AOL To Be Free For Broadband Users? 159
mikesd81 writes "AOL may give away more services including its AOL.com accounts reserved for paying customers. They have a proposal under consideration which calls for Time Warner's online unit to stop charging subscription fees to users who have high-speed Internet access or even dial-up service from a rival provider. Under the plan the company would continue to charge the fees for those needing dial-up access through AOL. The AOL software also would allow subscribers to continue using instant messaging, Web journals and other services without having to download separate software or figure out Web-based options. That would ease the transition and encourage them to keep using AOL services, the person familiar with the matter said."
Yea, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2)
However, if AOL is offering their service for free, I think I'll wait a month and say, "You're not still paying for that, are you? AOL's offering it for free now." You know, just to be a good possibly future son-in-law.
Re:Yea, but... (Score:1)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2)
-uso.
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2, Funny)
I want respect that "aol.com" email address gets (Score:3, Funny)
-Eric
Re:Yea, but... (Score:2)
Can someone tell me? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:3)
September 1993, to be exact.
Dated: September 4692, 1993
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:1)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those who have been saying for years that AOL content adds no value to what can be had in the wilds of the internet now have proof: Time-Warner will stop charging for AOL content.
What a long, embarrassing fall for the online company whose stock was once so valuable that it could buy a major cable company!
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
What a long, embarrassing fall for the online company whose stock was once so valuable that it could buy a major cable company!
You do know that they're more than a cable company [timewarner.com], right?
Advertising (Score:1, Insightful)
AOL (the app) is simply voluntary spyware, the entire point of AOL (the company) is not to help or provide a "service" to users but to provide companies with a targeted resource in which to exploit for financial gain
open AOL (the app) and see what is more prominent , advertising or content ?
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:5, Interesting)
Got me. AOL is one of those things that, even free, still isn't worth it.
At one point, my company had a "strategic business partnership" with AOL to provide personal Internet service for its employees. Everyone got free AOL accounts for a year. Most of the IT group didn't use them, we knew better. The people I know who did had nothing but trouble, and I don't know anyone who renewed their subscription when the free year ran out. The company didn't do it again. I think that the plan got nixed when all the employess started calling our help desk asking why their Internet at home wasn't working.
Oh well, lesson learned, I suppose.
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
It is the "other internet" for people who have not a clue. It protects them from viruses, spam, and other net evils. But, the best part is that AOL protects us from the clueless by making it extremely difficult to spam or spew viruses, trojans, et al from their servers. The walled community of AOL keeps evil out, but also helps keep evil in.
I am glad AOL exists because it keeps many clueless users away (mostly) from the real internet.
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
Yeah, I was going to ask who AOL was, but then I remembered hearing about them in the 90s.
So, what's next? A new Netscape release? Oh yeah, didn't AOL buy^Hry them in 98?
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
The point of AOL is that it provides an appealing mix of on-line services to 18 million paying subscribers--none of them so young and certainly none so ideologically driven as the stereotypical Slashdot Geek. I am discovering as I grow older that the right place for me is the majors' DRM'd subscription services and not the outlaw's P2P nets.
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
Only with pop-ups.
Re:Can someone tell me? (Score:2)
AOL then becomes an easy to use search engine and media file finder for people too stupid to use Google and BitTorrent.
AOL rips off dial-up users with that $24.99 a month rate, but now wants to provide AOL software for free to existi
The point of AOL (Score:3, Interesting)
Eventually, some of the system
If AOL were free . . . (Score:5, Funny)
Q: Does it still suck? (Score:5, Funny)
In related news... (Score:1)
So? (Score:5, Funny)
I could get AIDS for free, too. That doesn't make it desirable.
Re:So? (Score:2)
Re:So? (Score:2)
on the other hand.. a very very well writen article.. and should be read by as many as posiable.
Re:So? (Score:1)
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
He was just making a point/joke, give him a break.
Re:So? (Score:2)
It's been 22.3 years. AIDS is now funny.
for you that would involve sex .... (Score:3, Funny)
and for you
Re:So? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So? (Score:2)
I'm left handed, you insensitive clod!
Re:So? (Score:2)
That brings up a good point... (Score:2)
Strings attached! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Strings attached! (Score:2)
retroactively
Re:Strings attached! (Score:2)
retroactively
I heard they were going so retro-active that they were even going to charge you for all those floppy disks you re-formatted.
