Argh.. should it be illegal to run aol on a g4.. or any mac?
- Thread starter J5
- Start date
As much as i hate AOL...you should be HAPPY!!!
Apple and AOL are in very good relationship.....iChat is one of the example.....
You should not be that strict.... people have the right to run any software...and you should be glad AOL is giving support to the mac platform.
BE very glad...VERY VERY GLAD there are company like AOL that give support to our platform.
AOL is just another company...and if they also serve the MAC... is another company that make thing EASYER for people...it MAKES it easier for people to SWITCH it MAKES it easier for Apple to become a leader..
BE GLAD there are company like AOL
Apple and AOL are in very good relationship.....iChat is one of the example.....
You should not be that strict.... people have the right to run any software...and you should be glad AOL is giving support to the mac platform.
BE very glad...VERY VERY GLAD there are company like AOL that give support to our platform.
AOL is just another company...and if they also serve the MAC... is another company that make thing EASYER for people...it MAKES it easier for people to SWITCH it MAKES it easier for Apple to become a leader..
BE GLAD there are company like AOL
edX
mac shaman
yep, aol is just another company. we should be thrilled that they are so focused on helping the consumer , especially us poor mac users. 
sorry, but i still feel this is all too little too late from a company that is finally paying attention to apple users now that they are losing ground. aol doesn't offer a service, they con people people into believing that they are the internet and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product. I mean, how do you get on the internet and 'get mail' without aol?
i'm with you J5 - aol is practically criminal. or maybe i'm wrong and we should all cheer for m$n too, cause sometime next year they are going to support macs as well. isn't great that after nearly 20 years, these wonderful companies are not only acknowledging we exist, but are going to let us do business with them?
*ed breaks out into a colorful rendition of "i'm so excited"*
sorry, but i still feel this is all too little too late from a company that is finally paying attention to apple users now that they are losing ground. aol doesn't offer a service, they con people people into believing that they are the internet and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product. I mean, how do you get on the internet and 'get mail' without aol?
i'm with you J5 - aol is practically criminal. or maybe i'm wrong and we should all cheer for m$n too, cause sometime next year they are going to support macs as well. isn't great that after nearly 20 years, these wonderful companies are not only acknowledging we exist, but are going to let us do business with them?
*ed breaks out into a colorful rendition of "i'm so excited"*
Ed i know what ya mean.. i am just bored by people that hates company and think they should be illegal or banned.. i mean...it's justa nother company..if you do not like it...just do as i do... do not use their stuff.... what should i say About apple??
I live in Italy...and we HAVE NO support NO SUPPORT...
NO Apple Store
High PRICE
We get stuu later than US....
You say "sorry, but i still feel this is all too little too late from a company that is finally paying attention to apple users now that they are losing ground"
And i say... Wheen Apple is gonna realize that there are other customers outside of US? when will it pay attention??? At least AOL i s paying attention...apple isn't really looking that much out of US
The same machine you get there for 2000$ you pay it here almost 3500 $....is that a good thing?? not really
I mean ..this is not the Apple i am proud of...but still i keep loving them.
"they con people people into believing that they are the internet and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product."
Apple does the same here...they make you believe they re the best (and the are) and it would be hard without them to do graphic and stuff...and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product.....but then.. you try to get assistance ...and simply....you cannot get it...
See...there is good and bad in Apple as in every company.. so do not blame AOL only because you can only see the bad of it....probably..if they are still in business.. there are a lot of peiople that can see a positive side at AOL just like we do with Apple....
I live in Italy...and we HAVE NO support NO SUPPORT...
NO Apple Store
High PRICE
We get stuu later than US....
You say "sorry, but i still feel this is all too little too late from a company that is finally paying attention to apple users now that they are losing ground"
And i say... Wheen Apple is gonna realize that there are other customers outside of US? when will it pay attention??? At least AOL i s paying attention...apple isn't really looking that much out of US
The same machine you get there for 2000$ you pay it here almost 3500 $....is that a good thing?? not really
I mean ..this is not the Apple i am proud of...but still i keep loving them.
"they con people people into believing that they are the internet and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product."
