Gamera = AOL for Linux 129
Uart writes: "AOL is building a Cross-Platform FDO to allow AOL content to be viewed on any number of platforms/environments. This includes a Linux client. Why is this big news you ask? Because it allows many many more people to use Linux, or other non-Microsoft operating systems. An image of the AOL site is right here. BTW, there will also be a Netscape\IE plugin to allow people to access AOL content from their Web browser." Rather then the traditional desktop PC model for viewing, a Linux-client allows AOL to make small devices that /just/ run AOL. Why on Earth would you need anything more? *grin*
well actually, (Score:1)
This looks much like a fraud. (Score:1)
1) First, being, that www.inside-aol.com is obviously not an official or trust-worthy source of information.
2) I may be thinking of a different website but I believe that www.inside-aol.com has done hoaxes before.
3) The
4) Theres something of an informal nature about this website that reeks of hoax, its written in such a manner to imply something informal (read: "The Long awaited.. etc.. blah blah") yet it contains a dubious confidentiality clause at the begining ("Do not distribute or show..."). I dont think that "Do not show..." is common legalese.
But these are just my opinions. I think its a fraud. What do you think?
Michael Munson
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
Unix is able to be uses by non-geeks... in fact.... artists. Think about all of the SGI workstations that are being used by 3D people... hardly a geek in the group.
They can point and click with the best of them.
Re:The End of BYOA? (Score:1)
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
I _HATE_ Explorer in all its incarnations, though - shell, file manager, and browser.
Having never played with SuSE, I don't know about how easy it is to configure graphically (though I've heard songs sung in praise here and there). Are they always at the CLI or in the GUI?
Email me.
Don't trust anyone over 90000.
SGI's and artists. (Score:2)
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
I won't try to address your first sentence, as I can't make heads or tails of it.
If you don't believe that a unix or unix-like substrate can support a highly functional, user-friendly environment, feel free to come by and use my NeXT for a few minutes. You may change your mind.
--
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
FYI, i've been using Linux for over two years, and various BSD's long before that. I know my computers, especially my operating systems.
As for printers, if it is supported I find it is always very easy to set up the printer on Linux
How often have you installed a printer on Linux? How many years experience with Linux do you have?
Heres an idea. Sit two fairly computer illeterate people in front of a computer (I.E they can use a mouse/GUI comfortably, know what a computer is). Have one sit as a freshly installed Windows box, another on an iddentical Linux box. Now, ask them to set up a printer, and see which one can get it done first. I'd put lots of money on the Windows user getting there before the Linux user.
for installing software and the multiuser model in general: it's called (*)S E C U R I T Y(*).
Theres security that helps, then there is security that just gets in your way. Once you've taught your Granny how to install an RPM, try to explain to her one day why the directory permisions on her newly installed package are wrong, and why she needs to drop to a command line to edit that config file.
Nothing their kids can do either to damage the system without the root passwd, or delete their important files by accident, or read their email correspondence. They appreciate the feeling of safety a great deal.
You can do that without such fine grained UNIX style security. You don't need individual file permisions.
They also appreciate having a free firewall that can *S A F E L Y * masquerade an inexpensive home LAN...
Uh, yeah, i can't even count the number of times i've heard Joe A. User ask me how to do that
Please, just try to think from the point of view of an average, barely computer literate user, who doesn't care, or have the time, to have to learn any of this stuff.
Re:This looks much like a fraud. (Score:1)
i'm not a zealot! (Score:1)
if you read the thread, you'll notice that i'm not a zealot and i don't run linux....
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=00/08/13/1372
Re:Back in the USSR (Score:1)
GAMERA IS FRIEND TO CHILDREN (Score:2)
"Bouncy Gamera Song"
[On the satellite:]
JOEL: Let's go, Gamera!
[music starts]
ALL: Gamera! Gamera!
Gamera is really neat.
Gamera is filled with meat.
We've been eating Gamera!
Shell
Teeth
Eyes
Flames
Claws
Breath
Scales
Fun!
SERVO: Dr. Forrester is kind of a jerk,
and Frank is really dumb, too.
CROW: We have to take part in these lame experiments.
JOEL: But do we complain?
SERVO: No!
JOEL: No!
CROW: Yes!
SERVO: Huh?
