Slashdot Mirror
AOL's Upgrade of Death
Kethryvis writes "CNN is reporting about the joyousness that is the new version of AOL. Version 5.0 seizes control of all Internet connections on your machine and handles all Web requests, e-mail, etc. So, if you use your system to connect to other ISPs, your business, your school, etc. and you install AOL 5.0, yer screwed. The CNN article is here. Read deeper into the story to find out how the new version can also cripple machines just by installing. Scary stuff."
Why should the DOJ wait till they are finished with Microsoft. Go after AOL NOW!!!!
Bzzt! Wrong. As soon as you load up AOL again, it will rebuild those "additions".
It's funnny to see this article since the last straw in my experience with AOL was a destructive upgrade to the 5.0 browser. It began to crash unaccountably, and reverting to the previous 4.0 didn't help. I hope they go out of business. Sigh. Not likely.
Hey Frank...welcome back...ya rat bastard.
Thoughts?
Terrified.
I've felt that same feeling about Linux. One day it'll just stop working right, and it's way beyond me what the heck went wrong and how to fix it. It's just easier to reinstall, and nothing to bad is changed since /home is on it's own partition. This isn't a Windows only "problem"
Ask Slashdot
Posted by Stiff on 06:29 AM January 19th, 2000
from the stupid-ass-question dept.
Retardo asks: "I've noticed a proliferation of websites that use different colors. I have typically used all white, sometimes changing the font to black so I can see the words, but I've been wondering: how do people pick the colors they use on their websites? What algorithms do they use? Are the algorithms open-source? I will never use colors if the algorithms are propietary.
( Read More... | 32 comments )
I deal with this issue every day I bother to go to work. As I support HUGE INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDER.
.386 or *.386 and rename them all. THEN go back into Control Panel - Network and reinstall TCP/IP after.
Do the following:
1. Boot into safe mode. (with network support {win95})
2. Uninstall and reinstall dial-up networking In: Control Panel - add remove programs - Windows Setup - Communications.
3. Before rebooting! Go into the Network Control Panel and uninstall and reinstall both the Dial-up adapter and TCP/IP for Dial-up adapter.
4. That SHOULD do it. Reconfigure DUN for your ISP. But just in case safe mode didn't reinstall everything. Some files MAY have been missed if you have the DUN upgrade, etc...
5. Rename and extract rasapi32.dll, winsock.dll, wsock32.dll.
6. Now the v*.386 files: vdhcp.386, vtcp.386, vip.386, etc.. there are five or six just do a search for
7. REBOOT.
8. Didn't work? Go to the MS KB and find the file list for MS TCP/IP, rename and extract every file listed in that KB.
9. Still hosed? Call AOL/MS/OEM/YPD (Your Personal Diety.) cause I'm not going to fix your registry sorry.
9. Now please stop calling on this issue. An increasing number of this ISP's new customers are former AOLers fresh from the OEM with spanking new installs of windoze....
Or better yet. Go find a nice friendly distro. like Mandrake and give Linux a whirl, but im preaching...
This is only one view point. Mine, sometimes...
I've had to uninstall older versions of AOL many times in the past on various Win 95 machines. Uninstall never works! Always end up reinstalling Win 95 to get things fixed.
I've sworn off helping any more aol users until they change to an isp that is run by humans.
why is this +2 informative?
Ah! Here's the problem then.
Do we write software that is designed for the common baboon to operate safely, or do we write it with the assumption that someone can read and follow directions?
If you want a choice you have to be smart enough to know what it is and how to use it.
Hmm... AOL 5.0 didn't seem to hurt my computer, I can still use my LAN to get out to the Internet over ISDN, I can dail-in to the network at work, I can still access all of my POP mail accounts.
For Christ's sake... PLEASE SHUT UP! ISP Tech Support everywhere are clueless dweebs that believe they know a hell of a lot more than they really do know.
Dude, for the sake of your customers I sure as hell hope that you get a clue some day soon. I pity the poor sap that calls you to change around some simple default settings in IE, and you start screwing around with uninstalling modem drivers, reinstalling Internet Explorer, and then when you have completely screwed up his machine you make him reinstall the OS.
Jesus H. Christ- I think the REAL story waiting to be told is how tech support idiots at ISPs and other companies (anyone ever heard of Stream International, they do a lot of Microsoft's support?) screw up a huge percentage of everything they touch.
All AOL does that I could see is change the default home page when IE is loaded (gee, that's difficult to change), and the default search engine. So after changing those, I'm not having any problems whatsoever with the software being on my system.
Stories like this one could really hurt AOL's reputation on /.
AOL 5.0 for Linux works great! The "You've got Porn" greeting is impressive, especially with the fetchmail hacks...
Okay, please spare us your stupid "front line" tech support tails, and don't call it the "tcp/ip stack" unless you can tell me why it is called a stack. The truth is that you don't really know what the hell you are doing, and as is true of most ISP tech support dweebs you stumble around in the dark uninstall/reinstalling everything related to making an Internet connection until something finally works, or the customer gives up in digust, or you have the customer reinstall the OS.
Eh?
We're talking about MEN now. We've got to show that "naked and petrified" isn't sexist, otherwise Nitroz-- errr, I mean, "a certain obscure cartoonist" will continue to rant & rave.
Monoplolizing? A couple of point :
- Granted, they have a great deal of subscribers, but I would hardly call them an ISP monopoly...There are about a billion and one ISP's, some of which are probably as easy as AOL..(Although I never understood what is "hard" about dialing up to the internet through other ISP's...I guess they like AOL selected garbage to be hand-fed to them instead of actually searching for pages on the web).
- The problem of crashing windows/replacing DLL's of the wrong type is bad...but the selection of AOL as the default browser is hardly a bad thing...You don't have to check it during the installation and (unless there's something special about AOL software), it's easily reversible...
No, I don't use AOHell, I mean, AOL, but except for the crashing bug (which I'm assuming doesn't happen to all installations), I wouldn't call it "installation of death"....
AC ...excuse typos due to lack of sleep
Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds
"I hate quotes at the end of posts"
Sounds like you might be a Netscape insider.
Do you know whose idea the Shop button up on the tool bar was?
Seems the be the most innovative thing Netscape has done recently. The other day I hovered my mouse pointer over it and somehow it fired off on it's own. Scary.
There was a time when I thought the likes of AOL and M$ were incompetent. I was young and naive. I thought they were unable to conform with standards.
By creating products that intentionally subvert standards and marketing them aggressively, they create a dependence on their products. They have their users convinced that their way is the easy way, the right way, and the only way.
The constant cycle of bugs and superfluous bug fixes only serves to reinforce this dependence, successfully creating the illusion that they have the customer's best interests in mind.
Any assertion that this AOL 5.0 'default browser bug' is anything other than an intentional ploy to increase their market share, customer dependence, and undermine competition is just plain naive.
They have done exactly what they wanted to do. If you don't believe me, ask Bugs Bunny.
It was a good read. I look forward to more Tinkerbell posts.
Which you apparently don't - Fjerk!
I'd like to clarify something..... In light of the fact that they're getting a great deal of complaints on their boards, I agree with the above posts... But I still object to CNN bundeling the problem of AOL making themselves default browser, etc. with the crashing problem...one is a bug, the other isn't.....and it isn't clear which one is getting the complaints..
AC - Hey, I said I was tired
people eat shit and wonder why it tastes so bad
I work at an ISP and there have been numberous calls lately that they can't get connected. For the first couple of calls it was a complete mystery. On the phone for far too long for phone tech. After a while we removed the AOL adapters and protocols from the Windows Network control panel and like !magic! it works. Like a dream. And that's the whole purpose of the Network Control Panel, to have multiple, concurrent adapters and protocols. Hmmm... I'm getting a little suspicious.
We are a small ISP, and people call us to complain that our service stopped working. The first thing I ask is, "Did you install AOL?" The answer is yes 99 percent of the time. This has been happening since AOL 3.0, but 5.0 has not given us any problems yet.
We had to put a clause in the service agreement just for this! It basically said that they were not entitled to free tech support if AOL was installed on the same computer.
It is incredibly frustrating guiding some STUPID people through the configuration of the network settings, or any other setting. "Double click on the control panel."
"Left or right click."
"198 dot 20 dot"
"It won't let me type dot.'
"Try the period key."
"Type cd backslash"
"which one is the backslash I get those too confused."
"type edit autoexec dot bat"
"huh?"
