The service performed automated checks rather than requiring website owners to visit their sites manually throughout the day.

Website availability monitoring generally involves sending requests to a website and evaluating the responses returned by its server. A successful HTTP response may indicate that the server is operating and able to deliver the requested resource. Failed connections, server errors, timeouts, and unexpected responses can indicate that a website is unavailable or experiencing technical difficulties.

For website owners, the value of this approach lies in continuous observation. A business might operate during normal office hours, but its website could receive visitors at any time. Problems occurring overnight, during weekends, or while employees are occupied with other responsibilities might otherwise remain undiscovered for hours.

MyWebAlert offered monitoring intended to reduce that uncertainty. Its services could help organizations recognize recurring outages, evaluate whether their hosting arrangements were dependable, and develop a clearer understanding of website performance over time.

The company also provided monthly reports summarizing monitoring results. These reports were useful because individual outages do not necessarily reveal the broader reliability of a website. A site might experience several brief failures that are easily overlooked but collectively indicate an underlying hosting or network problem.

Historical accounts describe the service as straightforward and relatively inexpensive. The emphasis was on providing useful monitoring information without requiring customers to purchase complicated network management systems or maintain their own monitoring infrastructure.

Monitoring from London, San Francisco, and Houston

One of MyWebAlert's most distinctive technical features was its use of multiple monitoring locations. Contemporary reporting identified three locations: London's Docklands area, San Francisco, California, and Houston, Texas.

These locations provided geographically separated perspectives on website availability. A website that appeared inaccessible from one network might still be functioning normally from another. Network congestion, routing failures, regional connectivity problems, and temporary communication disruptions could produce misleading results when monitoring was conducted from only one location.

By checking websites from several places, MyWebAlert attempted to distinguish genuine website failures from problems affecting a particular monitoring connection. This approach was especially important for a service designed to send warnings about possible outages or security incidents.

London's Docklands area was a logical location for internet infrastructure because of its concentration of telecommunications and business facilities. San Francisco offered a presence in a major American technology region, while Houston provided another geographically distinct monitoring point within the United States.

The company described its distributed monitoring architecture as an advantage over systems that operated entirely within an organization's own network. Independent checks could reveal availability problems that internal systems might not detect or might interpret differently.

This design anticipated an important principle of modern website monitoring: reliability should be evaluated from the perspective of users accessing a service through external networks, rather than solely from the perspective of the server or hosting provider.

Website Defacement and Free Security Monitoring

In addition to basic availability monitoring, MyWebAlert introduced a free service designed to detect unauthorized changes to websites. This feature addressed the growing problem of website defacement, in which attackers modify or replace website content without the owner's permission.

The security service was described in contemporary technology coverage as checking registered websites every five minutes. Website owners could specify a hidden text string that the monitoring system would look for during each inspection. If the expected string disappeared, the change could indicate that a page had been altered.

This was a relatively simple method of detecting possible website vandalism. It did not require a complete security audit or sophisticated analysis of every file on a server. Instead, it used the presence or absence of known content as an indicator that something might have changed.

The approach had practical limitations. A missing string could result from an authorized website update, a technical error, or another innocent change. Likewise, an attacker might modify a page without removing the monitored text. Nevertheless, the method offered a useful warning mechanism for organizations that otherwise had no automated way to identify suspicious changes.

MyWebAlert attempted to reduce false alarms through its distributed monitoring system. According to Earley's explanation, the company required confirmation from all three monitoring locations before issuing a possible hacking alert.

This was particularly relevant to schools, small businesses, and other organizations with limited security resources. A small institution might not have dedicated employees reviewing website content continuously, yet an unauthorized alteration could expose visitors to misleading information or damage public confidence.

The free defacement monitoring service therefore extended MyWebAlert's purpose beyond ordinary uptime checks. It positioned the company as a provider of basic website protection for organizations that could not justify expensive security monitoring arrangements.

Pricing and the Original Subscription Model

MyWebAlert initially attempted to operate as a low-cost subscription service. Contemporary descriptions identified a monitoring price of approximately £2.30 per month, equivalent to roughly $4.27 at the exchange rate quoted in the reporting. An annual subscription was also advertised at approximately £23.

These prices were intended to make website monitoring accessible to organizations that might hesitate to purchase more expensive commercial products. For a small business operating a basic informational website, a few dollars per month could appear reasonable when compared with the potential consequences of prolonged downtime.

The subscription approach also reflected a broader change in software distribution. Rather than purchasing software and installing it on local computers or servers, customers could subscribe to an externally hosted service. The provider maintained the monitoring infrastructure while customers received the results.