So we hi-keeba all over the place--
JOEL: --and talk of a thousand wonderful days.
SERVO: Everybody now!
ALL: Gamera is really sweet,
he is filled with turtle meat.
Now we have Commercial Sign!
Re:AOL "appliances" (Score:3)
The End of BYOA? (Score:1)
What's wrong with HTML? (Score:1)
Re:Seems a bit pointless (Score:1)
Re:Now what do us brainless masses do? (Score:1)
Now what stereotype do I put them under? </joke>
New, improved, smarter lamers?
Warranty Notice at Computer Store (Score:1)
"Installing AOL 5.0 onto your computer voids all warranties."
Gamera Is Friend To All Children!! (Score:1)
Re:Everyone is missing the point! (Score:1)
Right. AOL needs to be stopped - not encouraged to modify and proprietize (sp?) more and more technology. Do you think AOL will have anything to do with the GPL or open source? I seriously doubt it, folks - this is America Online - "So easy to use, no wonder it's #1" - sorry, but it's just because their propaganda machine is crankin' away. Please - don't let your mom, sister, grandma, or cousin use AOL - it merely reinforces the "too dumb to learn anything else" mentality.
Yes! Linux for the Numbnut! (Score:4)
I wonder if the AOL/linux web browser will be Mozilla? The Windows version uses IE... but now AOL has this spiffy portable web browser...
---- ----
Re:Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority. (Score:2)
RedHat 6.0, circa November 1999, on a Dell Optiplex GL-5133 (Pentium 133) with a genuine SoundBlaster 16.
conf.modules was my friend. And so was vi, which I voluntarily use over pico or emacs, mostly because when I got my first internet access in 1988, that was the only text editor available to me at shell. And therefore, nebulous and clumsy as it is, I know it well.
Urk.
Re:Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority. (Score:1)
Esc ZZ saves you 2 keystrokes.
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
Re:Slashdotted already (Score:1)
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
but at what cost to the linux community? i don't think anyone's realizing the full consequences of the "dumbing down" of linux.
FluX
After 16 years, MTV has finally completed its deevolution into the shiny things network
AOL Serves A Purpose! (Score:1)
This might be another step in getting the foolish neophytes to migrate to GNU/Linux (whether this is desirable is another question, but I think it is).
AOL will never be for you or me nor will it be free software. The company just does not get it, but this could be an interesting move in increasing userbase -> more free software -> enlightening the neophytes.
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
Re:we are the aol (Score:1)
WTF is the 'AOL Adapter' anyway, and why does it sometimes replace the network card completely (most of the time it gets put in along side the network card)?
AOL everywhere! (JAVA AIM etc...) (Score:1)
Re:AOL and Timer Warner (Score:1)
Re:If you really want to see Microsoft eat dust (Score:1)
Oh really? I was on AOL in 1993. I think you were still in diapers then.
Just try it out, fool - take the AOL Titanium CD, install it in any windows system, then once you realize that it's even below YOU, try to uninstall it. Ha!
It uninstalls easier than IE. QED.
Fucking clueless blinded-by-zealotry open-source disciple
That's not me. That's precisely who I was trying to skewer with my comment.
newbie!
My first kernel was 1.0.9.
Think for yourself!
Good advice!
Re:*sigh* (Score:1)
If people want Linux to take over Windows, they are going to have to accept that the companies that will be affected by this will also want to get on the bandwagon. It is simply self-preservation.
I do not want Linux to conquer the current Windows world. I could care less if the Linux userbase suddenly stopped growing.
Linux has accomplished all it needed to. And people are still working on it. It works great and better than Windows as a desktop, and developers are clamoring to get in on the action in fixing programs as well as creating new functionality. I feel that Linux's existence is already justified.
And now I am seeing anymosity towards RedHat. Why is this? Could it be that one of the companies who helped bring Linux to the fore-front is now being regarded as monopolistic because they are making money? People do have to do that you know.
There has always been anymosity towards anything proprietery and not open sourced in the Linux community. GNU/Linux is free and open sourced. Red Hat is closed source (and free as in beer only). I personally feel Debian [debian.org] is the only acceptable Linux distribution, because I am one of those Debian freaks.
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
AOL is a consumer ISP and doesn't particularly care what operating system its software gets ported too as long as there are sufficient customers to warrant it.