"E D I T spacebar A U T O E X E C period key B A T" Long pause. "Hit the enter key God damnit!! You stupid prick!"
"My computer won't boot up. It says I am invalid."
"Take the disk out of the floppy drive."
"I don't have a floppy drive. I have a hard drive."
"Sir, those 3.5" disks are also called floppies. Even though they have a hard plastic shell. The harddrive is inside of the computer housing, and is called a harddrive because of its Aluminum disks. I have even seen older harddisks made out of glass."
"My son told me they a hard disks, and he's a graphic artist."
phew.. had to get that off my chest.
You have to also backup the registry files, and make sure that you have all the current drivers for any hardware that you might have, and if you screw up something, your machine might be down for a long time.
Jesus! Ian Fleming would be proud. In five short paragraphs, you manage to mention...
harvard
dsl
ssh/telnet
VAIO notebook
Linux
So we have your average Harvard undergrad making business trips and communicating on the ultra-thin notebook. You forgot the Rolex Oyster perpetual, Aston-Martin DB5, Bombay Gin, and shaken, not stirred...
Do all current Harvar undergraduates have as poor a grasp of English grammer?
The only part I believes is that you are an AOl user...do mom and dad know that you opened the case of the Packard Bell?
That's why DLLs are the spawn of Satan. I've had many problems with different software packages requiring mutually incompatible DLLs and, of course, they all get bloody installed in the same bloody directory. It's enough to make a saint spit.
I've given up on having discrete DLLs with my code; now I just link them in as any other library . Lo and behold, crashing goes way down and I no longer have to field the calls to the effect of:
"I get a dialog box that says "Missing monkeyspank.dll" How do I fix that?"
I WOULD SIMPLY DIE DROOLING, BRAH!
This is unrelated to the true topic at hand, but I've found that IC3 from Imagecast (www.imagecast.com) has worked much better for me than ghost ever did. In initial tests, it seems much faster, and I don't even have to go to a desktop anymore to push a new "clean" image to it. It also allows me to rebind to NT domains when I'm done with the push withing visiting all the computers in the lab. The only downside of IC3 is the fact that it still sees ext2fs filesystems as "Non-NTFS" partitions. As a result it does a copy of the entire filesystem as if it is a large single file.
True. And similar options stand in WinNT 4.. The point remains though, Win9x and its derivatives are going to live on. The next 'consumer' Windows won't prevent this sort of thing, and why should consumers have to suffer the bad design of an operating system?
I made a cool ashtray out of cds (admittedly, not all AOL cds.. some compuserve, msn, and a win95 disk). I glued 2 stacks together; one is for the base, the other for the walls. The one designed for the walls, cut out the middle so that there's about an inch of cd remaining, and then glue that to the base. Carve out little indentations in the top, so the cigarettes don't roll around while resting there, and viola! Even if you don't smoke, they make great presents.
Dunno how healthy they are, though.. the chemical coating on the disks has the potential to melt onto the tip of your cig. I'd suggest painting the insides w/ something non-toxic, that won't be damaged by the lit cigarette tip.
-martha ste^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hdilinger
well?
-auntfloyd
The reason they install it is because AOL does not use PPP for their connection. They use their own proprietary protocol over the modem connection, which mixes packets for the AOL network (not IP) with packets for the rest of the Internet (IP packets encapsulated in AOL's stuff). Any time you send an IP packet across an AOL connection, it travels in this proprietary format across the dialup connection, and from there to one of several central servers, where the outer layer is stripped, leaving the IP packet which is then forwarded on to its final destination using IP. So, although you're dialing into an Ascend (er, Lucent) TNT-MAX, you're not even using its PPP functionality.
This information may be slightly inaccurate, as the last time I talked to an authoritative source about it was about 2 years ago, and at that time they were experimenting with using actual PPP "somewhere". Possibly they've started using PPP instead of their proprietary transport, don't know...
why do people have to be so stupid? im not saying that everyone that makes anti-AOL comments are lacking something, but at least check yourself before showing your ignorance to the world.
AOL does not charge for tech support, and if someone has a problem installing it, they can call TOLL FREE (yes, it does say that next to the number), and NO they dont ask for a credit card (unlike most other software companies).
and for the those who complain about installing AOL on winNT... whats up? forget to read the documentation? i know that for some of you thats a lot to read, but i have yet to see it mention NT.
most of the stability problems with AOL 5 seem to be with the operating system or with IE 5 (which is often installed at the same time). I happen to use a mac and had no problems with the beta version of AOL 5. none of my friends have had problems installing AOL on windows. in fact, if anyone ever cared to check, they would find that AOL 5 is the most stable client so far released.
two types of people seem to call in: those who know what they are doing, but have a question or two; and those who have no clue and want someone to hold their hand. the redundant files are backups which allow one to quickly repair something while talking to a mouse-impaired person.
i'll shut up for now, and alack, feel i must post anonymously. thank you for hearing me out.
I love AOL. When I first got online back in 1995 I played around with various providers like compuserve, netcom and yes, AOL. Of these, I stuck with AOL the longest. Why? Because it was harder to cancel my account. The other providers allowed online cancellation, but not AOL. You had to send snail mail or place a phone call to cancel the account. I'm a cheap bastard, so I wasn't about to cough up postage. Instead I called their customer service line -- two and a half hours later I got ahold of a customer service rep and canceled. I think this is the main reason AOL got so big. But on the bright side, I read war and peace while waiting for new art.
If I recall correctly, the original Windows 95 installation would disable AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, and may ISP dialers. So you could wrest control away from AOL- of course if it worked then you would really be screwed.
If apps that are accustomed to writing to the system DLLs are denied permission, they will fail their installs. Microsoft has thought this through more carefully than you - they are taking the only route that does not break thousands of legacy apps.
I have yet to se one that DOES come with a win cd. Compaq is especially bad about this, from what I can tell. If you want to reinstall win you have to go buy a copy.
Silly, just because you don't know what is going to happen to you doesn't mean you deserve what you get.
... it means that one only has to learn one application in order to get around the Internet. There's really not much sense in some people using 3 or 4 different programs to carry out certain tasks, especially when they don't really understand the difference in those programs.
However, you do have to take some responsibility if you had the opportunity to know what was going to happen and you chose not to read it. As AOL 5 installs itself on your machine, it asks if you'd like to make it the default newsreader, web browser, and email client for your computer. This is a pretty clear-cut question and I don't see how anyone can view this as a travesty in customer relations or an Orwellian attempt to control users. It's a simple question and when I first saw it, I chose "no." I don't see what the big deal is here.
Not every user thinks that AOL would put in a 'simplifcation' procedure which effectively shuts off all other internet services.
It doesn't "shut off" internet services, it merely redirects the client-side control of them into the AOL client software. For some people, this is a good thing
AOL5 does NOT keep you from using seperate applications to access different types of network services. You can still use Internet Explorer or Netscape Navigator, or any browser for viewing web pages. You can still use Outlook or Eudora or Ma/Pa EMail Reader for viewing your email. AOL made a very normal move, they're making it simpler to integrate all of the network services available to users. If you don't want that integration, click "no" or change the setting later if you clicked "yes." This is not the terrible situation that some people think it is. I don't understand why this even made it onto Slashdot... it's ridiculous to chastise them for doing this.
Hey at least it's ontopic considering... I work at an outsourced tech support haus, and have had to support two major ISPs in the past two years. There isn't a lot in Dial up Networking that surprises me anymore. So far the best me, our 'escalation techs' (the guys who have enough time to actually *research* issues,) and the clients' in house techs could come up with is that AOL5 is basically a "Windows-Fix" error (start singing fdisk, format, reinstall, doo-da doo-da). It is considered so bad that we send them to AOL tech support to hear the news, along with a partial list of files (with change dates) and the instructions that the AOL techs are to return their networking to the condition it was in before installing version 5. The philosophy behind this is evil yet simple- We make the customer 'be the ball' and by the time AOL sends them to Microsoft, we know that everyone of their freinds will be told not to even *look* at an AOL CD. By the way, about half the TCPIP errors I encounter have to do with someone having an "AOL adapter" and associated TCP/IP stack in their network components (version 4). FWIU(nderstand) it isn't even a neccesary thing to have installed there, yet there it is, trying to be the default protocol. Those bastards.