However, the economics of this arrangement presented difficulties. Even a relatively simple monitoring platform required software development, servers, network connectivity, maintenance, and customer support. The provider needed enough paying customers to cover these expenses while keeping subscription prices low enough to attract cost-conscious users.

MyWebAlert's experience demonstrated that an inexpensive product was not necessarily an easy product to sell. Some website owners did not recognize the financial value of independent monitoring, while others were satisfied with free tools or occasional manual checks.

By early 2007, the company had concluded that its initial pricing strategy was not generating the commercial response it expected. This realization led to a dramatic change in direction.

The February 2007 Decision to Offer Free Monitoring

The most widely documented turning point in MyWebAlert's history occurred in February 2007. The company distributed a press release explaining that its attempts to establish a conventional subscription business had been unsuccessful.

Technology journalist Tim Anderson discussed the announcement in a February 19, 2007 article titled "Where's the business model in Web 2.0? Don't ask MyWebAlert." Anderson had received the company's press release while examining the broader problem of how emerging internet services expected to generate revenue.

According to the announcement, MyWebAlert had conducted research indicating that website availability was poor across parts of the public and private sectors. The company believed these findings would encourage organizations to purchase inexpensive monitoring and management services. Instead, customers proved reluctant to pay.

The company had already invested in its software and monitoring architecture, leaving management with an operating platform but no satisfactory revenue strategy. Rather than continue relying on a subscription model that had failed to attract sufficient interest, MyWebAlert decided to make its service free.

The company's own description of its strategy was unusually candid. It acknowledged that there was no elaborate commercial plan and expressed the belief that continued operation and growing interest might eventually create opportunities to expand its services.

This was a striking position for a business providing a service that itself depended on operational reliability. MyWebAlert was effectively betting that offering something useful without charging for it could generate enough momentum to justify continued investment.

Anderson's commentary highlighted the contradiction between technical usefulness and financial sustainability. A service could address a genuine problem, offer competitive pricing, and still fail to persuade customers that they needed to pay for it.

Press Coverage and Technology Industry Reaction

MyWebAlert received attention from technology publications and independent bloggers, particularly during 2006 and 2007. Its coverage focused on three related subjects: inexpensive website monitoring, security protection for smaller organizations, and the difficulty of developing a viable business model.

Technology reporting about the company's free security monitoring service described its five-minute checks, hidden-text verification method, and use of three geographically separated monitoring locations. These articles presented MyWebAlert as an affordable alternative for organizations that lacked the resources to deploy comprehensive internal security monitoring systems.

The company's commercial difficulties attracted a different kind of attention. Tim Anderson's February 2007 commentary placed MyWebAlert within a wider discussion of Web 2.0 companies that offered useful services without a clear method of generating revenue. The article also recorded an ironic difficulty: Anderson encountered an error while attempting to register for the website monitoring service.

That experience did not establish that MyWebAlert's entire infrastructure was unreliable, but it illustrated the challenge of maintaining customer confidence when selling a product specifically intended to detect website failures.

Other independent commentary provides additional insight into the company's promotional activities. In June 2006, British technology writer Sean McManus published an article criticizing unsolicited commercial email and discussed an exchange with John Marshall, who had contacted him to promote MyWebAlert.

McManus objected to the unsolicited approach, while Marshall defended personalized business-to-business email marketing. Their exchange showed that MyWebAlert was actively trying to reach potential customers through direct promotional efforts, although not all recipients welcomed those methods.

The discussion is also useful because it provides another contemporary reference to the company's management and publicity activities. Marshall referred to MyWebAlert's directors contributing to technology publications as part of their public relations efforts. The article does not, however, establish Marshall's precise corporate title or ownership interest.

Beyond these articles, MyWebAlert appeared in technical discussions of website availability monitoring. A German-language book on web analytics, Web Analytics: Metriken auswerten, Besucherverhalten verstehen, Website optimieren, included MyWebAlert alongside Pingdom as an example of services that could be used to observe website response times and outages. This later reference indicates that the MyWebAlert name had become recognizable enough to appear in educational material about internet performance measurement.

Website Availability Research and Industry Comparisons

MyWebAlert did more than advertise a monitoring service. The company also conducted research into website reliability, using the results to demonstrate the importance of independent monitoring.

In contemporary coverage, John Earley discussed findings suggesting substantial differences in website availability among industries. The reported figures included failure rates of approximately 43 percent for websites in a FTSE-related sample and 40 percent for retail websites. Airlines reportedly performed considerably better, with fewer than 7 percent of the websites examined experiencing failures.

These figures were presented as evidence that website reliability varied significantly across industries. Earley suggested that airlines, which depended heavily on internet services for customer transactions, demonstrated the advantages of treating online availability as an operational priority.

The findings were potentially valuable from a marketing perspective. A business owner might not recognize the importance of monitoring until confronted with evidence that websites in its industry were experiencing repeated failures.

