AOL Desktops On New PCs 220
mickeyreznor writes: "I came across this interesting article in the Washington Post. Apparently AOL is trying to pull the same kind of stunts that got Microsoft in trouble with the DOJ. I'm not sure where I stand on this whole issue, but it seems to be a very interesting situation. Seems like we're going to have an all-out corporate war in the upcoming months." With news that the number of internet users is shrinking, AOL needs a way to bring in new subscribers -- and the DOJ's pressure on Microsoft appears to have opened a door.
Funny... (Score:1)
Re:Not at all... (Score:1)
Talk about a pain in the ass.. (Score:1)
Ewwwwww. Removing all that shit sounds like a huge pain in the butt... far more intrusive than what Microsoft does for MSN.
I wish Microsoft was smart enough to put in their requirements that, "You can put whatever you want on the Desktop, but you have to put your changes in Add/Remove Programs." There really should be a "Remove all the AOL shit" option... which there almost certainly won't be...
Hopefully Microsft will provide a "restore default configuration" utility, but that would probably be considered anti-competitive. Oh well. Reinstalling the OS from Warez CD's it is...
Fewer people using DSL? Wonder why? (Score:2)
As for the decline in hits on some websites, I'd say that web users are becoming more savvy now. The novelty has worn off for many of them. We can't expect hamsterdance to maintain the level of clicks it had in '98 now can we?
One good thing about this... (Score:2)
I, for one, would be happy for the streaming content market to have more choice. More installed RealPlayers == more content creators providing content in this format. And, unless something has changed, there's nothing to play WMA (or whatever it is) files on *nix.
(Little) huzzah for AOL!
...j
Re:We're being bombarded! (Score:1)
If you're too lazy to build your own computer
You know, I've built dozens of computers for myself and other people and I still take exception to this - people should be able to buy product A without being subjected to advertising via mail, email, telephone or carrier pidgeon for products B, C, D, ad infinitum. Sorry, just because some of us enjoy tinkering with the internals of a PC doesn't mean everyone else does or even knows how -- or someone else who does. (Try that argument on a grandmother who buys a PC so she can email her grandkids. It's bullshit.)
The attitude that customers are just targets for repeat marketing is something that needs to change. The computer manufacturers are only one aspect of this. I have a Bally's membership, and now I find that they're re-selling my personal information. That's bullshit, I bought a membership to a health club. It's a business transaction, not an invitation for them to strip mine personal data for their further benefit. I pay for the use of the club, they should leave it at that.
People should be justifiably angry at all these large companies abusing their relationship with customers. People shouldn't have to build their own PC, car and health club to escape the damn ads.
Re:We're being bombarded! (Score:1)
They shouldn't HAVE to remove ads from something they just paid for - that's the whole point.
I didn't switch anything - I was never talking about spyware. I'm talking about how companies are double-dipping (or more) by taking your money and then also taking advantage of the business relationship to make further money by selling ads or your personal data.
Thoughts, part 1 of 1 (Score:3)
If the argument is that the world economy has been kicked in the teeth (GWB wouldn't know anything about that, would he?), and that the Internet is a luxury, compared to food, then yes, I'll agree that the global Internet usage is probably slipping, right now.
However, AOL aren't selling to the global Internet population. They're not even selling to all major cities in the United States! If you don't sell, then nobody can buy. Blaming the customer may appease a few board members, but it won't pay the bills.
If AOL are going to pull hostile take-overs of the Internet community, they're going to wind up dead in the water. For a start, how do you attack something or someone you know nothing about? At least Microsoft picked their targets with some degree of skill.
Besides, AOL's best solution is obvious to me. Even if the global Internet usage plummets, the big corporate players will still be there. And that means, a need for high-speed backbones. AOL covers a fair number of countries. If they were to build their own backbone, they would be less vulnerable if an existing major player went under, they'd have an extra revenue stream, and it would cut their long-term costs massively.
(Lucent's just about dead, which means that terabit switches and optical routers are more likely to end up in the Smithsonian than in companies' networks. Further, anything they have already sold is likely to end up unsupported.)
Re:Where did MS threaten to raise Windows Pricing? (Score:2)
Go read the Findings of Fact for the MS-DOJ case read the part about the licensing of Windows 95 to IBM. The OEMs that did whatever MS wanted got Win95 early and at a cheaper price than those who didn't cave in. IIRC, IBM didn't get Win95 until the night of the consumer launch. Which considering the amount of time it takes to test it on the hardware, write any necessary drivers, get the systems into the supply chain, etc. it hurt IBM a lot. Sure it's not jacking the prices up to extremely high levels, but the effect is still the same.
