AOL Not Alone In Subscriber Decline 232
E-Rock-23 writes "Our registration-hungry friends at the New York Times are running this article with a few more details on the AOL Subscriber Decline, covered in a recent /. post. And it looks like they aren't alone, as Earthlink and MSN are experiencing similar troubles. The article cites a major reason being that users "are buying broadband services offered by cable and telephone companies." Looks like broadband is finally gaining some significant ground with home users..."
Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, broadband is a nice upgrade. But I bet more people disconnected due to money than the need for speed.
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course, AOL is available to me for free and I still don't use it, but then I didn't recently get laid off.
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:5, Insightful)
More reason to cut ISP (Score:2)
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:2)
And I think about that everytime I get my $45 cable modem bill. How bad would it be?
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:2)
Heck, I'm getting reamed in the rear every month by Comcast and I still keep going back to them (well, they are the only broadband provider in town...).
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:3, Interesting)
For the $35/month I'd be saving, I could just buy copies from CheapBytes and still come out ahead.
downloading a single fansub off of the usenet wasn't feasable because the parts would expire before I got them downloaded
I'm not familiar with what that is, but I don't download binaries from usenet, anyway.
It really comes down to the fact that I basically only check email and read a handful of websites anymore. I don't download the latest game demos or much else. Sometimes I download Gnome or KDE or something, but I could just let it run for a few days. Wouldn't bother me that much.
I hope I don't get in trouble for saying this. I know Congress is very concerned about the slow adoption of broadband.
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:3, Insightful)
Wouldn't this sort of thought process justify an increase in subscribers flocking to AOL/MSN to take advantage of the low cost, downgrading from broadband? Millions of people now have broadband at $40 or more per month, and following your hypothetical penny pinching scenario it would seem appropriate that they would downgrade to the $9.95 or less light usage plans most of these services offer. Claiming that someone entirely cuts themselves off seems extremist as the net represents one of the primary communications mediums today: How does one find and then communicate with prospective jobs without an internet connection?
I counter your claims and would say that the rocketing adoption of broadband does as well: Everyone is getting broadband, and dial-up providers are going the way of Slashdot's editorial skills.
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:2, Funny)
You and I, and perhaps other geeks out there might enjoy it all the time, but for the average person out there, how long before getting 2.8million hits on "Harry Potter" just doesn't make it worth the time or money?
Vip
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:2)
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong, wrong, and very wrong.
The unemployment rate is determined by a survey that is conducted monthly by the US Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics called the "Current Population Survey". The CPS is in no way linked to unemployment benefits and who is receiving them. You do not have to be claim unemployment to be counted as unemployed in the CPS.
As I used to be a surveyor for the "Senseless Burro" for a large portion of my college career, I know the CPS very, very well. The definition of "unemployed" that gets counted into the unemployment rate is any person who:
1. Is currently unemployed.
2. Has actively looked for work in the past 4 weeks.
3. Is currently available to work.
This includes people who are not working but waiting to be recalled to their former job.
For those of you living outside the US, this same system is used to determine unemployment in Canada, Mexico, Austrailia, Japan, and every country in the European Economic Community.
Re:Here's a thought -- less disposable income! (Score:2, Funny)
Letter (Score:2)
Tim
Reg Free Link (Score:2, Funny)
passwd: somebaudysentme
Forgive this obvious statement but.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Forgive this obvious statement but.... (Score:2)
Besides, isn't EarthLink heavily involved with broadband themselves? I think if EarthLink was smart they should ally themselves with AT&T Broadband, Time-Warner Cable and Cox Cable to become the primary ISP for cable-modem connections.
Re:Forgive this obvious statement but.... (Score:2)
For some reason, I doubt it.
Re:Forgive this obvious statement but.... (Score:2)
Earthlink owns part of Sprint or Sprint owns part of Earthlink, I forget which.
In my neck of the woods Sprint bought up the local telco (Carolina Tel and Tel) several years ago. I can't get any flavor of DSL (they've been saying "real soon now" for years) despite living about 2000 feet from a reasonably new switching station.