Never is a long time (Score:1)
At work, we use SunOS Unix workstations daily for our mission-critical apps. For the less-important stuff, they make us use Windows.
When I was working at Field Station Korea, every system ran Unix. It was either AIX, Xenix, or SunOS, but it was Unix. We didn't need to call the techs for every little thing, and we weren't all computer geeks (SIGINT geeks, yes).
Now, if we're looking at the individual home user, the type of person who actually will install software on occasion, have you taken a gander at some of the usability enhancements that Mandrake, RedHat and Debian have put out lately?
As for the need for security on a single-user desktop, consider all the little script-kiddies out there who try to break into systems that run Windows because it's so easy. Why not make it harder by running something that doesn't actually advertise, "Hey rape me now" every 30 seconds. I certainly hope that security is a concern on every home user's mind nowadays.
Again I say, "Never is a long time."
Well, (Score:1)
-Omar
Re:Gamera Info (Score:1)
Uhhhhh.
-thomas
Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority. (Score:2)
Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority.
I mean, how will all the AOLers know they have new mail if they don't hear the "You've Got Mail!" [204.138.52.63] message?
Assuming a kernel recompile isn't required, can you imagine that process?
I'd pay money to see an AOL user opening up /etc/conf.modules with vi:
"Remember, you can save your changes and exit very easily. Hit Escape, then colon, then 'wq!' It's very intuitive. You'll like it."
So easy to use, no wonder it's number one!
Re:Seems a bit pointless (Score:2)
It would be useful for people like me who run linux but have a wife and kids who _really_ like AOL for some unknown reason. They could still run AOL without having to run Win9x( or MacOS). Dual booting would be a thing of the past and the disk space taken up by Win9x could be used for more productive purposes.
It certainly could be something that RedHat or any of the other distributions could bundle in their retail boxes and might attract users that would like to try out linux, but don't want to give up AOL. I might also make other software developers a reason to take a look at porting their consumer software to linux.
Re:"Numbnut"??? (Score:1)
Windows is NOT point and click for a newbie
The average newbie needs loads of handholding - same as linux
Alos how any newbies install a printer let alone a NIC
Re:Everyone is missing the point! (Score:2)
It's pretty obvious that you have never used AOL recently as your Provider. If you have, then you'd know that it's almost impossible to connect with any medium.
Really? My wife can access AOL on an IP-Masq'ed box with a linux machine providing the TCP/IP link to my ISP -- we've done this with dialup and cable modem without any problems. They've had the 'bring-your-own-access' feature for quite a while. If that's the only method being used, one can chop the monthly AOL bill to only $10. I have also setup relatives machines with AOL 5.0 and they still can use the ISP of their choice (usually a free one) if they don't want to use AOL. It's not that difficult. When installing it, you just have to remember to select 'No' when it asks you if you want AOL to be the default internet access method.
Re:Everyone is missing the point! (Score:2)
Are you serious? "we can use standard TCP/IP client setups..." - Have you ever installed AOL 5.0? Goodbye DUN on Windows - if you had another ISP, AOL disables it.
That's only true if you do not select 'No' when it asks if you want AOL to be the default connection method for accessing the internet. This is the very last thing it does when it's being installed. I've setup Win9x machines this way for relatives and they don't have any problems using DUN or whatever methods their free ISP use for establishing a PPP connection.
Re:Never is a long time (Score:1)
We did NOT become geeks. We had tech support people when things went terribly awry, just as we do for the Windows machines, and the Digital Vax machines.
Have you actually tried to approach a modern distro as a normal user, without a biased predisposition to being a pain in the ass?
And, I don't think that what we have today sucks, and "just wait RSN". I personally think that for most people, Linux RIGHT NOW is good enough, with the benefit of not crashing.
One of my coworkers was complaining about the frequency of his reboots in Windows recently. He said if he didn't have kids (and therefore kid's games), he'd never need to use Windows. But, he has to restart his computer at least daily. I've never had to reboot Linux in 2 years of running it. I have, of course, rebooted, but it was to play a Windows game, not because the computer ceased to function.
Linux, StarOffice, and Netscape. Bam! Most users' needs are met.