Nevertheless, the historical figures require careful interpretation. The available summaries do not establish the full sample sizes, testing periods, failure definitions, or statistical methodology. They should therefore be understood as findings reported by MyWebAlert rather than independently verified industry-wide failure rates.

The company's research also reveals an important aspect of its strategy. MyWebAlert was attempting to educate potential customers about a problem that many had not yet identified as requiring a separate commercial service.

That educational challenge helps explain the difficulty of its original business model. Customers who were unaware of their websites' reliability problems might not see a reason to purchase monitoring, even when the subscription cost was modest.

Target Audience and Practical Applications

MyWebAlert was particularly relevant to small and medium-sized businesses, schools, educational institutions, and organizations without dedicated network monitoring teams. These groups often depended on websites for communication but lacked the resources to purchase enterprise monitoring software.

For a small retailer, website monitoring could help identify outages that prevented customers from viewing products or completing transactions. An independent report could also provide evidence when discussing repeated service interruptions with a hosting company.

For a school, monitoring could help ensure that parents and students could access announcements, schedules, and other information. Defacement monitoring offered an additional layer of protection against unauthorized changes that might damage the institution's reputation.

Community organizations, charities, and independent publishers could benefit from similar capabilities. Their websites might not generate substantial revenue, but they could still play an important role in communication, fundraising, and public outreach.

Website designers and hosting consultants represented another potential audience. Professionals responsible for multiple client websites could use external monitoring to identify problems before clients reported them. Monitoring results could also support discussions about hosting quality and maintenance requirements.

MyWebAlert's appeal was therefore based on providing an essential technical function in a form that did not require substantial financial or technical investment. The company's difficulty was converting that practical usefulness into a reliable source of revenue.

Reviews, Criticism, and Public Reputation

Surviving independent commentary provides a limited but revealing picture of MyWebAlert's public reputation. The service received attention for its affordability and monitoring capabilities, but the available evidence does not support a broad conclusion that customers were consistently satisfied or dissatisfied.

The February 2007 discussion by Tim Anderson was particularly critical of the company's financial strategy. Anderson questioned how a business could continue operating without revenue and drew attention to the error he encountered while attempting to register.

Sean McManus's earlier criticism concerned the company's marketing methods rather than the performance of its monitoring software. His account illustrates how promotional practices could influence public perceptions of an otherwise legitimate technical service.

Other contemporary descriptions focused more favorably on MyWebAlert's low prices, frequent security checks, and multiple monitoring locations. These features gave the company a recognizable identity within the website monitoring market.

However, verified customer ratings, extensive user testimonials, independently audited uptime statistics, and comprehensive satisfaction surveys are not readily available in the surviving sources. There is also insufficient evidence to establish the company's total customer count or market share.

No independently verified major industry awards associated with MyWebAlert were identified. Its historical significance rests primarily on its service model, technical approach, and unusual public discussion of its financial difficulties rather than on documented awards or market leadership.

Competition in the Website Monitoring Industry

MyWebAlert operated in a market where website owners could choose among several methods of checking availability. Some relied on hosting company notifications, others used internal monitoring systems, and still others purchased services from independent providers.

Netcraft was among the established monitoring-related companies mentioned in contemporary discussions of MyWebAlert. Pingdom also became a recognizable name in website uptime and performance monitoring, offering services that helped organizations track availability and response times.

The competitive challenge extended beyond the capabilities of individual providers. Monitoring technology was becoming more accessible, and basic availability checks could increasingly be automated without expensive proprietary infrastructure.

MyWebAlert attempted to distinguish itself through affordability, distributed monitoring, and security features. Yet its experience suggests that these advantages were not sufficient to establish a dependable paid customer base.

One problem was the relationship between the cost of monitoring and the perceived consequences of downtime. A business that depended on continuous online transactions might consider monitoring indispensable. A small organization whose website was mainly informational might see the same service as optional.

Another problem involved differentiation. Once multiple providers offered automated checks and email alerts, customers needed additional reasons to choose one service over another. Reporting quality, monitoring frequency, customer support, integrations, and reliability could all become competitive factors.

The company's transition to free service reflected these pressures, but it also introduced new uncertainty. Free access could encourage adoption while simultaneously eliminating the revenue needed to support infrastructure and future development.

The Web 2.0 Business Model Problem

MyWebAlert's history is closely connected to the broader economic experimentation of the Web 2.0 period. During the mid-2000s, entrepreneurs were launching online services that could be accessed through a browser without requiring customers to purchase conventional packaged software.

Many companies expected that attracting users would eventually create opportunities for advertising, subscriptions, premium features, or partnerships. The difficulty was determining which services customers would actually pay for and how much revenue could be generated from a growing audience.