What's new about this news? Fred Langa has been discussing problems with AOL since November. The latest article is at: http://www.winmag.com/columns/explorer/2000/02.htm
As a tech rep at an ISP, I can vouch on the visciousness of AOL5.0. Not only does it monopolize the modem, making it necessary to uninstall and reinstall the drivers, but it creeps into every nook and crevice in Win9x. On Win98 it is especially destructive because it messes the hell outta IE. Ive had one customer who needed to reinstall win98 because of it. Its bad enough that I have to uninstall their damn proprietary network components to get our customers going, but to up the ante with AOL5.0 is simply diabolical. Derek Long
They don't think other competitors exist.
That's the thing.
I think it's a bad thing to do for a number of reasons.
;) but there's still no reason not to build something that *uses* what's already in place and works, rather that replace it.
/. Make "plain old Text" the default posting for us poor tired olf AOL using AC's =)
1. There is nothing wrong with Win32's TCPIP stack. OK, well it does work sometimes
2. OK, so you've decided to ignore my point #1 (or it hasn't occured to you, or it's part of your strategy to make Microsoft seem bad when things don't work later). You should at LEAST make sure that the uninstall only takes out what it put in. And actually takes it out. OK, so the end user has to hit [restart] when you take out your network items. Big deal-they're used to it.
3. Folks who get AOL can and often DO 'graduate'. Should they be punished by hours of tech calls and that silly hold music because they're ready to try getting online the old fashioned way? Also consider the fact that Some of these people may have went for the 250 free hours and then decided that www.FOO.net really was faster and better overall. Sure AOL spent some of their resources on this person, but that person will undoubtedly pay in computer downtime for it when they try to switch.
OK, so I'm a little emotional on the issue. Thing's like the (default) browser wars piss me off, because it's the end user who loses the most. I do appreciate the marketing that AOL makes about being "easier than ever" or whatever...because it keeps most of the people who can't read instructions or help files away, but if they are so truly easy to use, they should also make a product that actually plays nice with the system when the user needs it to.
BTW I have yet to see a "Customised" IE or Netscape installation released by an ISP go in smoothly, but at least the fixes I've dealt with are relatively simple compared. Take as you will I'm posting AC due to my earlier, similar AC post which tells a little too much about my position to make me comfortable loggered in.
P.S. SUGGESTION TO
It must be written by the Devil. That would explain how you end up selling your soul to it when you click "yes".
Um... Coasters mainly protect the table underneath the glass from being scratched by the bottom of the glass/cup, not just from watermarking by spillage. Since most adults can drink from a glass without dribbling, the spillage issue is relativiely unimportant compared to the scratching issue. Anyway, even the spillage which can occur usually hangs around the uotside rim of the bottom of the glass, and is not in sufficient quantity to break away from the surface tension forces holding it there - So it is unlikely to make it to the middle or the edge of the CD "coaster" where it could contact the table surface.
you are an idiot. put your computer back in the box and mail it to me.
its a yes or no question. Yes if you want to turn everything over to AOL, no if you want to leave it as it is. dont be such a fucking idiot.
You don't have to say the rest.
AOL-TW includes Netscape and such.
That's called being repetitive.
This was news last Christmas, but not anymore. My hunch is that someone with an axe to grind against AOL wrote this article -- possibly a stockholder who's pissed that it's only gone down since the Time-Warner thing?
fuck dude.. dont play lawyer.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.
When did AOL release an NT client for it's software?
Well, I'm sticking my neck out just a bit but I work for AOL, and I can tell you for certain that there is no WinNT version of the AOL software. Trying to install the Win95/98 version of AOL on a WinNT system has been known to *completely* hose the OS. The 16bit AOL software made for Win3.x can be safely installed on a WinNT system, but even then AOL doesn't provide technical support if you run into problems. As far as AOL is concerned, WinNT is currently an unsupported operating system, period. Ditto For Win2K, at least untill Win2K hits the retail channels.
Me too. They begin "I can't get into windows, I get an error message..." "Is it 'Explorer has caused an invalid page fault in module Explorer.exe?' "Why, yes..." 'And is AOL your Internet service?' "Why, yes..." Then, having extablished my (relative) prescience, I sart them on a f&r, not because there's not a better way (you actually CAN extract explorer.exe and make it work, or run setup from the .cab files) but because they deserve no better. Files not backed up are, by definition, of no value. Then I can either take a short call, by giving instructions and releasing, or, exhibiting a nicely sarcastic concern, offer to stay on the line 'to make sure it copies files'. Then I go have a smoke. As Hemingway said-"Tech support makes assholes of us all." Ok, maybe it was Judge Wapner. Brad G. "Is it time for the .sig? Am I on?"
Me too. They begin "I can't get into windows, I get an error message..." "Is it 'Explorer has caused an invalid page fault in module Explorer.exe?' "Why, yes..." 'And is AOL your Internet service?' "Why, yes..." Then, having extablished my (relative) prescience, I sart them on a f&r, not because there's not a better way (you actually CAN extract explorer.exe (resize the swap file first) and make it work, or run setup from the .cab files) but because they deserve no better. Files not backed up are, by definition, of no value. Then I can either take a short call, by giving instructions and releasing, or, exhibiting a nicely sarcastic concern, offer to stay on the line 'to make sure it copies files'. Then I go have a smoke. As Hemingway said-"Tech support makes assholes of us all." Ok, maybe it was Judge Wapner. Brad G. "Is it time for the .sig? Am I on?"
if you just click 'no.' Those of us forced to use AOL because of family know better than to use AOL's browser or email services that come conveniently packaged.
I think we are evaluating this situation in a negative light. We must first take into account several factors which many of you are overlooking in your initial assumptions. First we must all be aware the time critical nature of this development and its effect on the general consumer population. Once this is done we can begin to understand the effects this new version of software will have on the net returns of the company in the year 2 thousand. Lastly we must all agree on the fact we must all pull together and begin pouring hot grits down our pants. Thank You.
What a surprise! AOL hasn't shown the slightest hint that they know how to code better than the average 10-year-old, and now they mess up yet another upgrade. (I'm giving them the doubt on this one--I don't think it's an Evil Plot to Take Over Your Computer, just the latest example of utterly clueless programming from a company with a laughably bad track record.)
Shit... I work for AT&T WorldNet..
Let me tell you, that's one merger that aint gonna happen..
1) AT&T is going to broadband.
2) AT&T WorldNet prides itself on its consistantly high performing ISP status.. We put a lot of hard work into being reliable (I mean SERIOUS work, redundancy on site and at other locations, all kinds of quality assurance tests, etc..). AOL? Joke of an ISP.
3) The gov't wouldn't allow it... AT&T has been broken up already, and is a little shaky about getting too big.. It's getting smaller and looking to broadband TCP/IP largely replacing phone and other services. We already own cable companies, what the check would we want with AOL?
...and your kindly post sums up the Anonymous Coward Slashdot Community pretty well.
<BLINK>(IRONY! IRONY!)</BLINK>
If you'd look at the source, it was an AP news article. CNN probably publishes links to all AP news stories.
This is a truely great innovation in connectivity technology. This will greatly simplify my internet experience, no longer will I have to spend the extra time managing my extra DSL connection. Instead I can focus my time and energy pouring hot grits down my pants. Thank you.
You have the internet? That's AOL, right?
BAH! Damn AOL fools!
We've had so many problems with AOL, the network, and 95 that we have banned it on any of the machines we support. But people are stupid and keep installing it. There is really no point, mail can be checked through www.aol.com/aolmail and instant messanger would cover the only other thing they would really need. I would just lock them out of installing programs under NT. Would like to do that here.
What the hell? When I read that post I got Deja Vu. Like you or somebody has posted something with a similar subject and opening paragraph.
so windoze becomes even harder to use. So what? more tech support jobs for aspireing geeks, and as long as aol doesn't make a version for linux, they can screw the system as much as they want.
Kaufmann's laws: 1.) All laws suck dick. 2.) All laws are as moral as your average rich well-raised teenage girl who joins Drama club and enjoys hanging out with well-to-do friends.
So you can only watch CNN and the WB channel.
~~~~~~~~~
auntfloyd
Go hang a salami, I'm a lasgna hog.
moderate this as flamebait if you must. I've been watching aol for years, long before they ever had access to the rest of the net. They have always been the sorriest company, with the worst interface in their software. I think anyone who uses aol voluntarily is an idiot...there isnt ANYTHING on aol, that you cant find elsewhere. The fact that people pay 22 dollars a month to a slow unreliable dialup, and get censored and spammed to death in the process, proves to me one thing.....there's an idiot born every second, and they've got mail!
Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
NATALIE PORTMAN!
I used to work at AOL.. AOL came out with a Netscape browser that was branded with the AOL Logo for two complete weeks. BUT Since Netscape is not componetized (You can't embed it in your application) you got stuck with 2 web browsers.. AOL's and the AOL/Netscape. Users didn't get it - complained and through fits so it was pulled.. Awhile later there was a press release that AOL was going to use IE because of its modular design. Considering that Netscape (not Mozilla) STILL cannot do this I dont see how the *monopoly* argument can even hold up.
I work Tech-Support for an ISP and ive seen the dammage AOL 5.0 can do. Ive seen it corrupt the TCP/IP stack so badly that all you can do is rip it out and put it all back in. Ive been fixing this bug ever since the software was introduced. My hatred for AOL has grown to about 10 times its origional magnitude in the past 3 months! I cringe when I see their commercials. I flipped on a friend of mine for just mentioning the possibility of installing AOL 5!! I think I am going to see if I can file a lawsuit against AOL for mental dammage
How do you get that he is "wishing harm" from that statment? Look, I have to basically agree with him, if you sign up for a service like AOL that causes you problems, then you deserve what you get, at least if you won't change it. The thing is, you don't enter into any sort of contract with AOL. If you don't like it, just get another ISP, it's that simple. So really, these people that are on AOL and complain about it, do deserve what they are getting because they could switch to another service.
Why didn't you do research on the English language before you presumed to write it down?
Please, let's not get into this crap of ragging on people because they can't spell. Most browsers don't have a spell checker and we aren't all perfect spellers. If you can't find anything better to attack than someone's spelling, you probably shouldn't be attacking their argument at all.
which is significantly easier to setup than any other ISP's
I'm going to have to disagee there. My ISP has a nice, easy setup program they will send you (and then walk you through using on the phone). Or, you can have them walk you through a regular dialup setup (in Windows, MacOS and Linux), or, for a fee, they will even come to your house, and do it for you. The same goes for their DSL offerings.
However, the claim that any other ISP offers "everything AOL has" is patently false.
Then let me put it a better way, a regular ISP offers everything that AOL does that matters. I'm sorry, but the small amount of "AOL only" content and chatrooms simply are not significant. Yes, I'll admit that it's not all as easily available on the internet, but really, it's not all that hard and it won't hurt most people to learn how to use the internet. The internet and computers in general are becomming a larger and larger part of our society. It is becomming quite important for everyone to have a basic, working knowledge of both, just as everyone is expected to have a basic working knowledge of English, math, science and so on.
Still, I'm still glad my parents have stuck with AOL, because it's frankly the best choice for them.
How so? How is AOL "the best for them"? What is it they do with the internet that only AOL can provide? Now you can't argue setup with me, since surely you could setup a dialup for them. Also, I'm assuming your parents are fairly bright people, so it wouldn't take them too long to learn how to use altavista or yahoo instead of the AOL search. Just what is it that AOL offers that a standard ISP can't?
AOL has provided a much more consistent and reliable connection than my friends' local ISPs as well.
In YOUR experience. Please remember that your story, as a single anecdote, is just not valid to make a broad claim that AOL is a good ISP. My parents and I ahve had quite the opposite experience. At home, my parents use a smalltown ISP, and have for about 4 years. It has been very reliable and basically is only down if the power fails. My father, however, uses AOL at work since his job requires extensive travel and AOL is about the only way to get a local number in Flagstaff, London and Sydney. But that is the ONLY reason he uses it, it has been slow and unreliable in all three cities. Please also remember that I am not alone, AOL is so bad that there is actually a site, aolsucks.org.
AOL 5.0 installs a bunch of its own software to handle its internet connection; your computer may already have other files which do analogous things
Well I can verify that AOL actually does do this and this IS a bad thing. Look, programs have no bussiness going and replacing files that the OS provides or taking over OS services. How would you like it if you installed a new game and it decided that it didn't want to use Microsoft's DirectX and installed it's own version, which had compatibility problems. Look, I don't have a problem with somethign like this if it is the explicit purpose of the software. If you want to write a program to replace the MS TCP/IP stack fine, and if someone wants to use that, fine. What is bad about the whole AOL deal is that AOL is, as you say, targeted at the newbie. Well, a newbie is very unlikely to be sophisticated enough to know that AOL is doing something like this, much less why it might be a problem or how to fix it.
Sure, this is a non issue if the person chooses to stay with AOL for life, but, funny thing, newbies learn. We were all newbies once, and now we aren't. Well, when the newbie has learned enough to want to change ISPs (maybe for the simple reason of wanting something fater like cable access), then the problems start. Thing is, though the newbie has learned enough to know that there are better options, they haven't learned enough to know why their computer is having problems or how to fix it.
Software that is intended for newbies needs to be the MOST careful with making no system modifications, as any modification to the system can have unforseen results. You just can't know what changing a DLL will do to EVERY possible system configuration. With software for more advanced users, this is still bad form, but is sometimes necessary and is at least acceptable. If you tell the user you are doing it, they should be able to undo it later if it is necessary. With a newbie, however, this will just serve to confuse them, and then if a problem does happen, they won't know why or what to do to fix it.
Further, any sort of modification to the TCP/IP stack or any other part of the networking is simply unnecessary. I mean tell me, what does AOL require that TCP/IP does not provide? Is there ANY sort of service from the Session layer on down that TCP/IP fails to provide that AOL needs? Think of the vast amount of software that can send it widely varied kind of data using nothing but TCP/IP. AOL just has no good reason to be modifing code at that level.
And some of them are MSCE's!
This is why you shouldn't make fun of other people's spelling, it will come back to bit you. It's MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer) not MSCE.
I've been collecting CDs for my cooker for years. AOL CDs, demoware CDs, CompuServe, Microsoft Developpers Network (when the office tosses the old ones out), New Kids on the Block CDs, etc. I glued all of them on a 4 ft x 8 ft plank of plywood with small blocks of appropriate height under each CD so they all reflect the sun onto the hotplate mounted above the plank. I've cooked pots of rice and made some damn fine oolong tea!
cd /dosc /pub/backups/w98.tgz
rm -rf *
tar xvfzp
Works like a charm.
Be afraid, be very afraid.
I think it's a bad thing to do for a number of reasons. 1. There is nothing wrong with Win32's TCPIP stack. OK, well it does work sometimes ;) but there's still no reason not to build something that *uses* what's already in place and works, rather that replace it. 2. OK, so you've decided to ignore my point #1 (or it hasn't occured to you, or it's part of your strategy to make Microsoft seem bad when things don't work later). You should at LEAST make sure that the uninstall only takes out what it put in. And actually takes it out. OK, so the end user has to hit [restart] when you take out your network items. Big deal-they're used to it. 3. Folks who get AOL can and often DO 'graduate'. Should they be punished by hours of tech calls and that silly hold music because they're ready to try getting online the old fashioned way? Also consider the fact that Some of these people may have went for the 250 free hours and then decided that www.FOO.net really was faster and better overall. Sure AOL spent some of their resources on this person, but that person will undoubtedly pay in computer downtime for it when they try to switch. OK, so I'm a little emotional on the issue. Thing's like the (default) browser wars piss me off, because it's the end user who loses the most. I do appreciate the marketing that AOL makes about being "easier than ever" or whatever...because it keeps most of the people who can't read instructions or help files away, but if they are so truly easy to use, they should also make a product that actually plays nice with the system when the user needs it to. BTW I have yet to see a "Customised" IE or Netscape installation released by an ISP go in smoothly, but at least the fixes I've dealt with are relatively simple compared. Take as you will I'm posting AC due to my earlier, similar AC post which tells a little too much about my position to make me comfortable loggered in.
Destructive installers, whether they mean to be or not, are nothing new. A well known example to gamers was the Wing Commander anthology that blindly installed DirectX 2 when it finished.. DX ver 2 was one of those versions that had a bad habit of overwriting newer/working setups.
Part of this is the way Win9x works.. Any installer can overwrite critical system files. So you commonly have installers putting in files that may or may not be compatible with *all* your apps due to version differences.
Thank god only root can do stuff like that on a *nix box.
Simply, yes. People who fail to do so make the world more hazardous for all of us by encouraging government regulation, monopolistic business practices, and other abominations. If we've got to live in a consumer-oriented economy, the least we can do is insist that consumers be smart about things. And failing to seek out the best is anything but. If you aren't going to research it, don't buy it. I fail to see the unfairness here.