Re:AOL and Timer Warner (Score:1)
I wouldn't be surprised if AOL put out something like <a href="http://www.thinknic.com">the NIC</a>. This a computer that does *nothing* but go online using either a modem or ethernet and run Netscape using a custom Linux 2.2 kernel. Apparently anyone who knows how to push buttons can set one up. They cost $200-300. There's one for Grandma
This would be a good thing (Score:1)
Re:Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority. (Score:1)
Standards.... (Score:1)
AOL for Linux (Score:1)
You can always switch to FreeBSD (Score:1)
"Linux is for people who hate Windows."
"FreeBSD is for people that like UNIX."
Ode to Gamera (Score:1)
Re:This looks much like a fraud. (Score:2)
Why have they been putting *so much effort* into making it suitable for embedded devices ?
Missing The point (Score:1)
Personally I think this is cool. (Score:1)
I really am happy about AOL Linux. Despite what anyone (myself included) says about AOL technically and price wise, they do have a reputation for being really easy to use.
A bunch of the comments I've read reflect an attitude that having AOL involved with Linux will somehow spoil it. Or that AOL is not good enough for Linux. I don't see it that way. It used to be that installing and using Linux was a kind of right of passage and if you did it it meant you knew something about computers. But these days it's fairly trivial to install something like Corel Linux. Pre-installed AOL is only just one small step easier. Sure with gamera you'll have AOL users who think they are l33t now that they run Linux. But if that worries you then you have self confidence issues you need to deal with on your own.
I like the idea of AOL linux too because at work I see people all day who think they hate computers but really they hate Microsoft. I do try to keep a balanced view in this but I've become convinced that NT _does_ crash too much. You can blame it on the hardware companies making inferior drivers or whatever but in the end Windows crashes and Linux doesn't. Also I find that many windows programs suffer from user interface problems and bugs. For example at work today I used a program where I had to press a button "daily report." But pressing it down doesn't do anything by it's self you also have to press enter or change the size of the window before the menu will appear. There are tons of things like this in every application I use at work. In Linux they would get fixed. If no one else fixed them I would fix them.
The other reason I AOL Linux is because I hope to get a Linux job after graduation. The more Linux users there are the more likely it is I'll find a Linux job. Call me biased, but programming in Linux is just a lot more fun.
Re:Err... (Score:1)
*sigh* (Score:2)
Ugh. The elitest attitude of some of these posts is, quite disturbing.
I have been using various *nix's for a number of years. From SCO in high school and College to Slackware 3.2 and RH 5 and FreeBSD 3 on my home puter. It is a great OS. And AOL coming to Linux can be a good thing if one thinks about it. It isn't just newbies using AOL *GASP* it is also made up of many people who are using it because either work or parents pay for it. Nothing like free internet access. There are also many places where AOL is the only (decent) choice. When AOL first came to town here, it was a better and faster solution than the generic ISP's. Who do you think I went with?
Did I curse and complain that it wasn;t available or *nix? No. At that time it just wasn't possible to do in *nix what I could in windows so I was in windows to do work. Now that Linux has become a viable alternative to Windows people like AOL are taking notice and allowing for those people who are using AOL for one reason or another to use it AND Linux at the same time.
If people want Linux to take over Windows, they are going to have to accept that the companies that will be affected by this will also want to get on the bandwagon. It is simply self-preservation.
And now I am seeing anymosity towards RedHat. Why is this? Could it be that one of the companies who helped bring Linux to the fore-front is now being regarded as monopolistic because they are making money? People do have to do that you know.
The greater the number of mainstream apps that come to Linux means a greater number of users and less reason to have to keep that Windows partition on the system.
Re:I just dont even know what to say (Score:1)
An installer that could read the registry, and gather any network and hardware information would be really nice. Or how about installing Wine, and seemlessly migrating the apps that it finds that work with the current version over to the Linux install?
Just pop in the cd, press ok, reboot, and you've got a fully functional system, complete with all of your old software...
It's not for us! (Score:2)
This is almost certainly for the AOL/Transmeta/Gateway "web pad" devices that have been mentioned before, more or less like the I-Opener. The users won't have to deal with "Linux," they'll just click the pretty buttons. Plug it in, turn it on... and you're ready to go.
Regarding the issues that people have brought up about more and more people using Linux, though... it does concern me a bit. The traditional "ask a question on Usenet" model may fall apart when 100 questions a day ask how to set up XFree, or Linux-Kernel is flooded with "what's an 'fdisk?'"