The only available broadband is through the local cable monopoly (AOL Time-Warner) who offer Roadrunner (which they own), AOL (which they own), or Earthlink (which has a financial stake in the local phone company monopoly which doesn't offer DSL).
My former dial-up ISP (Volaris), which I wound up with as most of the local ISPs got merged and swallowed up, went belly-up and handed all of us over to Earthlink, who dropped all but one of our many legacy e-mail domains (currently being supported for free for about another 30 days by the saints at mpinet.com just because it's the right thing to do, bless them).
So Earthlink has several thousand "new" dial-up customers, but we aren't an increase in the total number of people accessing the internet, we just got moved from one column to another.
Although I'm not particularly thrilled with Earthlink the company, I've had only positive experiences with the people there with whom I've talked when I finally got through to an actual human. No doubt they're the ones most likely to be kicked to the curb in the downsizing.
Would I rather have a broadband connection instead of dial-up? Not badly enough to get it from or through my local cable tv monopoly, especially at nearly twice the price.
AOL's content-only service (Score:2)
Of Course People are gowing broadband (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Of Course People are gowing broadband (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Of Course People are gowing broadband (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Of Course People are going broadband (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people who have the option wait to do some of their surfing at work on a fast connection. For people who don't have that option, they must pay for a faster connection or accept that some web content and services will be barely usable or unavailable.
It was simple math for me! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It was simple math for me! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It was simple math for me! (Score:2, Insightful)
I've been debating going back to dialup to save money - I wouldn't get the second phone line. I honestly am just not online enough - and I'm a computer nerd. I suspect others realize this, too...
I'm not arguing that people aren't switching to broadband, but I'd say a significant loss at AOL, Earthlink, and MSN is that people are discovering local $10/month dial up internet access.
Stickyness of email address masks the real problem (Score:5, Insightful)
As a former AOL employee, I still have an AOL account even though I find the service has ticked me off more than a few times but my wife can't really change her email address at this tmie. So we are like so many who just are waiting for the right time.
You can't stop the future, you can only simulate it by stopping progress
Re:Stickyness of email address masks the real prob (Score:3, Insightful)
Mail forwarders like pobox.com (Score:2)
Fastmail.fm has a nice tagged email feature using subdomains - not only can you get mail at username+tag@fastmail.fm, but tag@username.fastmail.fm translates to the same thing, so you can give everybody an email address like that and trash any addresses used by spammers. Like many of the newer web mail systems, they also let you retrieve mail from them with IMAP, and can fetch mail from other systems with POP or IMAP.
I haven't actually gotten rid of the Netcom->Mindspring->Earthlink dialup account I used back when I got the pobox.com account, though with broadband and work-provided dialup for my laptop it's about time to.
still waiting. (Score:2)
I will happily forward to you all of my AOL mail and my wife's hotmail. I have given up on them both, what you will get is spam spam spam and more spam.
Use Spamcop (Score:2)
I just helped someone (Score:4, Funny)
With streaming content becoming more available and higher quality, the days of dial-up are numbered. I'm suprised apartment buildings don't pool together and get a T1 into the buildling and provide internet to all apartments.
Re:I just helped someone (Score:2)
Seriously, people who don't know anything actually want it. They want to be on the band-wagon.
Besides, I was curious to see what AOL had turned into from when it first came out.
As registration for AOL and MSN go down (Score:5, Funny)
No surprise here (Score:4, Informative)
AOL UK has recently started offering broadband services, through BT, but I've yet to see any figures on how much success they've had with it. MSN UK haven't made any moves on that front yet.
Re:No surprise here (Score:2)
I was going to post this exact same thing.
The only people I know that are still on 56k dial-up are the casual weekend users. The ones who check their emails on a Saturday morning and visit a handful of websites - like my Dad for example.
NTL also do a 128/128 cable connection that is as cheap (or the same price) as their 56k dial-up. Many people, like the father-in-law, have swapped over to this setup.