The linux solution works, the DOS solution won't, as DOS still doesn't support long filenames, but Linux does.
It's one thing to make AOL the default browser, but when you answer 'yes', it ruins the other setups so you can't just go back to your old settings quickly - THAT is the nature of the complaint. The question asks about your "default" browser, then proceeds to make it your only browser that will actually run right.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
My company just uograded our sneaker net to ethernet a few months ago. The first thing that I pushed for was a "network use policy". One of those policies is that end users can not install ANY software, period. IS does that, and no one else.
People who install AOL at work should be fired. Period. AOL is for personal use, not business use.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Silly, just because you don't know what is going to happen to you doesn't mean you deserve what you get. Not every user thinks that AOL would put in a 'simplifcation' procedure which effectively shuts off all other internet services. To Grandma who just got her new computer for her birthday and can't use her shiny new internet account her Geeky grand-kids are paying for, this is kind of mean, frustrating, and to them another example of why computers themselves are the devil.
-[ World domination - rains.net ]-
Anyway, the point is that just because things look bad now it doesn't mean we are inevitably headed towards the end of open internet access as we know it.
Fear and paranoia have their place, and ideally everyone should know of perceived or real threats to their intrests. Be it Open Source Software, Linux, Freedom of Speech, The right to bear arms, or any other cause. However I do not think it is quite time to declare defeat for open internet access and choice of ISPs. You only lose fights like this if you choose to lose them. Tell people why you hate AOL 5 when they mention it, and suggest another ISP, granted they might be a little annoyed with you for it, but hey, you're a little annoyed with them for telling you how great AOL 5 is.
-[ World domination - rains.net ]-
Didn't the old AOL do this, too? I remember you couldn't really telnet then. I'm not too surprised, since AOL's web browser is still based on Internet Explorer, and they're all still evil.
Anyhow, yet another reason not to upgrade from AOL 4.0, and wait for them to switch to Mozilla, (Netscape 5.0, when it's released...) and hope they don't screw up again. I feel sorry for all those people stuck with AOL, for whatever reason.
AOL: we make your life simpler provided you don't know what you're doing... and we intend to keep it that way!
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Hmm. Recursive acronym. Well, the obvious start would be: "Tinkerbell Is Not", but past that you've got me stumped. Maybe words like "Karma", "Leet", "Eleet", or "Troll" might creep in there somewhere? You do use all the letters coherently, right? With T standing for Tinkerbell?
Oh, and... yo, moderators, lighten up. I remember when MEEPT! used to get moderated up. Because it was funny. I didn't think this was terribly funny, but more deserving of 0 than -1, at least. Redundant? Please, it's the second post.
And heck, expect some crap in an AOL story. At least we don't have the porn spam mail on slashdot like almost every AOL user gets...
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Here's an interesting article which explains file protection and private DLLs:
R L=/library/techart/dlldanger1.htm.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/isapi/msdnlib2.idc?theU
Kind of ugly hacks, but I guess ugly hacks are what's needed due to Windows' badly designed DLL system...
--
All Glory To The Hypnotoad!
I think it's ironic...AOL, now just about the biggest company, is resorting to the same tricks Microsoft has used in the past.
Also ironic, isn't it, that AOL was one ofthe biggies pushing for the anti-trust suit against Microsoft.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
The computers are owned by the business. They have no right to install business damaging software.
It only takes a couple.
Deleted
"Calling EMACS an editor is like calling the Earth a hunk of dirt" - Chris DiBona
Very interesting way to look at it. One could argue that the typical AOL user is too naive to understand other mail programs and what not. Also you could say this seriously inhibits their ability to quickly and painlessly switch ISPs. The only argument I was trying to attack in my previous post was that of legality. By giving users an option AOL can not be responsible. If you click yes you click yes. It is that simple. I do agree however, that there should be a "What Does This Mean" option in addition to the YES/NO that is currently given. I think its a little brutal to say they are taking advantage of their users naivete', perhaps a better way to look at it is that they are trying to make life easier by putting everything in one easy to use application.
Finally, "America Online" is an option in the Add/Remove Programs area of the Windows control panels so you can get rid of the application and most browsers upon installation ask you if you want to make them the default browsers. Reversing the process is possible.
"Calling EMACS an editor is like calling the Earth a hunk of dirt" - Chris DiBona
This story has me on edge now, and slightly grateful for once that we're largely running Macs behind At Ease. The few clone users in the building are in my immediate area and I can drop a few hints... the Mac users (teachers) don't have the privileges to install anything on their own, anyhow, and this sounds like a Windows issue.
------------
Michael Hall
mphall@cstone.nospam.net
Michael Hall
mph.puddingbowl.org
And I would be that win'00 is indeed doing the file replacement trick... that would be nice. Of course, any and all microsoft products get to 'upgrade' vxds and dlls.
--Dan
Well, if the problem is as large as this article makes it out to be, the people I just warned against have reason to come at me screaming "I told you so!" I'm none too happy about it, either. Is it just not possible for big companies to play nice with the kids?
-- Stargazer
I use mine for coasters as well. They're great, especially the small ones that you get in the mail. Got a can of Dew sitting on one right now...
-- K
(argh... that's tab, not enter)
Gee... I'm stunned. AOL engaging in Anti-Competitive tatics. Just wait for the Microsoft/AOL-Time Warner-Netscape-Winamp merger...
maybe forced video rentals of the crappiest Warner movies ever made?
Yeah, we'll get more and more movies like "You've Got Mail"
"If you insist on using Windoze you're on your own."
Right away, this tells you what kind of "expert" you're dealing with. I have seen many like him. The people that think there is something special about Windows, and that somehow, by some hidden magic, the problems will stay unless you format the hard drive. Nuking \WINDOWS and reinstalling it (as a last resort) doesn't seem as an option to them.
Oh wait, this is a journalist Windows Magazine we're talking about... why did I even comment?
--
I was talking about a slightly different thing. Not reinstalling itself, but the act of formatting the hard drive. While in this case, it was probably a test box with nothing important on it, I have talked to many people who thought of no other way to reinstall other than to format their hard drive, which contained importand data that was never backed up
--
While this is true, the following is what I think caused them do what they did. Not everyone has the TCP/IP stack installed. To install it would cause all kinds of annoyances, including requests for the Windows CD, which many people have already used for other purposes. This way, AOL automatically installs all the drivers without the l^Huser worrying about it.
I do appreciate the marketing that AOL makes about being "easier than ever" or whatever...because it keeps most of the people who can't read instructions or help files away, but if they are so truly easy to use, they should also make a product that actually plays nice with the system when the user needs it to.
My theory is that it is impossible to make a product that is easy to use, stable, and system-friendly at the same time. For the moment, anyway.
--
However, that doesn't mean that there will be no confusion. Microsoft will also release a DOS-based Windows later on, called Windows Millenium. I think that's what you're talking about.
--
--
I consider this a glorified virus. AOL has no right to mess with the internals of Windows... if it wasn't for MS' anti-trust lawsuit and their cozy relationship with AOL.. and if I was Bill Gates, I'd be calling for AOL's head right now.
*RANT*
When companies take it upon themselves to make modifications to *YOUR* *PERSONAL* computer, that's where I draw the line. There ought to be civil liability for stuff like this - I wish I could come up with a good strawman case to try out on AOL... some way of demonstrating how harmful this kind of behavior is. Atleast a virus can be detected and removed - try getting McAfee to release a patch to scrub AOL off your system.
There was a version before that did this. Install the "AOL adapter" and no other tcp/ip stack worked but it. I had to bail several people out of that nifty trick and put a lower version on.
So once again, I have to explain this stuff to people and that "no, it's not the lie-nucks computer that isnt working". Oh well, it'll be my fault anyway. I'll just apologize for breaking AOL and downgrade them again.
"Don't think, we do for you" its their motto
Friday I took a call from someone who's computer had been taken over by AOL. Nothing worked, and everytime she started an Internet program the AOL dialup screen came up. I figured she was a) boned, and b) AOL's problem, not ours.
Here's the kicker: her kids installed AOL.
Now that I hear about this, I'm starting to think she may have a legal case against AOL. A minor can't agree to a contract after all. This point is a little thin, but if there's any sign of negligence on the part of AOL developers such that they should have put in stronger warnings and more detailed information, then they could be liable of a lot of money. It probably wouldn't be worth the effort on her own, but there's a good possibility of a class-action suit.