Apple does the same here...they make you believe they re the best (and the are) and it would be hard without them to do graphic and stuff...and that it would all be terribly difficult to understand without their unique product.....but then.. you try to get assistance ...and simply....you cannot get it...
See...there is good and bad in Apple as in every company.. so do not blame AOL only because you can only see the bad of it....probably..if they are still in business.. there are a lot of peiople that can see a positive side at AOL just like we do with Apple....
Bon giorno.
I'm not certain of this, but I'm pretty sure the reason that Apple products are expensive in your country - which is probably true for any American consumer electronic device for that matter - is due to import/export laws and tariffs.
I really don't think Apple has much say in that.
I know that in a few countries I've been to, any kind of American computer costs far more than it would in the states. I don't know if this is true for, say, Japanese-made computers, but I suspect this is the case as well. Though whatever trade laws are worked out between countries could be very different, and in one country a Japanese product might be a lot cheaper relative to an American product and in another country the reverse could be true.
I realize this has nothing to do with AOL, except for my guess that you are also paying much higher rates to access AOL in Europe than we are here in the US. But that has more to do with your phone companies/internet system and the deals that AOL has worked out with them.
I'm not certain of this, but I'm pretty sure the reason that Apple products are expensive in your country - which is probably true for any American consumer electronic device for that matter - is due to import/export laws and tariffs.
I really don't think Apple has much say in that.
I know that in a few countries I've been to, any kind of American computer costs far more than it would in the states. I don't know if this is true for, say, Japanese-made computers, but I suspect this is the case as well. Though whatever trade laws are worked out between countries could be very different, and in one country a Japanese product might be a lot cheaper relative to an American product and in another country the reverse could be true.
I realize this has nothing to do with AOL, except for my guess that you are also paying much higher rates to access AOL in Europe than we are here in the US. But that has more to do with your phone companies/internet system and the deals that AOL has worked out with them.
Hey -
I was trying to be sarcastic about it being "illegal".. but that doesn't always come through in text. My biggest problem is that I'm a web developer. It scares me to think that people are using aol to not be able to see the sites I create. Unless I'm specifically asked to support it.. I don't even bother.
The other thing that scares the hey out of me is that aol is owned by Time Warner, or vice versa.. my internet access comes from TW (road runner). I'm afraid that someday my only option will be high-speed aol.
What I hate the most about aol is that although you pay them a decent amount, you are bombarded with ads while you use it.
Also - their wacky keyword stuff.. it seems they try to make it difficult to visit sites outside of the "aol keywords" networks. It's almost like a giant filter.. ie one big censor deciding what I (you) do/see on the internet. I have no doubts in my mind (no proof.. but still no doubt) that aol users activity is tracked without their knowledge.
BBenve -
You mentioned Ichat -- I don't know. Until I use it (tonight!!!!!!) I won't know if I like it.. but I've been using fire since I installed osx and it is truly a great app. So if the folks who made fire(open source) could do it.. why does Apple need aol at all to build their app? Why didn't they just commission the folks who did fire?(maybe they did?) I don't know enough about whether ichat can connect to other services as well.. so I'll leave this one alone. I don know that from the screen caps I've seen... it doesn't look all that great. if I'm talking in text.. I just want to see the text. Keep it simple.
Before this gets too long and I get way off topic --
I agree for the most part - but I don't really know anyone who uses aol who actually likes it. They use it because it's been drilled into their head by all the ads and cd's and crap they send everyone with a mailbox that it's the only option.. or in some way better than having complete - uncontrolled/uncensored access to the entire world we call the internet. My point is that advertising is what sells aol.. not a quality product. Apple sells a quality product-- this is another point. Folks who've been using macs since before pc's were an option to do graphics work will attest to that.
Ok --- end rant!!
Do me a favor -- next time you see someone using aol - just explain to them that there are other options! Much, much better and more powerful options! And usually at the same or a cheaper price!
J5
I was trying to be sarcastic about it being "illegal".. but that doesn't always come through in text. My biggest problem is that I'm a web developer. It scares me to think that people are using aol to not be able to see the sites I create. Unless I'm specifically asked to support it.. I don't even bother.