The courts also use monopoly/anti-trust law to block mergers of companies where the combined market share percentage is no where near the market share that Microsoft has. Whether it fits your definition or not, the courts still have ruled that MS abused monopoly power. As others have pointed out, what AOL is doing isn't any different than companies paying for premium space on store shelves. It's actually funny that MS is bitching about it.
It's a gem. (Score:1)
A new level of mediocrity... (Score:2)
Number of 'net users dwindling.. (Score:1)
Well, maybe not porn.
Quick question (Score:3)
That's odd... what's that big-ass building down the street from me (Dulles)? Is AOL no longer based on NoVA as a result of the merger?
Re:Out of the box, out of the ashes... (Score:1)
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:1)
Dell wouldn't be giving it away for free - if they could offer a "better Windows than Windows" (that's not OS/2) they could charge more for it. People complain that there are a zillion different Linux distributions, but that's really a feature, not a failing - OEMs can put together a distribution targetted for a particular audience and use, charge a minor premium for that service, and retain a very loyal audience too.
Right now Dell and Gateway try to distinguish themselves on hardware price and by the quantity of worthless OEM crap that they shovel onto each machine. Wouldn't it be better for them to spend that energy actually making real improvements to things that are actually broken in Windows, rather than just throwing more junk on top of it?
Microsoft would never let this happen, but it's still a neat idea IMHO.
Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus",
Re:This is the free market at work (Score:2)
I sort of agree. The problem occurs when OEMs can no longer compete without getting those $35 payments from AOL. OEMs could have chosen not to sign restrictive contracts with Microsoft as well, but it would have hurt them enough financially that they would have been out of business. Eventually I could see this being the case with AOL's kickbacks as well.
In a certain sense AOL isn't the monopoly at this time that Microsoft was then, but in another way it is: AOL is the only way to get AOL-type services. If you want the incredibly simple interface that they provide, there is really no competition. I don't know how many OEMs are selling based on the simplicity and AOL-ness of their systems, but if they are doing so then they've got nowhere else to go. AOL is still nowhere near the monopoly that Microsoft is, though.
Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus",
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
Best. Solution. Ever.
mod up, please
Remember: it's a "Microsoft virus", not an "email virus",
I'm sure MS has an ace up their sleeve (Score:4)
DR DOS
I can see blue screens happening every time that popup comes along
Re:Why the HELL... (Score:1)
I mean come on, what do you expect out of this group? Objectivity and Real World experience? Right. That's hard to get when the only sun these idiots get are on those days when their college dorm happens to have a fire drill in the middle of the day.
That's sad, I had to actually think for a few minutes why one of these dweebs would need to leave their computer nowadays. The list is getting shorter.
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
If your answer is, "Because nobody needs a terminal emulation program anymore", then s/Hyperterminal/Notepad.
Notepad sucks. There are a million better programs (not necessarily more complex, though) I'd be happy if Notepad had three new features:
* Arbitrarily large file support
* Proper handling of UNIX newlines (MS-DOS editor handles them just fine)
* Search-and-replace
Dell could easily write a program that was as simple as Notepad but had these three features, and then pull out Notepad and replace it with this.
Similar things have happened with Stacker/DoubleSpace, HIMEM/QEMM, Speedisk/Defrag, NDD/ScanDisk, Anything/Pbrush, Anything/HyperTerminal, Winamp/Windows Media Player, Netscape/IE, ICQ/MSN Messenger, Anything/Command Prompt,
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
The benefit, of course, is that Dell Windows had better be superior to Micron Windows or else no corporations will use it. And so on.
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
There ARE alternatives... :) (Score:3)
I for one hope AOL gets every single major OEM to put AOL products all over the default installation, and then says to MS, "What? They can always download MSN. They can always download Windows Media Player."
Or paraphrase MS's excuse from Windows Refund Day: "Sure, most major OEMs will bundle AOL, but you don't have to use a major OEM. Just use some fly-by-night mail-order distributor if you don't want AOL bundled with your computer."
Sure, i hate AOL as much as the next guy, but the delight of seeing MS get a taste of their own medicine is worth it.
Windows Distributions (Score:5)
The OEMs should look at products and choose what to bundle. If Dell decides Mozilla is better than IE, they should pull off IE and put on Mozilla.
That way, MS can't destroy a competitor just by bundling a moderately good imitation.