Competition is hotting up at the moment. ASDL for £20 a month is £5 less than I'm paying. The 1Mbit line price came down by ~£15 around xmas time. When it drops again I'm upgrading.
AOL offer broadband too (Score:2)
However, received wisdom suggests that going through AOL increases latency so much that gamers wouldn't want AOL even if it was BB. There's more to life than raw bandwidth.
Problem involves monopolistic, technical issues (Score:5, Interesting)
My business needs required something faster than dial-up, so when EarthLink offered DSL, I applied. At the time, however, DSL wasn't available for my part of the city (a medium-large midwestern one--think race cars), so Time Warner Cable's RoadRunner service was my only option.
Today, as a result of court agreements and such, EarthLink and AOL can provide their services through cable and DSL options, but the carriers (the cable and phone companies that own these lines) don't advertise the options much, from what I see.
I use Comcast High-Speed service today, which works OK, but they have tech support that's about as bright as a bag of coal.
I agree that the Internet was a fascination for some, and now a relatively expensive one to those who don't use it much. So, many of the users who've signed off are probably the "sightseers."
High-speed access is still a bit too expensive for most, despite the faster speeds. Paying twice to 2.5 times as much isn't a strong marketing point.
Re:Problem involves monopolistic, technical issues (Score:2)
Telcos and Cable will be the new winners (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Telcos and Cable will be the new winners (Score:2)
Most ISP's I see give you a dynamic IP address and schlep everything over PPPoE, which means whe you power down you're probably going to get a different IP address; makes running servers a little difficult, unless you service warez and hang out on IRC to spamvertise your box, and even then a lot of what I've seen has it that ISPs will specifically deny you in their TOS the ability to run any sort of server, which is thinly disguised as a lack of faith in the users' ability to secure their own machines. (They offer business packages for upwards of $120, but the average home geek may not be able to justify the expense just to run their own home box as a webserver/ftp server/bbs/whatever.)
[flame]
OK, maybe that "lack of faith" thing is a little off. After all, if you get your AOLer onto the telco, what are they gonna know about securing their box? Many of them don't even run antivirus software.
[/flame]
So you get people like Speakeasy in there. Static IP, not much speed out, but hey, it's $60 bare minimum, and seems to cater to the geek. In my case, when I first signed on, I was told that I could pretty much run any kind of server that didn't screw with their bandwidth.
Now that I've just finished sounding like a corporate shill, I suppose that if there were more companies out there that offered services similar to speakeasy (who seem to be successful despite all things) despite the higher cost, aside from the side effect of Speakeasy having to compete with more of a niche market, this just might put a cramp in the style of the telcos.
Re:Telcos and Cable will be the new winners (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a problem in urban areas too.
I telecommute, and because I require high-speed ADSL with static routing in order to work, I am
finding it somewhat difficult to move. I currently have 1.2MB ADSL. I have found it utterly impossible to determine in advance, whether such service will be available at a given location. It is the first piece of information I want after selecting a house, apartment, duplex, or condo. I have come to the conclusion that I need to close on a property, but have the necessary legal phrases in whatever lease or contract to make it very clear that the deal is off if I find out I can't get DSL after we close.
Try asking an apartment manager anything about the "High Speed Internet" they offer. Shared cable won't work for what I need to do.
I am willing to pay up to $2200/year for really good broadband. Why isn't that enough to motivate anyone to give me straight answers to my questions?
More savvy? (Score:3, Insightful)
Broadband... (Score:4, Insightful)
Here in Germany you can get a 128kBit up / 768 kBit down async line. The best a normal household can aford is 192 kBit up / 1536 kBit down async.
The problem is that as bandwidth goes up, quality of the net goes down.
I heard people saying: "Why should I not place these 2MB images on my website? It's downloaded with my DSL line in seconds."
And don't even try to tell these people what a thumbnail is.