And this is a lawsuit I can support. There's an enormous difference (especially on WinXX) between becoming the default app for email and web use and deleting existing network drivers. In the first case, it can easily be undone. In the later case, some actual damage may be done to the system, requiring expert (and expensive) repairs. I sincerely hope they've got enough tech support people to handle this, but I doubt it. Another sign of negligence ?
This is irresponsible on AOL's part. Poor luser installs a free trial copy of AOL, and they're stuck with it (or rebuilding their system). Note specifcally that there is no FM to R in this case. No warnings, and (I'll bet) no install log to help an expert in solving the problem.
There are far too many naive users out there who, if they even know that they could have to reinstall ("what's that mean ?, I don't know where my CD is !"), are adamant that they shouldn't have to.
They've got a point, anyone who pretends that Windows is an Internet Appliance that never needs user maintenance is guilty of gross misrepresentation. If they do it in advertising, then it's likely illegal. That's just not the reality of consumer desktop systems. I don't tell the Windows lusers out there that they shoulda bought a Mac, because the reality is that even the newer Macs can screw themselves up (and what do I tell them ?). Remember, too many people out there are Unclear on the Concept of moving/copying files and making shortcuts/aliases.
[an AOL ad just came on the TV... spooky]
Here's an opportunity for anyone thinking of putting together a new Linux distro: an appliance. It installs on (almost anything) and the user never really has to touch anything but an occaisonal GUI config tool. And programs can't break the system.
Get hacking guys !
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
I'll second this ! Especially if your office has a network that can handle Ghost from a network boot floppy.
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
Working for a smaller ISP and doing tech support along with my other duties..., I can tell you that this 5.0 release from AOL hell is a huge PITA! Explaining to our clients that the reason they cannot connect is due to their new install / upgrade of the AOL software is at best, a pain..., since the steps sometimes require just zapping the whole frick'in OS and reinstalling it. (Windows 9x) What worries me even more is that (with new client computers) now the SR2 release of Win98 comes with the AOL software. Personally, I'd rather setup Linux boxes all day. ;)
In a nutshell, AOL is costing us support time that could be put to better use, since I'm *sure* they knew about the problems before the release of 5.0.
Life was hell, then I discovered Linux...
You may be right about legality, but from your statement, you still aren't taking into account what default means. The traditional usage of default is where you want to use one browser or application most of the time, but still want to be able to access a similar application that handles the same things occasionally. Such as being able to connect to your work account from home as well as your own personal account.
However, with AOL 5.0, it is apparent that they are taking the usage of default much farther than needed. I don't know the average AOL user. However, I would probably be safe in thinking that this average user has encountered the default setting question before, and knows what it implies, and knows that it doesn't mean taking over everything so that other isps, such as a work account, can't be connected to.
Amen brothah! I was having trouble with my local ISP last week and decided to install AOL as a backup connection. It was like the apple in the Garden of Eden... right there under the coffee cup, and soooo tempting. And within mere minutes I was in deep doo-doo.
Did I click on some button that said to make AOL my default _anything_? Geez, I would never have done that on purpose. I already had enough of Exploder demanding to be my default browser over the years.
Like the guy says... "If you install AOL, you deserve the consequences."
I was a fool to even consider it. Fortunately, my system did not become any less stable, like some people. I was already running windoze so it couldn't get any worse.
My metamoderation cancels your moderation
If this is true, all the high school teches are realy genna be happy, if not breaking chairs over the idots heads who install aol on school computers.
Buried deep in the AOL service contract, subsection 20:10,
1) I AM THE LORD THY ISP. THOU SHALT HAVE NO FALSE
ISPS BEFORE ME.
Seems pretty clear to me...
"Format C:" is a perfectly reasonable course of action if the system is configured with the operating system in a dedicated partition with the user's data and applications in other partitions. I've often used this setup on test systems that may need to have the operating system reinstalled on a regular basis. Killing the whole partition is faster than deleting all of the files, including any read-only, hidden and system files.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Registry rot is one of the main reasons that I end up reinstalling the operating system. Sometimes I think the registry was designed by the same people who designed those Mission Impossible tape recorders.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Yeah, it's Microsoft's biggest product release in 5 years, and the geniuses blow it by distributing betas of a similarly named, but completely different product.
And these guys supposedly got where they are through marketing...
--
Business. Numbers. Money. People. Computer World.
Amazing prescience from Userfriendly--
Userfriendly Jan 15, 2000.
"...Borg gear will look good on you, Steve..."
I used to have a part time job at the local public library, and responsibility for maintaining our public access internet machines fell to me.
AOL has a most lovely Java install feature, that manages to bypass all of the security stuff that we had installed. For some reason, disallowing AOL's Java priviliges doesn't work. So, any asshole who wants to install AOL on our machines can. I spent more time fixing AOL-intall related problems than any other sort.
I left since before the new version came out, so it's not my headache. But all the people I know who still work there are going to hate it.
BTW, is there any way to convince McAffe or Norton to view the AOL install files as virii and nuke them accordingly?
My favorite palindrome is "Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas," which I actually use to remember how to spell oscillate -- a word that I often forget, I have no idea why. I simply spell metallic sonatas backwards: satanos cillatem, and then do a little twiddling of the spaces, and chop off some letters: [satan] oscillate [m]. Cool, no?
Why I posted this is left as an excercise for the reader -- and my apologies for trolling to all those who take a half a second to figure it out...
Jeff
I highly encourage a paper towel be placed under the CD before hitting 'Start'.
James E. Robinson, III Centennial Networking Lab - NCSU
AOL is a lot more aggressive in intercepting internet shortcuts than MS-IE. I can manage to run Netscape Navigator, Netscape Messenger, use anything for TCP=IP (I use Roadrunner), and not have issues. Uninstalling things is trivial. (I run Windows, by the way).
To uninstall AOL is a lil' more than trivial, the article has an example of a woman who needed to format. This is a little more than I expect from an ISP.
I truly doubt it's illegal. I belive the question is, "Is this ethical?".
I'd have to go with a "probably not," just to give myself some breathing room.
People go with what they know. Ask the average U.S. citizen what AOL is, and they can tell you it's an ISP (in their own words). AOL is easy to use, and it gives the average person what he or she wants -- an internet connection, e-mail, and a buddy list, all without hassle (ideally, of course).
To think that I missed the results by sheer instinct. I installed AOL on my dad's computer. 5.0. Boy am I glad that I said no!
Fighting the War on the War on Drugs.
http://smokedot.org/
Vanilla Ice? Is that they key to making Windows and AOL work?
Better not tell the RIAA... they'll sue the pants off of Bill Gates and Steve Case to "protect" Mr. Ice. Of course, they'll have to wait for the DoJ to finish with Bill and Steve separately, and the RIAA will want to finish this mess with MP3.com, which runs on NT servers, btw. Meanwhile, the MPAA, suing on behalf of Warner Brothers (CEO: Steve Case) will also be suing anyone who uses AOL to post the DeCSS code, as well as suing AOL (CEO: Steve Case) for storing the infringing material on their NT web servers (just like MP3.com). So AOL will have to pay its entire net worth to MPAA, which will give some back to Warner Bros., but some cash will end up being paid to Vanilla Ice's record label and their parent conglomerate, doubtless a servant of the RIAA.
Who gets the money? Some big company.
Whose money is it? It's mine. It's the extra $50 I paid for an OS; the extra $10 I paid for a $2 CD; the $20 a month I pay for low-speed access when sophomores in college get hi-speed access with their apartments and dorms for the same price. It was mine, and now they want it back...
wait a sec.
--jurph
In the aftermath of the AOL/NetscapeTime/Warner/CNN/SI... conglomoration, this is *really* scary. Taking control of our computers? What's next? (I wont even begin to speculate...
Reality has a liberal bias
Actually, I am saving them up. I will cut them in pieces with my scroll saw to form a mosaic.
--- If you don't want to know the answer, don't ask the question.
I actually have experience with this because I beta tested AOL 5.0 for a while. It would in fact create something in the dial up networking settings, and after using AOL you could not use your other ISP's if you had one. Now, this would only happen I think if you used AOL first, If you reboot the other ISP would work... or maybe you had to create the connections over again and then it was ok. I haven't however tested any of the recent versions so they might have changed something. The problem I think is that a lot of beta testers really did not know what they were doing, and did not know how to properly use the bug report system. I remember that a few suggested to reccomend features to the non-beta suggestion section of AOL instead of adressing it in the beta newsboard (Which the beta staff did read.)