Think back to the bundling of, say, HyperTerminal. It sucked, but nobody would bother to go out and find a good replacement when something adequate comes with the system. But if Dell had had the balls to say, "Screw that, we're including FooComm in our Windows distribution, it's better" then HyperTerminal would have faced competition and would be better today.
Re:Not at all... (Score:1)
It's laughable that anyone who can say MS was/is in a monopoly position, can believe that AOL/TW is not in a monopoly position. They have over 4 times the subscribers of their nearest competitor, control IM protocols that they are abusing, own the largest chunk of broadcast, print and online media, own one of the largest cable companies in the US and are working on a deal to handle the online customers for THE largest cable company. They control the largest portion of content and delivery.
MS did not threaten to raise OS prices, they threatened not to nearly give it away any more. Otherwise they'd have to pay the full price(that everyone else pays) of 89$ for the software. Same thing AOL wants to do by giving 35$ per PC. MS just did it as a credit, because they had a product that PC makers saw as valuable. AOL doesn't really have a lot that PC makers consider to add value to their product, so they pay cash.
Maybe this isn't an abuse of their monopoly, because they're not forcing you to subscribe to AOL to see CNN, yet. But AOL/TW most certainly holds a monopoly position.
Bury your head in the sand, but this is just as bad as the things MS did, probably worse because of the horizontal layout of AOL/TW.
Re:Not at all... (Score:3)
Yes, utilities are one of the very few things that work well in a socialistic fashion. Gov't regulated or owned utilities have worked terribly well. However AOL/TW isn't a utility. You must understand that AOL/TW isn't just AOL anymore. It's the largest mixed media company in the world. What they control or have an extensive interest in is mindboggling.
Sure, MS can control the PC OS, and even the office application market. But that's a miniscule niche to what AOL/TW controls.
Microsoft can rely on threats while AOL has to offer sweeteners
In the business world the difference between a threat and sweetener is negligiable. If your competitor is keeping back 35$ more than you a unit it effects your bottom line. You have to counter that by taking the offer too, whether you want to or not. The EXACT same reason PC makers had to agree to MS's demands. AOL is simply taking advantage of the current situation, because MS can't counter because of PR backlash (See AOL's holdings in CNN, CNN/fn etc).
Choose your evils. Myself, I hate to see any company go unchallenged. MS at least had some challengers, no matter how small, But AOL/TW has none. Go without MS for a month, no problem. Now try to go without AOL/TW, good luck, hopefully you're blind, deaf and dumb and live in a very remote cave.
Net users will continue to rise long term (Score:2)
Once the economic conditions turn around, however, people will begin signing on again once the extra
$20 or so per month is no longer a strain on the budget, and people will begin using the net for what it is - a facilitator of information exchange - rather than expecting it to solve all the world's problems. I think any downturn is temporary.
The insidious thing is... (Score:4)
Microsoft is using the same technique with passport: the prompt to register comes up three times before disappearing (IIRC) after installing XP. Microsoft claims that passport registration is NOT required with the OS, however a reasonable user would believe after the second time that the nag popped up, that registering with passport is necessary to get rid of it.
How is this helping users? Nags should come up once and then have the ability to dismiss them forever or remind later (just like outlook appointments).
By including such measures AOL and MSFT are doing a disservice to their end users.
-Shieldwolf.
Can we say read the article again? (Score:1)
The article states that a few sectors are still growing, but never says that the overall number of users is still growing. The positive figures quoted were from the previous two years.
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:1)
We must make a stand (Score:1)
I would bet that sometime down the road they will have a 'AOL'centric active desktop feeding you ads at a phenominal pace. You might think web popups are annoying now. Could you imagine tring to get to Word and a popup comes up and says 'Would'nt you like a Coke(tm) with that?"
ARRGGHH, enough already! Lets tell all thes lusers where to get off.
Re:My favorite comment... (Score:1)
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:2)
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
Re:AOL's paying off Retailers (Score:1)
"...that somes it up very nicely." should be:
"...that sums it up very nicely."
It's alright if you feel like an ass.
painkillr
Re:Not at all... (Score:2)
Vivek Varma again! (Score:1)
Re:This is not the same as what MS did/does (Score:2)
Let AOL and MS duke it out on the Windows desktop. Windows will become so unusable due to the constant popups, hundreds of extraneous icons, and lack of program compatibility that noone will want to use it. Maybe then people will finally look at the alternatives.
How long will it be before the alternatives are clogged with ads?
Maybe we should keep this whole "leenux" thing quiet...