Stab, ow? (Score:1, Funny)
AOL (Score:5, Funny)
Re:AOL (Score:3, Funny)
Now I see what Dubya was talking about when he referred to, "The Internets," back in the 2004 campaign! There's the "normal internet" and the "AOL internet" ... two "Internets." ;-)
AOL is the epitomy of corporate addware (Score:5, Interesting)
She's stopping now though, because even though she pays a high monthly subscription, she gets bombarded with adverts from AOL, even while their addware and spyware 'zapper' is running.
There are even usually two adverts on the logoff screen.
I can't beleive it, but they've actually managed to suck more.
How can I lose? (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds reliable... (Score:2)
Re:Sounds reliable... (Score:1)
Presidents of america can gossip ( elite republican guard, WMD, global terror network etc), and be taken seriously.
Unimportant people can gossip about stuff that's important to them and those they know, and no-one gives a damn.
Re:Sounds reliable... (Score:1)
Actually, it was announced on CNBC (A financial network) this morning.
Re:Sounds reliable... (Score:2)
That's like saying... (Score:1)
Free Software (Score:1)
omg enough with the speculation already (Score:2, Informative)
Re:omg enough with the speculation already (Score:3, Funny)
Wasn't AOL always free ? (Score:5, Funny)
Here's what REALLY happened. (Score:2, Funny)
AOL users: We'd like to cancel our accounts please.
AOLCS: I'm sorry what part of our service were you unhappy with?
AOL users: We'd like to cancel our accounts please.
AOLCS: But you logged Umpteenzillion hours on your accounts last month...
AOL users: We'd like to cancel our accounts please.
AOLCS: Do you know we'll be hosting a live chat with Lionel Ritchie for paying users only next month?
AOL users: We'd like to cancel our accounts please.
AOLCS: Why won't you
I dont understand (Score:3, Interesting)
Everyone I know that's gone to broadband from AOL did it as much to escape the confines/ads/annoyances of the AOL software as for the speed. Why would you voluntarily restrict yourself to using their browser when you could be using Firefox?
Furthermore, the people that have broadband (granted, not as much today, but still) are the people that are a bit more technically savvy and want more out of their internet connection/experience. Why on earth would any of these people want AOL?
Re:I dont understand (Score:1)
Re:I dont understand (Score:2)
New and Improved Crap! (Score:2, Insightful)
Net Neutrality in reverse (Score:2)
A weird business plan. So weird, it just might work!
But is it still AOL.
Which free? (Score:1)
But.. (Score:2)
Uh, I think I'm missing something. (Score:1)
Makes sense, so why now...? (Score:3, Interesting)
When I worked a short job in telephone tech support, I could never understand why someone would want aol in addition to DSL/cable/etc. I actually worked people through getting them connected to the Internet (and proved it by getting them to CNN/Yahoo/Slashdot/etc. but they didn't think they were actually connected until the aol software decided that it wanted to connect (I passed them off to aol for support since they are connected to the Internet).
I guess I just don't understand the business side of technology services. This proposed free access for highspeed subscribers should have been done years ago. Better very late (if they do it), than absolutely never, I guess.
Red-Letter Day (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Red-Letter Day (Score:2)
I don't know about you (Score:1)
AOL just can't fool the n00bs anymore. (Score:1)
Re:AOL just can't fool the n00bs anymore. (Score:2)
Great until I figured out that, while AOL was advertising 14.4Kbps (top speed in the day), my dialup POP in the suburbs was 2400bps. And every time I dialed up, I had to wait fifteen minutes while AOL "downloaded new art." And they were charging me by
Re:AOL just can't fool the n00bs anymore. (Score:2)
Re:AOL just can't fool the n00bs anymore. (Score:2)
Ah I never looked into it that far. All I knew was that AOL was charging by the hour, that I had to download new art every time, and I could only connect at 2400 baud when 14.4Kbps was standard, and 28.8 was coming up. I just did the math in my own head.
I would have been surprised if I could have found anyone at AOL to confirm that downloading art wasn't paid time. I spent many hours in their support chats trying diff
WOW... (Score:1)
Mistake in the summary (Score:2)
Anyone else think that I should be an editor?
This is already in effect (Score:2)
They did notify me, however, that if I don't cancel AOL before I switch providers, they will begin to charge my account. Ahh, AOL...
But.. (Score:1)
Would you all use AOL if they redesigned their software and used Mozilla as the base for the browser?
I would consider it if the damn software didn't act like a virus like norton. Also, they can put all ads in an iframe.
Speculation, but what if... (Score:1)
This has something to do with that purchase of AOL stock by Google [washingtonpost.com] some time ago?
Great! Now I can say... (Score:2)
I just signed up and cancelled my aol account... (Score:2)
I signed up online, gave my credit card info and such. I didn't download their software or anything and just called the customer service number that was on the post-signup screen and selected the "cancellation" option. They made me wade through a relatively obnoxious "privacy" screening in order to sit on hold for 7-8 minutes.