The other thing that scares the hey out of me is that aol is owned by Time Warner, or vice versa.. my internet access comes from TW (road runner). I'm afraid that someday my only option will be high-speed aol.
What I hate the most about aol is that although you pay them a decent amount, you are bombarded with ads while you use it.
Also - their wacky keyword stuff.. it seems they try to make it difficult to visit sites outside of the "aol keywords" networks. It's almost like a giant filter.. ie one big censor deciding what I (you) do/see on the internet. I have no doubts in my mind (no proof.. but still no doubt) that aol users activity is tracked without their knowledge.
BBenve -
You mentioned Ichat -- I don't know. Until I use it (tonight!!!!!!) I won't know if I like it.. but I've been using fire since I installed osx and it is truly a great app. So if the folks who made fire(open source) could do it.. why does Apple need aol at all to build their app? Why didn't they just commission the folks who did fire?(maybe they did?) I don't know enough about whether ichat can connect to other services as well.. so I'll leave this one alone. I don know that from the screen caps I've seen... it doesn't look all that great. if I'm talking in text.. I just want to see the text. Keep it simple.
Before this gets too long and I get way off topic --
I agree for the most part - but I don't really know anyone who uses aol who actually likes it. They use it because it's been drilled into their head by all the ads and cd's and crap they send everyone with a mailbox that it's the only option.. or in some way better than having complete - uncontrolled/uncensored access to the entire world we call the internet. My point is that advertising is what sells aol.. not a quality product. Apple sells a quality product-- this is another point. Folks who've been using macs since before pc's were an option to do graphics work will attest to that.
Ok --- end rant!!
Do me a favor -- next time you see someone using aol - just explain to them that there are other options! Much, much better and more powerful options! And usually at the same or a cheaper price!
J5
but they have one thing we want.. or at least most web devs want...
They are going to help open the Browser wars again...
They fired the first shot with the gecko engine being used in the lastest compuserve browser. Now, the OS X version is using it...
Within another year, maybe two, the PC version will be using Gecko... and then we will truly see a "beginning" of the next browser war against MS.
This is a major thing here, because you can talk about OW, Chimera, Mozilla.. all you want.. but if somebody doesn't make inroads in the browser market against IE, then it really wont matter in a couple of years. Because our fancy 3rd party mac browser are still going to suck hind tit...
We actually need AOL, at least on this front. Although, AOL needs it more than we do.
This is a good thing.
As for the rest of AOL... well, there are just too many people out there that want their services... meaning ease of use, setup, and everything else that AOL has pretty much perfected. There is a reason they are the worlds largest ISP...
Not to say that I like it personally, but... lets pick out battles first...
We need to get rid of the IE dominance of the internet as it is today. Standards are great, but only if they are used. Aol is the first step in achieving this... If AOL causes more developers to adhere to standards, then we will start to see a better internet.
As for not developing for AOL, that is fine if you are developing piddly sites for your self, or for gamers, etc.. but if you are serious about designing sites.. then AOL HAS to be accounted for in your designs. AOL is a huge segment of users, and especially "buying" users who spend money.
If you want to turn your back on that, well, then you are not really a serious developer, or you are short-sighted. (BTW>> not flaming, just making a point)
Lastly... Once we get more standards adoption, coding will be SOOO much easier for us developers. I dont know about you, but I am tired of the last 10 years of incomplete standards, and screwed up browser support.
They are going to help open the Browser wars again...
They fired the first shot with the gecko engine being used in the lastest compuserve browser. Now, the OS X version is using it...
Within another year, maybe two, the PC version will be using Gecko... and then we will truly see a "beginning" of the next browser war against MS.
This is a major thing here, because you can talk about OW, Chimera, Mozilla.. all you want.. but if somebody doesn't make inroads in the browser market against IE, then it really wont matter in a couple of years. Because our fancy 3rd party mac browser are still going to suck hind tit...
We actually need AOL, at least on this front. Although, AOL needs it more than we do.
This is a good thing.
As for the rest of AOL... well, there are just too many people out there that want their services... meaning ease of use, setup, and everything else that AOL has pretty much perfected. There is a reason they are the worlds largest ISP...