Re:Where did MS threaten to raise Windows Pricing? (Score:2)
Say there was one car engine manufacturer in the US (heck, the world) who had an exclusive deal with all auto manufacturers. So all cars came with the same engine. SURE, you *could* go out and buy an engine from smaller-engine-dealer and replace the one that came with the car...or you could just build your own car from scratch.
But who's going to deal with that? Maybe 10% of the population? So before ya know it, every car has a 4 cylinder, 20mpg engine and spare parts (upgrades) for that engine cost lotsa $$.
Take this to the computer world, and perhaps you see the problem?
KM
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:1)
hmm, isn't this option there under Search?
AOL/TW hq is in NYC (Score:1)
I remember just an hour after the merger was approved, CNN was showing a crew on ladders adding the letters "AOL" to beginning of the name over the main entrance.
I work at 43rd and 5th and was wondering where the building was. Now I know.
--
Steve Jackson
Okay, I'll say it... (Score:1)
What would be nice is that since the target users of the kiosk would be consumers, they could build the distro to be extremely secure on the Internet side. No Outlook viruses. No NetBIOS hacks. No DDOSes. "Screen names" would translate to users, but now with separate, completely customizable desktops with minimal office suites.
Imagine the contributions AOL would be able to make to Linux WRT device drivers. Those pesky "please wait while we update your system" messages may actually be linux kernel module updates.
And who knows, maybe even AOL/TW would open the AUP on their RoadRunner service to allow these kiosks to share their internet connection with other PCs in the same home. Doubtful, but it would be a way for them to guarantee the security of systems attached directly to their cable modems, and therefore minimize abuse of the connected clients. I haven't performed any true forensics, but the last time I installed AOL6 for my Mom, it looked like the native AOL connection was extremely close to a traditional PPP connection.
--
Steve Jackson
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:1)
Re:Battle of the Blobulants (Score:1)
Battle of the Titans (Score:3)
Once one gets the upper hand of the other, then we're going downhill. Once MS is finally emasculated (by the DOJ? AOL?), AOL/TW will be the new hated corporation around here.
Re:more haiku (Score:1)
Congratulations, humanity! A big collective "No!" at some subconcious cultural level. It is quite re-assuring, really
We [/.ers] can have a cleaner net exerience if we want to, becuase we know how to. But no-ones making much money from us either.
More bandwidth to share between us, eh? I hear there isn't a shortage of bandwidth really these days, just a shortage of people using it. Last week the company I work for decided to reduce it's international ATM link by 50%. Smarter use of what we have by using easy to use and adjust QOS systems QOS [packeteer.com], and a saving monthy of A$20,000 per month.
RG
This is not the same as what MS did/does (Score:2)
MS leveraged their OS market share to push IE. They forbade manufacturers from changing the desktop. They penalized manufacturers who did not put Windows on the PCs they sold.
AOL is striking deals where they would pay the manufacturers bounties for AOL subscribers that sign up as a result of popups that the manufacturer would install on the Windows desktop, courtesy of MS's loosened restrictions on this. AOL is not forcing anyone do this. They're not penalizing people who don't. And they're not leveraging anything to get this, except maybe existing relationships with the manufacturers. So other than cluttering the desktop and annoying people with popups, what's wrong with this?
I say more power to them. Let AOL and MS duke it out on the Windows desktop. Windows will become so unusable due to the constant popups, hundreds of extraneous icons, and lack of program compatibility that noone will want to use it. Maybe then people will finally look at the alternatives.
-Todd
---
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
*this space is filled with uncontrollable laughter*
Maybe you should spend 10 minutes comparing Macs and PCs in real world situations? Say, throw the latest consumer OS version on them both, 256 megs of RAM on both of 'em, and the top of the line processors on both of them, then run every application that you can get a copy for both systems on them. You'll notive that the Mac consistently outperforms the PC. Then come back and tell us how sorry you are for spreading disinformation.
DISCLAIMER: I do not like Macs, I am impressed with their hardware, and I kind of like MacOS X, but I prefer Windows 2000. I like PCs for the ease with which I can screw with the components. But that feature is not one that most consumers have any need or desire for.
Kintanon
Re:Instead of 1 (Score:1)
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:1)
Corporate interests DO control the US govt.
Check out the rest of opensecrets.org [opensecrets.org] for more info.
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:1)
-- Bucket
Re:Let me get this straight... (Score:2)
I love it! (Score:1)
methods of the past. I liked it so much I even bought some AOL stock for a position play.
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:5)
Re:My favorite comment... (Score:1)
My favorite comment... (Score:5)
classic
Suck on that foot, MSFT (Score:2)
""AOL's actions are unprecedented and completely anti-consumer," said Microsoft spokesman Vivek Varma. "AOL is paying [computer makers] to eliminate consumer choice, forcing people to select the most expensive service in the industry.""