_joshua_
You do realize that this could never happen in a system where only AUTHORIZED programs could change your Internet settings, right?
Good.
This just shows that the Windows security model (no security at all) is inadequate for the Internet age. It's time for something, ANYTHING, better.
<*cough* capability systems *cough*>
Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
http://www.langa.com/newsle tters/1999/nov-4-99.htm#aol1
Here are the original comments sent to Fred Langa (person who wrote the original article).
--
GroundAndPound.com News and info for martial artists of all styles.
If someone is willing to install AOL 5.0, chances are they're not really comfortable with a "regular" ISP dialup account (and maybe installing software is still something they're new to), so if AOL disables the others dialups, what are the chances these users will be able to get them back? AOL is essentially locking in their userbase.
.mp3, it plays in the RealPlaer.
AOL is far from alone in this, Microsoft routinely does this, Apple does this in the Quicktime 4 player (takes over all media types), but the granddaddy of it is Real Networks.
RealPlayer gets my vote for most annoying software on earth.
If you want to see the level of obnoxiousness in their software, download RealPlayer 7 and install it on a windows system. Then count the number of infections across your system. I remember the following occurring on install: a new toolbar button in IE, new links in my bookmarks, realjukebox installed even though I have no intention of ever wanting or using it, new taskbar program always running, disabling the taskbar icon is now hidden 2 levels deep in its preferences (it used to be one click away), and it associated *everything* imaginable with the RealPlayer, including MP3's which I'm perfectly happy using Winamp or Freeamp for playback. I've forced the mp3 extension to map to Winamp, but still to this day, when I click on a web link ending in
I'll also mention that they continue to hide the free player plugin deep in their site, forcing visitors to view multiple pitches to buy their questionably better $30 Plus version. Those are just off the top of my head, I know I missed a couple more...
Real Networks has built its user base to insane numbers because of the infectious nature of their plugin (remember, it's just a plugin, since when should a plugin install things all over my OS?). They've effectively duped their user base into using RealPlayer for everything, and making it near impossible to avoid it or uninstall it. This line of thinking reminds of how the most annoying banner ads and TV advertising is usually the most effective at getting people to actually use or know about a product.
Fortunately, a company that prefers to use deceptive tactics to maintain their market dominance instead of standing behind and continuing to build great products is destined to fail, as they will inevitably piss off their entire user base (see: Linux user base growning as veteran Windows users tire of being fed up with their buggy software).
Matt
Someone I used to work with was either related to or very good friends with a local newspaper journalist. This former co-worker was featured several times in anecdotal stories (e.g., in one about the musical tastes of pre-teens, we learned that her daughter enjoyed the Spice Girls). I think journalists learn somewhere that concrete examples with real people increase interest in a story, and I suppose the easiest way to get these, at least for relatively non-exotic things, is to ask friends and acquaintences.
this article only gets published in this universe...in the OTHER universe(we'll call it next year, after some merging goes through)...all these things get reported by CNN as GREAT!! and offering a LOT more to the customer by taking away all those nit-picky choices that no one would want to have make THEMSELVES>..!
I don't know how this reporter got their information, but when I needed to get an idea of what types of problems people were having with their computers I'd call up repair people, and they would forward me to a client to interview.
Since this is an AOL situation, that's the best bet-- I bet most AOLers make frequent trips to computer repair shops to have Windows re-installed.
this is something equal to what m$ has done.
#?@??%?$%?4
die a0l + m$ $%$%&%^&**$%^$%^&$%&$%&&%&$$%&&$%$%^&
You can use a tcp/ip connection to access aol, and some of them might have email that they want to check or some other such thing.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Well, then can't the geeky kids fix the problem? It's not that difficult. This was my point: The users that install AOL and don't know what they are saying yes too are more than likely going to use AOL for their email and web browsing. Every internet browser does exactly the same thing. Every email client does exactly the same thing. All the telnet applications I have tried have done the same thing. Just because AOL is generally lame doesn't give us reason to bash them for something everyone else does.
The problem is that AOL has millions of subscribers, the vast majority of which just hit "yes" to everything when they install a program. Hell, there's been plenty of times when, either because of being tired or drunk or whatever, I just don't pay attention to half the prompts on the screen.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Okay sir, type in the following: F.. O.. R.. M.. A.. (you get the idea..)
BTW, Opman rocks. Just what I wanted for Opera..
>They would have read about the horrors of 5.0
>before they installed it. Not to mention they are
>drasticly overpaying for service. $21.95? Most of
>the local ISPs around here are $14.95 or under,
>and offer everything AOL has.
Just some points: - Most people installing 5.0 are probably existing AOL users. They probably DIDN'T read the horror stories, but read all the AOL-fed hype about 5.0. Doesn't make it better, just puts things in perspective. - Show me an ISP that offers everything that AOL offers. I dare ya. Sure, other ISPs might offer better service, but there is no other ISP that provides the content that AOL provides.
the point may be that anecdotal reports are common. i know of at least 2 cases that i heard of before this story ever broke. they are also the only two people i know who have installed AOL5. incedentaly, i would also say that it did a real job on a laptop (vaio 505rx- did you know you can get linux on these thin guys now?! http://emperorlinux.com/), which required booting and reinstalling from the recovery CD. didn't even do the safe mode thing.
This is Why GHOST is the only way to admin Windows Boxes. first you try to fix it, which you can in most cases, But if it is really hosed and you have spent more then 1 hour trying to fix it, it is time for a GHOST multicast boot disk and a system nuke.
1. Copy user files to a network drive, if networking is still running
2. GHOST
3. Copy user files back
4. Collect pay check
This is why I GHOST every machine before I redeploy it. The same thing can happen to NT
that is why you NEVER install unneeded software
on a production machine. And if you need to install new software you should try it on ONE server first and use it for about a week or so
and test the hell out of it, this included Hotfixes and Service Packs. This brings up the
fact that you need to firewall an NT network big time. If by act of God MSFT does release a Hotfix for a crack I'll be damed If I will install it on more then one machine to test it. Restoring an NTFS file system ACL's is a ROYAL pain in the ASS.
Mmmmmmm..... Arcane technical settings
luckly we'll have two isp's....aol and AT&T...take it or leave it...it looks like that will be the only options. They both seem to be gaining a strangle hold on the market.
Everyone is making fun of this and that, but does anyone know of the solution? I have warned my younger sister numerous times about installing any trial software especially AOL. But her big boned head never absorbed that. ... and your guess is correct, she installed AOL 5.0, and the families computer is now screwed, and umm as the computer addict, they are expecting me to fix it, cuz heh, they are realizing just how addicted err useful the net is too. I don't use windows, never did, strictly Unix from day 1, so I really have no idea what to do. I have uninstalled the software and stuff, but it still doesn't help. I am currently searching for solutions, so that these people I call family will leave me alone, so that I can crank more code.
------ Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
actually you can. some new compaqs have a soft bios -- the bios exists on a partition on the hard drive. format/repartition and reinstall the machine and voila - no bios. Also most home machines comes with win9x preinstalled and no install cd - win9x dies and you cant reinstall it.
I do use AOL 5 on my laptop due to world-wide travling, and you can connect aywhere with it. It is true that it will try to take over all you Network settings, but it takes about 5 minutes to put it right. I can still connect through my Linux Box via IP Masq, the local ISP via modem, and to the network at work via ethernet. Alothough you have to reboot to accomplish the last one.
I'm sorry, but since Windows 95 and TAPI, is it REALLY necessary for the program to use its OWN DAMN DRIVERS, that, until 5.0, didn't recognize anything above COM5?! And what if it's a USB modem, What THEN?! Why the hell can't AOL use TAPI like any SANE program?
WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE?!?!?
(In case you haven't noticed, I just came off a 4 hour war with AOL's shitware over an LT Winmodem that only installed on COM5.)
-Lx?
The laptop lady was obviously clueless; reinstalling windows==reformating for most people, and there's no reason 3 times would be needed, let alone a $145 'fix' to a software problem.
will there ever be a time when there is no alternative to AOL?
i mean its easy to have an alternative to Microsoft in that its only software. but actually building and maintaing physical infrastructure (a la Time Warner) is really a big ordeal.
AOLers are and always will be Lamers (with a capital 'L') but how much bigger is AOL gonna get?
clearly they're gonna use monopolisitic tactics, so how are we going to ensure that they don't become a monopoly!
there used to be hundreds of local ISPs in my home town (Toronto) but now there are only a handful. what does the future hold for the home user?!