I'm sure we'll find a way to deal with it...
---
AOL distro? (Score:1)
The next important thing is obviously networking. They would have to streamline the setting up of a modem by the inclusion of a database of the settings of available modems out there. I do shudder at the thought of network security. Then again, they could turn off all services, and make the computer primarily a client machine.
New hardware? Run something like kudzu. Obviously, a lot extra modules will have to already be in place. Printer? Improve something like printtool by making the selection of a printer something like the selection of a modem; have a large data base of available printers. Installing new software? Something like gnorpm, only simplier. Monitor and graphics card? Once again, got to have a large data base available.
I know that there are other issues, but I have to believe that it is possible to make a user friendly linux distro. This would probably mean eliminating "options" in installation and setup.
They'll also probably have to change the name of fsck.:)
Double Edged Sword (Score:1)
I see it as a Double Edged Sword.
AOL, with 20+ million subscribers, does hold alot of weight within the industry.
If this weight can be used to get Hardware and Software Companies to provide more Drivers or Compatible Programs for an OS like Linux. I say more power to them. I've signed more "Linux Driver Petitions" [libralinux.com] than I care to count. It's a shame that we don't have some of the great programs Windows does(ie: Macromedia Products). That's why part of me doesn't mind AOL porting to Linux so much.
On the other hand, I have the part of me that wants to keep this OS of ours out of the mainstream as much as possible. To keep it the leet O/S it is, before we loose anymore of it to Big Greedy Corporations [aol.com].
Re:Is there an echo in the room (Score:1)
(Usenet I can understand..)
Elitism doesen't get us anywhere.
(Perhaps you should go back to using Gopher? I doubt you'll find many AOLers there...)
;-)
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
Giant Monster Gamera (Score:1)
Take a look here : Giant Monster Gamera [stomptokyo.com].
Anyone care to enlighten me why corporations tend to choose weird code names just to look cool in their financial reports?
Re:Yes, please. (Score:1)
Ryan
Re:Everyone is missing the point! (Score:1)
Altough IMAP can be a pain in the ass - especially when used with Mulberry.
Image Mirrored (Score:2)
You can now view it at [nols.com]
http://www.nols.com/slashdot/cris@aoledited.jpg without having to wait an hour for it to load.
Re:Yes! Linux for the Numbnut! (Score:4)
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
Ok, so we have an operating system that is well known by hackers runing historicly easy-to-hack software that allows server-push updates. And presumably as little user interaction with the operating system as possable. The company introducing the product is likely going to push for a wideband capabilities (cable, dsl) for the box, meaning it may be open to the internet.
Yeah, this sounds like a good idea :)
Give that man a cigar (Score:1)
Re:Seems a bit pointless (Score:2)
Why? Well, let's just think about this. AOL wants to develop a bunch of "AOL Appliances". Things like the I-Opener (but I'm sure locked down better). Why the heck would they want to do this with a windows platform? Then they have to pay a license fee for windows for each and every device.
Why not just port the client to Linux, and put Linux on these appliances? No license fees for the OS, and the interface, to the user, is pretty much the same. That's what they've done.
I saw the Netscape plugin portion of the Tokyo project work when I was still working at AOL. This was probably about 6 months ago that I first looked at it, and it was pretty slick then. Had a few bugs, but it was good for an alpha. I never did get to Gamera, even though I heard a lot about it. Mostly because I never took the time to download it off the internal servers.
IIRC, AOL was moving towards using Gecko in the clients (and therefore Netscape/Mozilla) instead of IE. Most of the holdups were concerns over the agreements with MS that keep AOL on the desktop of fresh Windows installs. However, I seem to remember that as I was leaving, they sorted it out and were pushing ahead. Although, it was always discussed as making an interface to plug a third-party browser into AOL, and never about Netscape/Gecko specifically. But I didn't live in that part of the AOL house, so I could be mistaken.
-Todd
---
Re:Seems a bit pointless (Score:1)
But i see this as a huge support momentum. If companies think that more will use Linux, they might be compelled to have better linux support.