So it was fine for Microsoft to put MSN on the desktop alone (Before they started selling the space to ISPs themselves, anyway.), but when AOL does it the whole thing is anti-competitive.
*sigh*
Re:It's called "competition" (Score:2)
to to this by threatening to withhold the OS;
No, you're wrong.
Microsoft never threatened to withhold the OS or to raise prices on it. There was a set price per license and a date on which you could get your hands on copies. What it did do, though was offer incentives - not unlike what AOL is doing here. If a manufacturer was willing to do things their way, MS offered them discounted licenses (similar to AOLs $35 rebate) as well as a chance to get their hands on the Gold CDs early.
Not that much different after all.
Re:Windows Distributions (Score:2)
As an application developer, I prefer coding to a standards, not moving targets where my test matrix blows up because every OEMs version of the Operating System has its own personal quirks which throw my app in a tizzy.
As a user, I prefer a standardized operating system where I don't have to relearn everything every time I want to do something just because some OEM thought it would be cool to remap the function keys.
Here's a clue: Most users use their computers to get something ELSE done. People don't normally use computers for the thrill of it but in order to get their job done. They don't care about the specifics of how as long as it is relatively easy to learn and doesn't change every time. MS won't have much to worry about until the competition begins to realize this.
Re:This is not the same as what MS did/does (Score:3)
They penalized manufacturers who did not put Windows on the PCs they sold ... AOL is striking deals where they would pay the manufacturers
Bzzzzt!! Wrong!
There is no difference between Microsoft's "penalties" and what AOL is doing here. The price for the OS was always $89. For OEMs that played along with MS, MS offered a huge discount to that price. OEMs that didn't do this didn't get the discount and were hence "penalized". What AOL is doing is the same here. They're offering money and OEMs that don't take it are "penalized" because their computers cost more compared to their competitors who do.
Re:It's called "competition" (Score:2)
No, you're wrong.
Microsoft never threatened to withhold the OS or to raise prices on it. There was a set price per license and a date on which you could get your hands on copies. What it did do, though was offer incentives - not unlike what AOL is doing here. If a manufacturer was willing to do things their way, MS offered them discounted licenses (similar to AOLs $35 rebate) as well as a chance to get their hands on the Gold CDs early.
MS Windows is ALWAYS available, to any manufacturer. The price, however, is the $199 MSRP. If MS withheld their licensing agreement from a manufacturer, then the price of installing Windows would basically price the manufacturer right out of the market in most cases.
AOL IS NOT DISCOUNTING LICENSES. They are paying for new users, that's vastly different. The AOL software does not need to be licensed, they give it away all day, every day.
If a manufacturer doesn't do business with AOL, then nothing has changed for him. If a manufacturer refused to "play ball" with the "old" MS, then MS had the ability to directly increase his costs and force him out of the market.
It's called "competition" (Score:4)
Ah, good old American capitalism at work...
We're being bombarded! (Score:4)
Jesus! We're being bombarded by ads enough as it is. It's not enough that every morning I see ads on TV and hear them in my car. During my drives around town, I see hundreds of billboards, signs, and flyers designed to attract my attention. When I'm on the Internet, I'm pounded by pop-ups and banner ads. Now, AOL wants to slap computer users in the face before they even get on the Internet!
As a result of that Microsoft concession, AOL's strategy for Windows XP now focuses on the "OOBE process," or the out-of-box experience, the crucial moment when consumers turn on their machines for the first time and select what products and services they intend to use, the documents show.
The average OOBE will soon be "Wow. I remember back when there was a *desktop* that people could see icons that related to the programs they bought. Now, it looks like we've bought one damned expensive commercial-generator."
--SC
Another internal AOL "wishlist" (Score:4)
Other ways to ensure a profitable "Out Of the Box Experience" for AOL:
- Removal of one of the customer's fingers each week that the customer fails to accept "the trial".
- Promised hold times of "only three hours" if the customer wishes to cancel his or her subscription after "the trial".
- Forced sex with the customer's spouse and/or children until the customer agrees to "the trial".
- Regular visits by a naked Steve Case to the customer's home or office until the customer accepts "the trial".
- The AOL icon will be present on the customer's desktop in three forms. Each time the customer tries to delete one of them, one of the customer's most recent documents will be deleted, and a pop-up message will warn that if the customer doesn't try "the trial" within the first 30 days of ownership, his family will be killed one by one in reverse order of birth.