Finally a guy picked up and asked me for all the information all over again. He asked how he could help
Re:I just signed up and cancelled my aol account.. (Score:2)
Re:I just signed up and cancelled my aol account.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Its STILL over-priced. (Score:4, Funny)
The good side (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:The good side (Score:2)
Hopefully now they won't have to.
translation (Score:2)
the
AOL has been obselete since the second half of the 90s and shouldn't be paid for in any circumstance, what AOL is finally doing is placing the proper price on its service.
AOL's main features are totally useless to anyone (but were revolutionary at the time of introduction)
- AOL Keywords: Wow, if I don't type WWW then I'll get a smaller we
Brilliant. Really. (Score:4, Interesting)
AOL's brand has started to really hurt lately. Ma and pa are beginning to dislike them, and so this is AOL doing the best move they can: Cut the crap, scale down the profit drive, and return to services. AOL is still a very valuable brand name, and it can still be salvaged for future use. If they immediately stop aggravating customers and do their best to play nice while Time Warner scales them down, the brand can once again have value.
We always blast away at companies for driving themselves into the ground by refusing to change. And yeah, AOL has been and still is a pretty dark beast in some spots. But despite this, AOL is doing the hardest thing a mega-corporation can do: admit their blunder, and try to change. In addition to mocking their shameful past, some positive, if exasperated, attention should be spent to note this move toward the right direction.
I have to post a disclaimer to ward off the astroturf melters, though. No, I am not an AOL employee. No, I do not own AOL stock. No, I have no personal or professional stake in AOL at all. Yes, I -am- thoroughly intoxicated.
AOL image couldn't be worse (Score:3, Interesting)
Wait until it starts loosing more customers because of the stories they read on the media. The company will implode like a black hole, taking Time Warner with them.
I wrote the Upside "AOL doesn't suck" cover story (Score:3, Interesting)
Long, long ago, in a millenium far, far away, my partner and I wrote Upside Magazine's cover story "AOL Doesn't Suck". The title came because editor Richard Brandt emailed me saying "Everybody knows AOL sucks" and I wrote back "No it doesn't!"
But that was then, in the brief period when AOL shone as a dial-up ISP, when the chat rooms beat most alternatives, when alternate IM systems weren't widespread, when there were few good forums anywhere (Usenet had already been wrecked and the software for the alternatives wasn't there yet), when some of its content was competitive, and so on.
Now -- well, it's sucked for a long time now. What a waste.
That said, I've been meaning to do a piece on how net-nonneutrality would turn the whole internet into AOL. This throws a monkeywrench into that plan ...
making the final switch (Score:2)
I can't help but wonder why they are doing this though? I don't use AOL myself, but I wa
It's tradition. (Score:2)
Re:It's tradition. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Cool (Score:2)
TANSTAFS. (Score:4, Insightful)
If the editors can dupe the articles, us commenters can dupe the comments [slashdot.org] ... and to that end:
> > > > > Just because a bag of crap is free doesn't mean it's worth the hassle of obtaining it.
> > > > Horse shit!
> > > Free? My uncle sells manure at a good few pounds per bag. It's a good source of income.
> > Good source of income, eh? Must be good shit. Couldn't resist...
> I'll take a bag of the good shit please...
But as Heinlein would say... TANSTAFS.
From AOL's perspective, giving the shit away is probably a good business decision. AOL is as much a marketing organization / advertising agency than an ISP, and they probably make a lot more money selling their users' data as they do from ISP subscription fees.
Hence, give the shit away. The more eyeballs that stare at AOL's shit, the more shit comes through the tubes, and the more ad revenue AOL/TW brings in from advertisers eager to sell their shit.
Re:TANSTAFS. (Score:2)
Good business decision my ass.
The AOL divison of AOL-TW is already sucking money from the rest of the company like a leech on steroids. now they want to give it away for free??? Can they just slit our throats? wouldn't that be faster?
(note: i am an employee of time-warner cable. not aol. I and everyone I work with pray for the day corporate finally decides to split aol off so it can fucking die.)
Re:TANSTAFS. (Score:2)
From the all-powerful wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TANSTAAFL [wikipedia.org]
TANSTAAFL is an acronym for the adage "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch", popularized by science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein in his 1966 novel The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, which discusses the problems caused by not considering the eventual outcome of an unbalanced economy.
Paraphrasing and quoting are not the same. If heinlein wanted to say shit he would have.
So is gum under your chair. (Score:2)
Tell me when they pay me to use that crap.