Not to say that I like it personally, but... lets pick out battles first...
We need to get rid of the IE dominance of the internet as it is today. Standards are great, but only if they are used. Aol is the first step in achieving this... If AOL causes more developers to adhere to standards, then we will start to see a better internet.
As for not developing for AOL, that is fine if you are developing piddly sites for your self, or for gamers, etc.. but if you are serious about designing sites.. then AOL HAS to be accounted for in your designs. AOL is a huge segment of users, and especially "buying" users who spend money.
If you want to turn your back on that, well, then you are not really a serious developer, or you are short-sighted. (BTW>> not flaming, just making a point)
Lastly... Once we get more standards adoption, coding will be SOOO much easier for us developers. I dont know about you, but I am tired of the last 10 years of incomplete standards, and screwed up browser support.
SCARECROW -
no offense taken.
I agree - it is a huge market to be left in the dark... but if we can't get it to work on aol's browser stuff (it's been a while since I've seen it on the mac... do they now use ie or ns for their browser, or is it still that weird pseudo-browser they had around say version 5?) we simply note on the page a link to some instruction as to how to use ie/netscape with your aol connection.
But I feel vastly different about the browser wars stuff... (this will probably get me flamed, but oh well)... I agree that microsoft needs competition, as does any market.. but as a web developer... I'd welcome a monopoly in this case. I only use ie on my mac. I am as anit-m$ as the next guy, but it's truly a great browser, never gives me trouble.. and to me looks and acts better than even it's pc counterpart. In fact.. even the office suite looks/acts nicer on the mac than it does on the pc!
I honestly can't say the same for netscape. The best experience I've had with mozilla was with chimera. Great product -- all the goodness of the mozilla engine without all the bloat of say ns6. Netscape 6+ has so much extra garbage I don't use that it's truly unuseable on my aging powerbook.
I agree also that standards are what we need. The biggest problem I face is the time it takes to test on so many different options! Or when something that works great in ie on all platforms.. decides to break on netscape... my latest example would be loading php content in flash. Flash rocks. It has the capabilty to truly change the face of the internet, and the power to bring some real interactivity to the scene.
So back to my php/netscape point:
In netscape... when loading data into flash from php(netscape 4- I think) there is an issue where if the server(apache) is using the gzip mod.. (sends compressed data to the browser) netscape will request that the data be sent compressed... but netscape or the flash player offers no way of decompressing it. I don't honestly know if this is an issue with the browser or the flash player.. but at any rate.. ie either ignores it or knows the player can't handle it and therefore doesn't request compressed data.
Before we get onto the flash discussion -- I'd like to point out that the days of flash animation for the sake of animation are over (I HOPE!) and that this idea of loading dynamic content into a flash frontend is a true godsend.. Almost(!) true cross platformabilty without caring what browser your users are using. I like that -- now if we could get macromedia to iron out some of these little things.. I wouldn't care if my users were using aol1.0 as long as it had support for flash.
And before I go -- just a fun example of interactive flash that I've been working on the past few days:
http://psychlonex.dyndns.org/magnets/
J5
no offense taken.
I agree - it is a huge market to be left in the dark... but if we can't get it to work on aol's browser stuff (it's been a while since I've seen it on the mac... do they now use ie or ns for their browser, or is it still that weird pseudo-browser they had around say version 5?) we simply note on the page a link to some instruction as to how to use ie/netscape with your aol connection.
But I feel vastly different about the browser wars stuff... (this will probably get me flamed, but oh well)... I agree that microsoft needs competition, as does any market.. but as a web developer... I'd welcome a monopoly in this case. I only use ie on my mac. I am as anit-m$ as the next guy, but it's truly a great browser, never gives me trouble.. and to me looks and acts better than even it's pc counterpart. In fact.. even the office suite looks/acts nicer on the mac than it does on the pc!
I honestly can't say the same for netscape. The best experience I've had with mozilla was with chimera. Great product -- all the goodness of the mozilla engine without all the bloat of say ns6. Netscape 6+ has so much extra garbage I don't use that it's truly unuseable on my aging powerbook.