Shocking.This is the free market at work (Score:2)
Uhm, no. This is the free market at work. AOL is making deals that other companys are free to attempt to make. The PC makers aren't being forced into anything. Consumers aren't being forced into anything.
This is the way it's SUPPOSED to work.
--
Re:Not at all... (Score:2)
You can avoid Microsoft with no problem -- use an operating system other than Windows, and 95% of your problem is solved. What if you want to avoid AOL-Time-Warner? They have more control over the public's mindshare than Microsoft could ever hope to.
To add to this, you always know when you're faced with a Microsoft product -- it's got the logo in a prominent position on the box. With AOL-Time-Warner and its myriad of brands, you never know when you're being fed by the corporate monster.
this isn't the same (Score:2)
2 problems with this new approach (Score:4)
There are two issues (that I see) with this new approach, but neither deals with the fact that AOL/Time Warner is becoming a mega-media giant.
Oh yeah, and to touch on Compaq again, I really think their idea of keeping their computers as an overall package of software, hardware, support, etc. is an awful idea. They tried that on me with a laptop I bought from them. I recently dissuaded the purchase of $200,000 of computer equipment from Compaq because of their inflexibility. What a pleasure it was putting a full-featured, factory-provided version of Win2K (without all the company crap) in a brand-new Dell machine, reformatting/reinstalling, and have it still be fully supported!
No they don't. (Score:2)
No they don't. With all the recent mergers they've been having, how many tens of millions of subscribers do they have now?
---
Re:Pots and kettles, all of 'em... (Score:2)
Can we say horrible journalism? (Score:3)
But this is completely and utterly a lie! The article he links to clearly states that the number of internt users is increasing, this is simply happening at a slower rate than last year.
Geeze. It makes me sick.
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:2)
This isn't the same as Microsoft (Score:2)
Microsoft was slapped on the wrist because they both made the desktop, and dictated what content could sit on it. ie - leveraging monopoly control on one product to bolster sales in another sector. This is not what AOL-T/W is doing.
Disclaimer: This does not mean I don't consider AOL Time-Warner to a monopoly. I just don't think this is an example of it.
---
more haiku (Score:2)
my bandwidth goes up up up
arg! more disks needed
Looking on the bright side... (Score:2)
AOL also is seeking to give an advantage to Netscape, its own Web browser...
Truly, I am torn over this one... no wait, I'm not, that's just heartburn.
Re:AOL's paying off Retailers (Score:2)
Forward to the Past (Score:2)
When MSN was rolled out, Microsoft decided to pressure PC makers to not allow competitive providers. This caused us at the ISP that employed me huge heartburn; we were convinced that MSN would drive us out of business in no time flat. We negotiated with Microsoft to allow us some presence and they eventually relented, so long as we used Microsoft Explorer as our default browser. I use the word "negotiate" loosely as it was a pretty one-sided negotiation.
I think this may have even been the initial impetus for the antitrust suit as all the ISPs gave up negotiating with Netscape so as to get placement somewhere in Windows. In any case, it certainly smells like tying.
AOL seems to be exploiting Microsoft's weakness to turn back the tide. Much as I dislike both AOL and Microsoft, better to have a two party system than a one party system - even for us Independents.
Similarly ... (Score:3)
Not at all... (Score:5)
1) What got Microsoft into trouble wasn't what they did but that they did it with a monopoly position. AOL hardly has a monopoly and can therefore legally do all sorts of things that would be illegal for Microsoft.
2) Anyway, I don't see where there's much similarity between Microsoft threatening to raise Windows prices to prohibitive levels for computer makers who don't do what they want and AOL offering bonuses to makers who deliver users to them.
To give this some perspective, Dell, Compaq and the rest are paying catalog owners and stores to give their products good placement -- and they're paying bonuses to salesmen who successfully move their boxes. (Apple doesn't pay those bonuses, which is why CompUSA salesmen are so reluctant to sell you a Mac even when you go in and demand one.)
Unsettling MOTD at my ISP.
When are they going to learn... (Score:2)
MS's troll says in the article that AOL is "forcing people to select the most expensive service in the industry".
To that I say: 1. MacOS doesn't do that, and I'm sure some PC manufactures won't support AOL 2. You CAN actually say NO to AOL.
Mainstream media seems to be missing the point (Score:3)
--CTH
Where did MS threaten to raise Windows Pricing? (Score:2)
Actually, can you have a monopoly on the operating system front when people can still go to the store and buy another? That is one thing that still bugs me about the scenario of the MS monopoly?