Mike Roberto
- GAIM: MicroBerto
This is good AND bad.. (Score:1)
If you really want to see Microsoft eat dust (Score:2)
Re:Someone once said (Score:1)
A rose by any othername would smell as sweet...
that which we call a Rose,
By any other word would smell as sweete
William Shakespeare, Romeo & Juliet.
Re:AOL "appliances" (Score:1)
Even more especially when you realize that they'll probably mail you three or four of them a week. Collect enough AOL trial web pads and you could put together your own supercomputer.
Re:Yes! Linux for the Numbnut! (Score:2)
web server [written in Java], and for Inferno and Plan9, there's the Mothra
web browser.
Re:What's the point of AOL anymore? (Score:1)
That's $22/month, actually.
--
Re:This looks much like a fraud. (Score:2)
Re:If you really want to see Microsoft eat dust (Score:2)
"If you really want to see Microsoft eat dust, you had better stop trashing Time-Warner/AOL and get behind this!"
I think I'll pass. I dislike Microsoft because of their shady business practices, and monopolistic attitiude. So why would I choose to support a company that's well on their way to becoming Micorsoft#2?
Two wrongs don't make a right, and supporting Time Warner/AOL to get back at Microsoft will do nothing but create another yet monster.
Slashdotted already (Score:2)
sign of the end times (Score:4)
it must be snowing in hell right now
Err... (Score:3)
Goodbye AOL Link Enhanced? (Score:1)
Do we want this? (Score:1)
Seriously, if you can get Linux running properly on your system, you don't need something like AOL to help you get connected to the net.
Re:This looks much like a fraud. (Score:1)
Wouldn't that violate your NDA? :)
Seems a bit pointless (Score:2)
I can accept the point that aol is perhaps easy to use but then WHY OH WHY couple it with linux. Whilst I love linux it really was a complete bugger to install and I still keep it for my server and run Win2k on my workstation.
Perhaps there are some embedded applications for it but in these field you want as light an installation as possible and as I recall AOL isn't all that small.
Where does it fit in?
It'll be the slashdot-thinks-it's-cool-cos-it-has-linux-in-it category.
Re:we are the aol (Score:1)
D'oh!!! Until now I thought that read "Uninstallation requires linux". Bastards!
"You'll die up there son, just like I did!" - Abe Simpson
Re:Yes! Linux for the Numbnut! (Score:1)
woo (Score:1)
Re:Configuring sound in Linux is a new priority. (Score:2)
Yeah. I've got RH6.2, and while I've installed it on probably half a dozen machines around the office now, I still haven't installed it on one with a sound card yet.
I do, however, know that RH6.2's installer is a lot more advanced than RH6's; so it wouldn't surprise me if sound detection has been added.
But, this is all beside the point.
We're familiar enough with Linux and with computers in general that we think nothing of joining in a discussion board where most of us type our replies in HTML.
We take it for granted that we'll be able to figure out how to use a new application or toss a new piece of hardware at our computers and make it work.
Linux embodies that. It's been said before, and I will say it again: it's the operating system by computer geeks and for computer geeks.
AOL's interface is the epitome of dumbed-down for the masses, and it's in such stark contrast to the intimidating power of the Linux system that combining the two feels like a travesty.
My concern never was literally that AOL users would end up using vi, because I don't think that's physically possible. Nor do I expect that they'd ever have to manually configure a sound card - let's face it, AOL's interest is only in creating closed internet appliances.
Now, you can't tell me that the image of an AOL user slugging it out with vi and the contents of his /etc/ directory doesn't make you want to fall over laughing?
Re:Do we want this? (Score:1)
It's a good thing you weren't running things at AOL when they were thinking about building a Windows client. If there's one company out there that has shown consistant vision for the last 15 years it's AOL.
What's the point of AOL anymore? (Score:2)
It was disapointing. Keywords are one-word "addresses," if you will, to content on AOL. I tried a few- all of them pointed to websites! Ones accessible by anyone with a browser and internet access. As another experiement, i tried out a couple chatrooms- all cheezy sex. Perhaps the christian singles rooms are better (ha!), but this was far below the quality of IRC. Also, the built-in Instant Messanging client was years behind the one you can download seperately from AOL.
The only real difference I saw between AOL and a regular ISP is that when I logged on, it flashed some adds before letting me do anything, asking if I wanted to buy.