It's just one example but you can find more of these. People sending 15 MB
SQL Slammer won't have had the effect of broadband coming to every home.
Re:Broadband... (Score:2)
Still never under estimate the stupidity of people in large groups.
The circle of life. (Score:2, Insightful)
Picture a production executive: "Why should I not agree to do this terrible movie? People will see it anyway." A theater owner: "Why should I not perpetrate the single largest price gouge that the average American sees over some kernels of 'popped corn' and sugar water? People will pay." A person in charge of showing the movie: "Let's put this movie in 8 screens, so everybody sees it all at once, and everybody forgets about it in 3 weeks. Then, let's do it again!"
The problem is that the problem feeds itself. So does this one. You know what the solution is? 'tis like a marketer's dream... More solutions! Bigger broadband, better broadband, different broadband!® And some will buy it, and some won't, and some will still be on dialup, but it will be different, and that's good, right?
You're right. But once you let the average person into something, they usually ruin it.
Re:The circle of life. (Score:2)
Exactly. Kinda like when Katz discovered Slashdot :-)
Registration free, as usual (Score:3, Insightful)
Broadband Rates (Score:4, Interesting)
I've already given up on DSL from the phone company (Good luck getting competitition-inducing rates from those guys.)
IMHO community run broadband (see this link [slashdot.org]) and other means like this are the only hope we have of keeping prices reasonable.
Erp, did I just come out in favor of regulating Internet pricing?!?
Sharing broadband (Score:5, Insightful)
With the coming of wireless internet, it even becomes simpler to share the net (you don't even have to dig or drill a line in the ground or wall for your ethernet cable). I think this also has some impact on the decline of dial-up subscriptions.
Re:Sharing broadband (Score:3, Interesting)
I think broadband's big advantages for the non-technical user is convenience and (relative) value. Having an always-on connection is much nicer than waiting for a modem to dial (and possibly redial)... and the phone line isn't "in use" with broadband. Also, paying $40-$100 a month for broadband is easy to justify based on speed; while it may not be 30 times faster, you can do more with broadband simultaneously than you can with dialup.
Being able to toss a router between my LAN and cable modem is a major benefit to having broadband, but I doubt that the average would be capable of doing it without help.
MP3s Need for broadband (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, now that I wrote that, I think they do--who knows what else will take the place of them though. A real-time slashdot feed perhaps?
Money Decline Overall (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe this tred will turn around but I doubt it. Even if these customers do get back on firm ground, I see them going with broadband via cable, phone company, or even the electric company long before comming back to a dial up.
Check out my demand curve (Score:2, Insightful)
Price goes up, quantity goes down-- that's a demand curve.
nb: There's other reasons for the decline too, AOL and MSN blow as ISPS and don't support linux and censor tons of content in the newsgroups, and break your Network Connections and
Earthlink broadband (Score:3, Interesting)
If Earthlink had a different TOS (I could have servers, for example), then I might consider switching. If the only change is I have to install Earthlink software instead of ATTBI software, then it's rather pointless, isn't it?
MSN and abuse :-) (Score:5, Funny)
The reason for Declines (Score:4, Insightful)
90% of the houses I go to are for people who are upgrading and now want two computers. (Their old one + their new one) AOL requires a $20 subscription fee + more money for multiple screens and though you can have broadband and still use AOL they still charge an aol usage fee.... *yawn*
So they upgrade to broadband because that 56k stuff has to go and because it can easily service two computers, they buy a router, they leave AOL but download the messenger to stay in touch with their buddies. They migrate to using Outlook Express (cringe) But they also have norton so I guess thats ok... sort of.
Then they also cancel AOL + Second Phone Line and broadband is about the same price. Some even cancel their phone and do VoIP. (Its rare but there are some really good offers out there that even offer wireless phonejacks that you can sticky to your wall or plug into an outlet...)
Customers going to boradband is only half of it (Score:2, Informative)
Another problem is that broadband is not as profitable as dial-up currently. Whereas dial-ups bring in $8-$10 a month on average, broadband products bring in the neighborhood of $5/month. Sometimes the the ISPs don't see any profit for more than a year (if ever) as they offer deals for free modems and discounted service fees.