Where is the importance of which browser is preloaded or used?
Where is the importance in the Instant Messenger?
Where is the importance in the media player?
There isn't, nothing MS proposed prevents me from getting another, which in fact is what I do. Heck, IE comes up and tells me I need QT or SW to play something, not quite threatening is it?
The key to being a monopoly is to have no choice other that yourself. I don't think its achieveable, not now, not 5 years ago, and not in 5 years, let alone ever.
So can AOL's decision be dangerous? Well the only threat AOL has is that in this day and age people are pretty attached to their email address.
Why not universalize them? Make them out to be like DNS... you may be x@aol.com, does that mean your mail must go there? Why not require ISPs and similar to let go the control of the mailbox, then it won't matter what platform or what ISP you use, you will always have a choice.
Its when you lose the freedom to switch that a monopoly exists, and we don't have that, nor were we approaching it.
But unfortunately.... (Score:2)
Consumer advocates briefed on the proposals were unsettled by AOL's marketing techniques, comparing them to those used by Microsoft.
---
Out of the box, out of the ashes... (Score:3)
This is the saddest thing I have ever heard -- I got a free DVD with my player and I never even considered watching it. What is it about computers that leads people to beleive that they come pre-ordained to do whatever you want them to?
I think it has to do with the amount of crap we hand people with a new computer. It's overwhelming. Instead of, "here's a box, a 35 page manual, and you're good," it's "here's a box, your monitor box, your cables and printer and mouse and keybouard an a set of For Dummies books on the OS, the browser, setting up internet, using software, scratching your ass and solving world hunger." We give them so much shit to learn...doesn't it make sense that they don't have time to absorb it all, and make all the pertinant decisions? When you buy a TV, you know how to use it...channel up, channel down, volume controls. Computers just don't have that level of ease of use...programs don't have any uniformity or really intuitive user interface that is common among them, and this is one area where Open Source just isn't helping (read the report Sun did of new users on Gnome...you'll realise why you need evils like project managers and marketeers to make a pervasive OS).
Maybe, rather than handing them all the software at once and burying them, we should go back to the old Commodore method of software sales. You get a PC with an OS, it does basically nothing. Learn that. Then we'll hand you your web browser, and when you need it your word processor. If this was how software was received, maybe there'd be time to choose which provider and package you wanted based on informed input. But software is rush, rush, rush...people want everything now, because that's what we've sold them. When you do that, you're openning the door for cruddy software and $35 kickbacks. It's a bit like beer vendors at a baseball game. I'd love to have open competition, with the choice to choose whatever beer I liked for a competitive price. But to prevent a lot of "confusion," the stadium offers a license to only one beer man, who offers a choice of piss yellow beer or piss yellow light beer, each for an abyssmal price. I drink it because it's there and don't really enjoy it. Software on a new PC is the same...you use it because that's what you got, and don't really get to know there's better stuff out there.
Re:When are they going to learn... (Score:3)
on-screen 'Pop-ups' that will appear five times within the first month of activity(or until the user signs up for AOL, whichever comes first).
Peachy. Beat them into submission. I bet Microsoft is kicking themselves for not having thought of it first.
The revenge of the PC-Makers IV (Score:2)
Whom they do expect? Snowhite? I mean who is going to compete in the desktop with Microsoft? I don't like AOL, but competence seems better than monopoly, even if it's imperfect. Only somebody with market power can make such deals interestings to PC makers.
What I find really interesting is that surely now PC makers start realizing their own importance. They had danced to the tune that Microsoft played, but now it seems they can also play a bit. I interpret that like Microsoft is more dependent on the PC makers than the PC makers on Microsoft. Perhaps next time some monopolist or other will think twice before screwing up their resellers when they're ahead of the game.
--
number of internet users.. shrinking?! (Score:3)
Come on, just how likely is it that the number of people getting net access is going down? Well, maybe because the majority now have connections, thus a slowdown in the number of new isp registrations. Seems logical enough, don't you think?
--
Re:Why the HELL... (Score:2)
I have also had internet accounts for *much* longer. I have kept both all of this time.
I understand that there are plenty of things *not* to like about AOL. But that being said, it still has some advantages.
Anytime I am out of the country, I have had NO trouble getting a TCP connection via AOL. It is pretty much global. One account and I can connect anywhere I need to. (my service level is the 10$/month BYOI) My other broadband ISP offers dial-ups in the US only.
With the advent of browser-based mail readers (still a recent event in my frame-work) this might not matter *as* much, but you can pretty well go to just about any computer out there and find AOL installed on it. This means friends' houses in other parts of the country, this means cyber cafes, this means libraries -- All usually have AOL on them.