MyWebAlert became an unusually direct example of this problem because its management publicly admitted that its original assumptions had failed. The company believed website reliability was sufficiently important to justify a modest subscription fee, but the expected demand did not materialize.

The free-service strategy was based on the possibility that continued activity and customer interest might eventually create a more sustainable business. This resembled the thinking behind other free and freemium internet products, although MyWebAlert had not established a clearly defined premium upgrade path in the reporting examined.

The broader debate continued after MyWebAlert's 2007 announcement. In October 2008, venture capitalist Fred Wilson discussed the competing arguments surrounding free services and paid business models. His analysis emphasized that free access could be commercially viable when it formed part of a strategy for converting some users into paying customers.

MyWebAlert's experience illustrated the danger of operating a useful service without a sufficiently developed method of funding it. Its story remains relevant because modern online businesses still face the challenge of balancing user acquisition, operating costs, and monetization.

The Decline of the Original Service and the Domain's Later History

The original MyWebAlert monitoring operation did not establish a lasting public presence comparable to the larger companies that subsequently became associated with website monitoring and infrastructure management.

Historical accounts associated with the domain describe the original service disappearing and the domain registration eventually becoming available to another owner. The domain was subsequently acquired with the intention of preserving information about the original website and its role in early internet monitoring.

The precise date when the original company stopped operating, the circumstances of its closure, and the complete sequence of domain ownership changes have not been independently established through the available contemporary reporting. Financial difficulties were publicly acknowledged in 2007, but that fact alone does not prove the exact cause or timing of the company's eventual disappearance.

The later use of MyWebAlert.com as a historical or informational website should also be distinguished from the original monitoring business. A domain can retain its name while changing owners, purposes, and content, and those later activities should not automatically be attributed to its original operators.

The Internet Archive's Wayback Machine provides a useful starting point for investigating the domain's changing appearance and any surviving historical pages. However, the absence of particular archived pages does not establish that a website was inactive on those dates, because web archives do not capture every website or every period of operation.

The documented 2006 and 2007 press accounts remain especially important because they preserve statements and descriptions from the period when the monitoring service was actively promoted.

Cultural and Technological Significance

MyWebAlert represents a transitional period in the development of online infrastructure services. During the early commercial internet, many organizations treated website availability as a responsibility handled entirely by hosting companies or internal technical personnel. Independent monitoring helped establish the idea that website owners should verify availability for themselves.

The company's geographically distributed checks also reflected a growing recognition that internet reliability is not simply a question of whether a server is running. A website may function properly within its hosting environment while remaining inaccessible to visitors because of network or routing problems elsewhere.

Its defacement monitoring service demonstrated another emerging concern: website integrity. As organizations placed more information online, unauthorized changes could create reputational and operational risks even when the underlying server remained available.

Perhaps most importantly, MyWebAlert illustrated the difficulty of selling preventive services. Customers often recognize the value of protection only after experiencing a failure. Monitoring companies must therefore communicate not only what their technology does but also why its benefits justify an ongoing expense.

The company's history also captures the experimental atmosphere of Web 2.0 entrepreneurship. Technical innovation was becoming less expensive, and small companies could develop services that previously required significant corporate infrastructure. Yet reduced development barriers did not eliminate the need for a sustainable business model.

MyWebAlert's experience shows that technological usefulness, public attention, and competitive pricing are separate from commercial success. A company can solve a genuine problem without finding enough customers willing to finance the solution.

MyWebAlert.com's Lasting Legacy

MyWebAlert.com is best remembered as an early provider of affordable website availability and security monitoring that openly confronted the financial difficulties of operating a small internet service.

Its principal technical features included automated website checks, monthly performance reporting, monitoring from London, San Francisco, and Houston, and a free defacement detection service that examined registered websites at five-minute intervals.

John Earley's public explanations gave the company a recognizable voice, while technology writers such as Tim Anderson and Sean McManus preserved valuable contemporary accounts of its activities, marketing, and business challenges.

Although the surviving evidence does not establish a large customer base, major industry awards, or a successful long-term commercial operation, MyWebAlert remains a useful case study in the development of internet monitoring services. Its history reflects a period when website reliability was becoming essential, independent monitoring was gaining recognition, and software companies were experimenting with ways to make technical services accessible to smaller organizations.

The broader lesson of MyWebAlert is that identifying a real technological need is only the beginning of building a sustainable service. Businesses must also establish how customers value that need, what they are willing to pay, and how the service can support its own continued operation.

Nearly two decades after its most notable press coverage, MyWebAlert's story remains relevant to discussions about website security, uptime monitoring, software subscriptions, and the economics of free online services.

 

---