As an employee and one of the 3 largest ISPs I can tell you that IMO the cost of broadband isn't going to be going up anytime soon as long as the CLEC's continue to convince the government that competition is a good thing. But you can expect to have your ISP try to sell you on additional services like static IP, VoIP, priority tech support, Long Distance telephone service, and offer discounts for longer contract terms.
Not suprised... (Score:2, Insightful)
Duh (Score:3, Insightful)
now let's look at my local cable provider. their network has been fairly reliable thus far. no software to install (though they do try and convince you to run their install program that puts their logo in the corner of IE and sets up your mail settings). my only REAL complaints with my cable service is that they block port 80, (because they don't want me to run a "server"...i guess they think a web server is the only type???) and i can only transmit at 128k while downstream is supposed to max out at 1.5M.
of course, i can live with those small irritations when i'm downloading the latest kernel source, mozilla, p0rn, and openoffice in a matter of min. instead of hours.
-frozen
dsl vs cable! (Score:2, Interesting)
~frank
Re:dsl vs cable! (Score:4, Insightful)
Ultimately, I think both technologies have about equal potential, with one beating the other depending on where you are.
DSL is offered by companies that typically have more experience in offering high-bandiwdth internet connections, so service and reliability I think is indeed, mostly better with DSL on average. However, as Cable companies have learned their lessons, it becomes harder and harder to distinguish the two. DSL still seems to typically offer better latency (around my area, at least), but cable services offer better throughput.
To home consumers, the fine details don't make much of a difference. Availability makes all the difference. I can't get DSL at any decent rate. None of my family can get it at all. I do, and my family could, all have cable modem at 2 megabit downstream, 768k up. In addition to that, a sort of unintended benefit of cable modem service is that there is a good chance the installer won't bother with a video filter and you get free cable with the net connection. I know, not a fair comparison because cable companies hate this, but realistically speaking, it must be considered.
You can get caught. (Score:2)
They don't just look for people outright stealing cable either. They're also interested in people using more hookups than what they paid for. More hookups - more deflection of that RF gauge.
Since all they are doing is monitoring the amount of signal leaking out their own network, they are legally in the clear on this. The fact that they didn't bother with a trap doesn't mean you're entitled to the video portion of the signal. If you hook up a TV, they'll find it if they're inclined to look for it.
Oh, they often use Time Domain Reflectometers to find faults in their cable. Those you who ride the network cabling range know about these too. A TDR will give highly precise readings on just what is sitting on a line. Those will work even if some smartass turns his house into a faraday cage.
Re:You can get caught. (Score:2)
Also there is the assumption that the technicians care to go to the trouble. Around here, technicians say flat out (while bosses are not looking, of course), to check cable hookups before calling for cable installation if all you want is TV. 8 times out of 10 the technician never bothers to disconnect. And if they don't even bother checking that, they can't be expected to detect minute differences in RF between 1 or 2 connections.
All this said, I am aware this is theft of service. And I actually don't do it (my only TV is so far away from the working cable outlet, it was only worth my time to see if it worked). And I know the omission of the filter doesn't give me rights, but as I said, free cable tv is a highly unofficial benefit, provider hates it, but consumers like it and learn of it by word of mouth.
decline of the dialup (Score:2, Interesting)
ISP = commodity (Score:2, Interesting)
This is exactly where broadband comes in. With ISPs being reduced to a commodity service, people are getting the most bang for their buck. And new internet users are savvy enough that they don't need AOL's (and the likes) handholding.