I can set filters on my normal mail when I know I will be travelling and don't want to be bothered with a laptop (one more thing to lug around or be stolen) and bounce important mail to my AOL account. I have *NO* configuration (NO SMTP/POP settings to change) to do on someone else's machine. (CyberCafes don't like you messing with their machine.)
And most importantly, there are people who aren't techies but would like some internet access. (Let's call this the "Grandma Function.") Sure they can do a whole lot more with a real ISP, but A) they don't know how, B) they wouldn't know what they are missing, and C) they couldn't care less. For them, AOL is a perfect solution. No configuration of the TCP/IP stack. Just click a button and you are on the "Internet."
IF this person buys a newer machine at some point, migration is a breeze as most of the data is server side.
______
This is a good thing (Score:2)
AOL and MS should be fighting over how to get customers to use their products and services. That's the way the system's supposed to work. If MS doesn't want AOL to gain the advantage, they should offer the box makers better incentives than AOL does. What MS was doing before was simply decreeing to the box makers what would go on the desktop and prohibiting them from doing the same thing with competitors products.
This shows that the finding that MS was guilty of illegally maintaining their monopoly did not come too late to have an impact. Already, AOL is seizing the opportunity to compete with MS, and others might too.
-jimbo
Sun Tzu's Art of War (Score:2)
AGAIN (Score:2)
We might WANT to buy this stuff, but if the thought of an MS OS, or and AOL desktop pisses you off enough you WONT. If they piss off enough people they GO BUST.
Its that simple. How many times in the past have some corp been on the brink of all out monopoly when someone just stands up and says "you know - enough people are pissed off that I might just be able to take them on".
If enough are - they will.
Now if you'll all just keep buying the linux, stop buying those damn DVDs you already have on video, and get your caffeine direct from the growers the world will be a better place! We can bring this stuff to a turn - never a stop, Linux will be evil one day, but at least a pause and a change of direction.
Re:When are they going to learn... (Score:2)
Well, its refreshing to see some competition... (Score:2)
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:2)
They're still fighting over outdated service paradigms.
Re:We're being bombarded! (Score:2)
Anyone else seen those free DSL connections that subject you to banner ads? Now, with those, you're getting something in -return- for subjecting yourself to that kind of thing.
Let the marketing monkeys do whatever they like, it only effects the lUsers.
There is no possible way these ads and service announcements will be un-removable (unless they were contained in a persistant-memory module hardwired to replace the data when it's been removed/deactivated...i dont see that happening), and you're not paying any more money to have that crap bundled in. Actually, theoretically, it would -lower- the price of the computer, since the manufacturer is being compensated for the endorsement vector. Maybe its not such a bad thing after all.
Re:Not at all... (Score:2)
Re:Er, you *like* aol's e-mail (Score:2)
Even still though, Outlook has a habit of letting arbitrary code run on your computer. I think its a wonderful program, I just don't feel like depending on such a hilariously vunerable client.
Of course, there are plenty of other email clients out there, just none i like as much as outlook.
As for the spam thing..sorry bucko, but you'll find that no matter where you go.
Actually, this is a fun idea i got from The Register:
My state has a law that says that if you intentionally misrepresent the headers/return path/transmission info/etc of a marketing email, you are breaking a fairly serious law. Many people are cornering spammers like this and extorting money, threatening a high-figure lawsuit (that I could easily win anyhow). Some people have been getting 4000-6000 USD PER-SPAMMER confronted in this fashion.
So kids, turn that spam into college tuition!
::Uncontrollable laughter fit:: (Score:4)
"'AOL's actions are unprecidented and completely anti-consumer' said Microsoft Spokesman Vivek Varma."
::falls off chair laughing::
It's sad to see that big business revolves around the "idiot factor", that is, trying to influence the decisions of the idiots that will use whatever the "Out of Box Experience" dictates they should use.
Business is based on efficiency. Since successful business must be efficient, we can use this trend as proof that most computer users are, in fact, idiots. It's a sad thing.
As for the AOL thing, i use AOL myself just because ive had the same email adress since I was in 7th grade (8 years ago). I use AOL merely as an email client, and use my cable service provider for the actual internet connectivity. This makes AOL service MUCH cheaper (especially when you pay for blocks of years, which my parents do). When you remove the ISP factor out of AOL service, its actually quite good, i would just rather chew aluminum than rely on AOL for my actual internet connection.
Re:Battle of the Titans (Score:2)