I agree also that standards are what we need. The biggest problem I face is the time it takes to test on so many different options! Or when something that works great in ie on all platforms.. decides to break on netscape... my latest example would be loading php content in flash. Flash rocks. It has the capabilty to truly change the face of the internet, and the power to bring some real interactivity to the scene.
So back to my php/netscape point:
In netscape... when loading data into flash from php(netscape 4- I think) there is an issue where if the server(apache) is using the gzip mod.. (sends compressed data to the browser) netscape will request that the data be sent compressed... but netscape or the flash player offers no way of decompressing it. I don't honestly know if this is an issue with the browser or the flash player.. but at any rate.. ie either ignores it or knows the player can't handle it and therefore doesn't request compressed data.
Before we get onto the flash discussion -- I'd like to point out that the days of flash animation for the sake of animation are over (I HOPE!) and that this idea of loading dynamic content into a flash frontend is a true godsend.. Almost(!) true cross platformabilty without caring what browser your users are using. I like that -- now if we could get macromedia to iron out some of these little things.. I wouldn't care if my users were using aol1.0 as long as it had support for flash.
And before I go -- just a fun example of interactive flash that I've been working on the past few days:
http://psychlonex.dyndns.org/magnets/
J5
At the peril of either steering this thread off-course or getting flamed for doing so, I just want to follow up on the spin-off subject of the price of Apple's computers in Europe - or anywhere else outside the U.S.
Just for the sake of clarification, are PCs similarly marked up, or is that just pertinent to Apple's products?
I'm very curious, because I suspect (as I said) that all American consumer electronics are marked up by similar percentages.
Just for the sake of clarification, are PCs similarly marked up, or is that just pertinent to Apple's products?
I'm very curious, because I suspect (as I said) that all American consumer electronics are marked up by similar percentages.
vanguard
Registered
My mother and my brother both use it. We all use AOL IM to talk to each other too.
Ok, I'll grant that their accounting is corrupt but I didn't see what was wrong with the AT&T deal. They just want to be able to sell to more people.
Anyway, their email works, their web interface is simple, and you don't like it you can use a normal browser. Without AOL, my mother might not be on the web at all.
Vanguard
Ok, I'll grant that their accounting is corrupt but I didn't see what was wrong with the AT&T deal. They just want to be able to sell to more people.
Anyway, their email works, their web interface is simple, and you don't like it you can use a normal browser. Without AOL, my mother might not be on the web at all.
Vanguard
Dude - this is my thread - I'll do the veering and steering!
You've reinstated a good point you started to make earlier. I tend to agree, in that any american electronics will be more expensive in other countries.
To swerve back onto the road tho - a few stories:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-955154.html
That article was particular interesting.. I'm a flash guy. I live and breath flash. I think flash may be my saving grace in the oddest of ways.. the article talks about aol using "rich media" ads to drive up revenue to counter their slowly sinking(YES!) user base. I see it hopefully working against them.. in that if the ad is anything like the ad in the center of that article (or worse, sound and video while you're trying to read something) they should drive their users away in no time flat. Of course.. this won't help the public outlook on flash content either.. but if it's flash done right (meaning flash that helps you get what you want out of a site, vs lookin' pretty) than I don't think my users will complain!
ok.. so we're no more back on topic than we were before.. but the swerving was fun!
J5
You've reinstated a good point you started to make earlier. I tend to agree, in that any american electronics will be more expensive in other countries.
To swerve back onto the road tho - a few stories:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1106-955154.html
That article was particular interesting.. I'm a flash guy. I live and breath flash. I think flash may be my saving grace in the oddest of ways.. the article talks about aol using "rich media" ads to drive up revenue to counter their slowly sinking(YES!) user base. I see it hopefully working against them.. in that if the ad is anything like the ad in the center of that article (or worse, sound and video while you're trying to read something) they should drive their users away in no time flat. Of course.. this won't help the public outlook on flash content either.. but if it's flash done right (meaning flash that helps you get what you want out of a site, vs lookin' pretty) than I don't think my users will complain!
ok.. so we're no more back on topic than we were before.. but the swerving was fun!
J5