As far as email addresses go, I only use Yahoo! mail, never ISP provided POP accounts. That won't go away anytime, and it won't change everytime I move from the US to Europe and back
Premium Content Isn't Worth It (Score:3, Insightful)
The first reason people are leaving AOL and MSN is because the features they offer over traditional Internet access (ie: web browser) aren't worth it. Why use AOL's news area when you have CNN.com [cnn.com] and other sites? Why join one of their communities when you can join one of the hundereds of message boards and mailing lists on the Internet? You can still use instant messaging services (AIM [aim.com]) and get free e-mail (Hotmail [hotmail.com], etc) without using AOL or MSN.
Another reason is usability. Surfing the net, using web based e-mail and instant messaging has become very, very user friendly over the past 5 years. Most people who have used AOL for a year or two can now use the web exclusively without too much of a learning curve.
The last reason is combined with the first, and that is speed and cost. Everyone (my mom included) loves high speed access. She understands it's about twice as much as AOL per month, but since she knows how to get around on the Internet without AOL she doesn't need AOL any more. Why pay extra for services she doesn't use (or can get for free on the web) and a GUI that's almost too easy?
In summary, free web based services that are comperable to AOL/MSN's, computer literacy and premium content that isn't worth the additional cost is what I feel will be the downfall of providers such as MSN and AOL. Hopefuly they recognize this and provide cheap good old fashioned dialup or broadband to keep the customers that would otherwise leave.
"the real internet" (Score:2, Funny)
Content is King (Score:2, Interesting)
As much of the 'good' internet goes behind a subscription wall and the sources for 'free bootleg content' starts tto dry up. The large ISPs (especially AOL/TW) are in a position to capitalize on this position and both retain and increase membership. This model is no different from that of a TV station. You get the best content on board and people watch your station. THEN you can start talking about advertising revenue. The old AOL folks just had this underpands gnome view of economics that suggested that people would advertise on AOL for reasons that they couldn't themselves specify.
If AOL wants to prove its worth, just having bandwidth is NOT the key. People get super fast bandwidth not because its cool - they get it because they want to GET stuff. And until AOL starts providing stuff thats unique and compelling - they and all subscription model ISPs and ASPs will be on a downward toilet spiral.
What this shows (Score:3, Insightful)
We all knew it would... it makes some sense to use content to sell connectivity. But that means you have to either break even or lose money on the content, otherwise your connectivity will be overpriced.
Another approach is the revers... using connectivity to sell content. Again, same situation... you couldn't make money on connectivity.
AOL's early success convinced a lot of people that there was some natural synergy between the two. There's isn't. AOL's business model (and the Time merger) are based on the theory that by combining the two, they could make more money on content AND more money on connectivity. Can't work.
Even more amazing is the number of companies that saw the growth of AOL and concluded that bundling the way to go. Excite@home was one of the most spectacular failures that was fueled by this erroneous analysis.
Deflates DMCA Argument (Score:2, Interesting)
With very little in the way of conventional entertainment available (the RIAA has killed most and movies don't exist), an increase in broadband acceptance appears independent of the incentive. All that really happened was the consumer got shafted.
cell phones and broadband (Score:4, Interesting)
For example my mother was paying $20/month for a second phone line and $20/month for her ISP. We got rid of her second phone line and the ISP for a cable modem that costs the same, $40/month.
Another phenomenon that phone companies and ISP's have to worrying about is people not having a landline at all. Most people I'm friends with (age 22-28) do not have a landline, but instead use a cell phone exclusively. There are lots of benefits of using a cell phone only. For people with roommates, you don't have to worry about splitting up the phone bill or dealing with calling cards. On a cost basis, I would rather pay $75 for a really good cell plan than a landline with no long distance for $40 and a cheap cell plan for $35.
Most of the people who I know who use a cell phone exclusively are also cable modem subscribers. Those who are not, just use work for personal Internet access. Of the people I do know with landlines, most of them have to have them in order to dial-in to their company's network because of the absence of a Internet VPN.
I've been landline free for three years now, with no regrets.
in other news: 2400 bps decline (Score:2)
Our anonimous source from one ISP company told us that his company now doesn't know what to do with many of those old modems. Perhaps they are going to lay off all modem support operators. We've asked why not switch to higher speed and the answer was: "we cannot do it, we don't know if it will be too fast for us and we afraid of anything new anyway".