The AOL client made my computer extremely unstable. I have a Mac, and was used to crashing about once a week. AOL installed and required a background application, which appeared to be some IPRouter, that would crash randomly, when I was on- and off-line. I had to reboot once, twice, or three times a day. It was absurd. And when I was on-line I would get kicked off randomly, even whilst active, with the helpful error that someone picked up the phone, or the phone plug fell out of the wall (!). I'm sure glad that this was only a trial- who would pay $20/month for this garbage when other quality ISPs charge far less?
Needless to day, I dumped AOL before my month was up and found some schmucky AltaVista free access. Yes, I have to look at adverts, but I had to do that on AOL, and now I get faster more stable connections. And the client doesn't happily bring my computer to it's knees.
And AOL isn't the only way for people new to computers to get on-line. I think the only reason it stays in business is that centiment is commonly circulated. My grandmother, completely new to computers, got an old pentium for last christmas. With the help of her also-new-to-computers neighbor (who's also an older lady), she was on-line with one of those free ISPs, sending me goofy e-cards.
Re:This looks much like a fraud. (Score:5)
1) First, being, that www.inside-aol.com is obviously not an official or trust-worthy source of information.
2) I may be thinking of a different website but I believe that www.inside-aol.com has done hoaxes before.
True, however that doesn't mean it's immediately wrong.
3) The
Absolutely. However, in this case that site does actually exist. It's internal to AOL, and not accessible outside. Likely they have an inside contact that sent them the screenshot. I don't believe you can access the office.aol.com network from the PCs in the lobby of the Reston and Dulles AOL offices.
4) Theres something of an informal nature about this website that reeks of hoax, its written in such a manner to imply something informal (read: "The Long awaited.. etc.. blah blah") yet it contains a dubious confidentiality clause at the begining ("Do not distribute or show..."). I dont think that "Do not show..." is common legalese.
Yes, it is a semi-informal site. It's an internal site, for AOL employees. This is not a site that was designed to be used by anyone outside the company, and the people who put it up are not web designers. The "confidentiality clause" at the top is not legalese. It's a reminder. Everyone who has access to view office.aol.com websites has already signed either NDAs (in the case of on-site vendors), or employment agreements that contain much stronger language.
Anyways, you can believe me if you want. I've seen that web site first hand, and can tell you that it's real.
-Todd
---
Now what do us brainless masses do? (Score:2)
Now what stereotype do I put them under? </joke>
---
"Numbnut"??? (Score:3)
I like Linux, a lot, and I use it for more houts per day than most people reading /., I'd wager. But a big part of why I like it is not because of what it is or the political aura around it, but because of its potential to grow into something the "numbnuts" of the world can use as a legitimate alternative to Windows. If LInux gets there (and I believe it will), freeing tens of millions of users from the grip of MS's monopoly will be its greatest achievement, no matter what else it does.
AOL "appliances" (Score:3)
If Linux/BSD/etc. users can hack systems that weren't made for our OS's to support Linux (BSD, whatever), imagine the utility of a box that was *made* with Linux in mind. The possibilities are positively staggerring (especially when you consider that AOL could make small Linux computers an economy of scale).
we are the aol (Score:5)
Gamera Info (Score:3)
Story is here [cnet.com].
Looks like Gamera works on RH 6.1 and is built from the Gecko technology.
Re:Seems a bit pointless (Score:2)
I know people who are confused by the fact you can save a word document in other formats reinstalling 98 and office because they have essential work on their system.
Why is aol so popular though? There are so many superior isps and so many of them are completely free... i really fail to see why the little addedvalue content and the false-peace-of-mind they give parents justify paying a subscription.
Everyone is missing the point! (Score:2)
While it's fashionable to dump on America Online, this idea of having any web browser be able to display AOL-formatted content may be a major Godsend for many users.
The advantages are extremely obvious: instead of using AOL's custom-written interface and communications front end, we can use standard TCP/IP client setups for dial-up analog modems, LAN, or broadband modems to connect to AOL. It also means AOL may change their email and newsgroup access so you can use any standard TCP/IP-based email or newsgroup reader.
People forget that AOL has POP's all over the USA and also much of Europe and Asia (far more than any ISP on this planet); the elimination of the need for a proprietary interface and communications setup could mean AOL access to anyone who can do TCP/IP connections.