Less competition, if from AOL (Score:3, Interesting)
Not just Broadband (Score:2)
That's not why any of the people I know are leaving those ISPs, though. In my experience it's a combination of high prices, questionable billing practices, and poor customer support. Earthlink seems to be especially bad. I knew a lot of people that signed up with jps when it was $99 per year. jps got bought by MediaOne(?IIRC) and the rates went up to something like $12 a month. There was a little grumbling, but nobody did anything about it. Phone support was much less useful, and all the useful online support information became much more difficult to find. Then they got bought up by Earthlink, rates shot up to the $20 range, and everybody started getting bills for months they had already paid for, and getting cut off for not paying. Phone support got downright hostile, and useful online information completely disappeared.
A lot of people paid what they had to and jumped ship as soon as they found a $10 per month ISP. A few lucky ones like my dad, who saves paperwork like it's a freakin religion, where able to browbeat Earthlink with threats of lawsuit (Earthlink graciously gave him "for free" 6 months of service he had already paid for).
Gee, I can't imagine why anyone would choose to go with a different ISP...
AOL Forces me to use them (Score:3, Interesting)
I run a small business and use email to notify my clients. I send out 50, or so, emails once a week.
Unfortunately, 1/2 my customers use AOL and AOL has a really nasty habit of silently dumping some, but not all, email from other ISP's. So, a couple of days after I had sent out the weekly notice, I would get calls from some of my clients saying they hadn't gotten their weekly status report. Dicking around with Sbcglobal over several months wasn't getting me anywhere so I finally bit the bullet and bought an AOL account just so I could reliably reach my clients.
I'm not happy about it but I don't have the time to sort out AOL-Sbcglobal email incompatibilities. What really is annoying is that it was only my AOL clients that had problems getting their email reliably.
If I was smart, (that's a big if ), I'd stop using email and have my customers go to my website to get their weekly status reports. Then when they complain about how slow AOL's browser is I can steer them to a non-AOL solution and earn a referral fee. The fee isn't worth much but getting more people off of AOL certainly is attractive after all the grief I've had from AOL.
DSL/Cable over Dial Up (Score:2, Insightful)
EarthLink *not* in similar trouble (Score:2)
EarthLink does have issues with turning some profits but losses are very low, and they added 52 million dollars in cash to the bank, bringing their cash position to over a half a billion dollars.
Additionally, EarthLink is aggressively pursuing in 2003 the "value" $10 dial-up business by offering services thru its recently acquired PeoplePC [peoplepc.com] subsidiary, which is guna put a lot of lethal pressue on United Online which offers spam-ridden, windows-only service thru custom dial-up/networking software which basically takes over your tcp/ip stack.
EarthLink is by far the most diversified [earthlink.net] ISP in the United States. AOL and MSN are doomed dinosaurs stuck in the dial-up age, scrambling for their lives trying to land broadband deals with telcos a whole TWO YEARS behind their fiercest competitors.
Re:EarthLink *not* in similar trouble (Score:2)
They bought up a lot of small to medium sized shops, that's how they increased subscriber base, nit because people were actually choosing them.
I stuck with them for 3 months after they bought out penn.com. After deleted emails and charges for being dialled in twice ( when I have one PC with a modem and one phone line) I left them. That was 2 years ago and I still get junk mail from them to re-join.
Perhaps it's more that dialup is a money sink? (Score:2)
another possible reason for subscriber reduction (Score:2)
Multiply this by 250,000 households and you could have another cause of the decline of there subscriber dialup base.
I use a regional... (Score:2)
They're not perfect by far, but they're small, I know some of the guys there, and they're actually profitable. I know there are fewer and fewer regional providers these days, which is all the more reason for me to keep using one.
I pay a little bit more for my DSL than I was paying for DirectTV DSL but I get very similar service and terms.
I have few complaints but even if there were major issues I would likely still use a small regional for no other reason than I refuse to support any of the evil three (AOL, MSN, Earthlink).
Also, the local cable provider (http://www.charter.net) really blows in my area. I hear about horrible lag, serious downtime, and other problems from everyone I know who uses them.
My choice to use a regional may seem silly, but I feel like my money is being well spent supporting a dying breed. There should be more companies like them.
Re:Not such great news? (Score:2, Informative)
More cable users = irrelevant for you if you use ADSL.
More ADSL users = irrelevant for you if you use cable.
More ADSL users = irrelevant for you if you use ADSL.
Hence, choose ADSL
Remember: more broadband users = bigger market for pr0n = more pr0n 4 u!!!
Daniel
Re:Not such great news? (Score:2)
I always love the cats who say this shit. Pray tell how going from 256Kbps upstream minimum with cable, frequently more like 512Kbps, to my current 128Kbps upstream is preferable?
Remember: more broadband users = bigger market for pr0n = more pr0n 4 u!!!
Do you realize how much time it takes to upload a 150 MB pr0n movie to someone at ISDN speeds???? It is a horrendous amount of time. SBC also throttles your download speed to 384Kbps when you are using the full 128Kbps they allocate you for uploading.
In 1989, 2400bps was king. Then by 1991, 9600 was affordable. 1993, 14.4 was king. 1994, v.34 had arrived. Thats 28.8Kbps. Now, TEN FUCKING YEARS LATER, I only get 128Kbps upstream. Four times the speed of a decade ago.
I am not impressed.
Re:Not such great news? (Score:2)
Except that that DSLAM aggregates all those customers onto a single OC-x circuit. More ADSL users = less bw for you if you use ADSL. Both ADSL and cable modem have aggregation points that are potential bottlenecks - whether that actually impacts customers is a business choice the operator makes, not a technical limitation.
Re:Not such great news? (Score:2)
Re:Another factor (Score:2)
AOL and MSN both suck. (Score:3, Informative)
Good for mobile people (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were more of a mobile warrior, I would definitely have AOL or MSN.
Re:Good for mobile people (Score:2)
Thanks for removing mine on that subject
Earthlink cutting call centers (Score:3, Informative)
They've got 3 call centers now instead of 7.
Basically, you'll NEVER get through to them now.
20% of their workforce has just been laid off.
Atlanta-based access provider EarthLink (Quote, Company Info) on Tuesday announced it would shut down call center operations in four U.S. cities and lay off about 1,300 employees as part of a cost-cutting move.
With its dial-up subscriber base dwindling, the nation's third largest ISP said it would close its entire call center operations in Dallas, Texas; Sacramento, Calif.; and Seattle, Wash. Additionally, a tech support and customer service center in Pasadena, Calif. would also be shuttered in the latest belt-tightening move.
"We estimate the streamlining of our call centers will reduce annualized operating expenses by more than $20 million," the company said in a brief statement.
Re:Another factor (Score:2)
Exaggerated (Score:2, Insightful)
IMHO, AOL gets a bad rap from the tech community because of the obscene amounts of script kiddies who run off their parents' accounts on it. Because it's so huge, it's also automatically evil to groups of techies who use Linux just because it's not Windows.
Re:Not Quite.. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:debunking the move to broadband (Score:3, Informative)
And I'll be one of them if they don't change their attitude soon. I am tired of their 15k upload cap. It's freakin ridiculous! I encourage everyone who switches from Comcast to some other ISP to tell them that it is BECAUSE of their upload cap. Maybe they'll start listening. (I can't get DSL, not available yet... and sat costs too much).
15 (Score:2)
Tim
Re:debunking the move, period! (Score:2)
Be nice if they had stats on local ISP's aggregate numbers...
Re:Canada.. (Score:2)
Regardless, maybe the mass-exodus from AOL will cause it to finally die (lets hope) and maybe (not likely) with the more people jumping on cable and DSL we'll see some price-decreases??
*Sigh* One can hope, can't one?