As much as *this* little 'feature' is cause of alarm, I'm happy to report that it didn't happen to me when I installed Version 5.0. The basic trick here is to keep a shortcut to your ISP connection in your Desktop or Start Menu, and make sure that you choose TCP/IP in your method of connection in the AOL program.
This method teached AOL 5.0 to behave.
David Gonterman of FoxFire Studios http://foxfire.twu.net
Maybe not, but if I said "Microsoft" instead of "AOL Time Warner" and "MSN" instead of "AOL 5.0," I think the perspective would be much different. In fact, I think it would be held up as an example of anti-competitive practices for use on a state or federal anti-trust suit. Of course, AOL doesn't have an Internet monopoly (yet), but crap like this doesn't help.
Add the DeCSS case (Warner Bros. Studios) and misc. RIAA (Warner/Elektra/Atlantic) anti-MP3 moves and this is one conglomerate in the making that would be unafraid to infringe on the ultimate choice of the technologically-savvy consumer.
What's going to be interesting is to see how Joe Average responds to this. Will it be, that he's OK with one source for everything (news, entertainment, bandwidth) like 90 percent of the U.S. is for MS products, or will he say, "I'm not comfortable with that?" Sadly, I don't know nor am I particularly hopeful at this point.
--Humpty Dumpty was pushed!
Ouch. That new dumb law strikes back
-------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------
A very nice tactical decision on their part, I must admit.
Really:
1. Send out those damned CDs to everyone in America. Like I need another coaster.
2. Some hapless boob installs the damned thing by freak accident. I know of nobody who would install AOL willingly, but they somehow managed to get a bunch of loons on the web. It proves people prefer convenience over thought.
3. The thing runs amok and does everything bad that the report says it does. So....
4. The user is stuck with AOL reminders and erros, unless he knows his stuff.
5. If he knows his stuff, he's not using AOL. He's using a real, nonintrusive, ISP.
6. Results: Advertising Through Annoyance! The user gets to either reformat his system, edit the registry, or spend a nice long call with tech support to get back to where he was before he deicded he wanted the convenience of getting porn links mailed to him.
Moral:
If you install AOL, you deserve the consequences.
Another case for a UNIX-based work environment. Rule number one of the Idiot User: If they SHOULDN'T do it, they WILL. I'm lucky- there are two other people in my office. Between the three of us, we have eight machines: five Macs, two Wintel boxes and a Dibian box. With the exception of the 'nix box, we're all competent professionals who know what the hell we're doing- IMHO, if you're going to be using a computer AT ALL, you should have at least six months of training to familiaze yourself intimately so situations like this don't happen.
Of course, it's probably your job to clean up a mess like that, though...
Still. Idiots don't deserve access priveleges.
Still, I'm glad to see that CNN has at least one shred of integrity. I'm really surprised that it would be mentioned there at all.
Ok I will have to bring up something JonKatz said to the effect of, how can a company based on screwing its customers over get so far ahead? Honestly, do you think that anyone will ever recieve any help from AOL's already bogged down Customer Service? It's crap, deal with it and get a real ISP...
JediLuke
JediLuke
-Do or Do Not, There is no Try
Well back when Win95 first came out, i had on compuserve...and everytime i reinstalled compuserve the windows would say..."There is a corrupted file windows will repair it now" and this was the WINSOCK.DLL. COmpuserve later sued Microsoft because this was an intentional thing put in, as it didn't check any other files for corruption...i can't remember if they won or not...doesn't matter...they got bought...heh
JediLuke
JediLuke
-Do or Do Not, There is no Try
Getting WinNT to do almost anything erratically is hardly an achievement, and certainly doesn't merit a significant causal relationship.
In other words, it could be anything. Blame the geniuses behind the NT registry if you want to blame anyone.
--
--
There is no premature anti-fascism. -Ernest Hemingway
Rhetorical: If the news is just for selling soap, where does the real news come from?
Zax
-- We are Linux. Resistance is measured in Ohms.
That fscking degenerate ISP known as AOL now has an Australia division...oxymornically called "AOL Australia".
:-)
Just a few more mergers to go till we see a "You've got McScientology!*" advert on TV
-Ekapshi
What the fsck? Windows2000 = NT5. The last consumer release of Windows was Windows98SE.
Win2k Professional = NT4 workstation.
There is no such thing as Win2k Personal, altho I suspect that MS may release their next consumer OS as "Windows2000 Home Edition" or something.
Damn, that rat bastard Shanoyu beat me to it. I will be forced to go undercover and use my arsenal of AOL CDs to assinate him.-
-------------------------------------------
Please give your mod points to others, Im at the cap. They will appreciate it more
What makes it even worse is that browsers have been asking "Do you want to make X your default browser?" for years. Up until now, it merely meant pretty much what it said, that the new browser would come up whenever html was referenced.
Had I had the misfortune of having to install this, I'm sure I would have just said yes, without though as well.
The cake is a pie
Okay, I saw on the main page that there were no comments, when I came onto the page to say "It asks you first, if you answer yes, you're stupid and deserve what you get."
But someone already said that. And there were 155+ comments when I clicked reply.
I really don't see the problem with AOL doing this. It asks you clearly if you'd like AOL to handle all of your internet operations. You say Yes|No.
I can't figure out how to word it even more clearly. I've seen the screen come up, it's actually a little dialogue box.
I'm all for making computers easier to use, but when it asks you a simple and clear question and you answer wrongly, you should just deal with it, or figure out how to fix it.
AOL newbies or not, it's too simple, and the people that don't understand it and probably shouldn't be around electrical devices anyway.
Dan
Resistance is futile. Your internet experience as you have known it is over. From this time forwared your computers and net connections will now service us.
Netscape is irrelevant. Mozilla is irrelevant. Open source is irrelevant. Independent ISPS are irrelevant. Freedom of choice is irreleveant. Click yes to be assimilated. Resistance is futile.
Agreed. This will happen as long as people let companies get away with it.
...she returned to an earlier version of AOL's software she considers less risky.
Peg Graham of New York installed AOL's latest software on her laptop weeks after its initial release in October with disastrous results: Her computer crashed. In vain, her laptop manufacturer urged her to reinstall her entire Windows operating system -- she did three times -- before she finally paid a local repair shop $145 to fix it.
What does she do next? Switch to a different ISP? Sue AOL for the repair costs?
Nope
It's tough to feel sorry for these people.
Is this legal? Aol already is monopolozing the ISP world as it is.
some of us /. geeks are tech support folk at a 'rival' isp. although i don't consider aol to be a rival of the one i work for. we do lose between 2 and 5 new users a week cause they can't handle the internet. they can't even figure out the world wide web. and i don't know how many computers i've had to fix because of aol software. and 1 that has been permanantly disabled, and i mean permanently, by aol software (before 5.0 btw).
so we should be up in arms cause it makes my life (yes i'm selfish) a fscking hell!
--
dead angel
i am strange people. -me
dead angel
i am strange people. -me
spreading linux lovin' since 1998!
sick man. just sick.
--
dead angel
i am strange people. -me
dead angel
i am strange people. -me
spreading linux lovin' since 1998!
AOL? Isn't that the group that did Evil Woman?
Or what it the company that created viagra.
I can never remember.
The Blue Screen reminds us we are mortal while Tux teaches that Open Source is immortal.
Microsoft or something?
I used to be on AOL, then I decided that 48 porno emails a day just was not worth it.
Now, I miss all the porno....
"Crito, we owe a cock to Aesculapius; please pay it and don't let it pass."~Socrates, on his deathbed.
God yes I remember that awful rubbish, their "AOL adapter." It would even break TCP/IP on your LAN! Like if you can "surf" the "net" using AOL, why would you ever need access to the files on your company's file server, right?
At the time I assumed that anyone who could make a GUI as thoroughly ugly and nasty as the so-called "AOL browser" was simply incompetent. But since then they've bought Netscape, which is full of competent programmers. And here it's happening again! So now we can only assume they are doing this on purpose.
Well, we all knew all alnog that AOL sucks. But with their assimilation of Time/Warner, now we have two gigantic evil empires nakedly striving to ruin the Internet. Ecch.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
Funny, I don't remember anyone talking about that in earlier posts.
I worked for AOL as an outsourced Technical Support agent a few years back. They really have no clue. I have spoken with several people that still work for AOL since 5.0 came out. This has been a known issue for some time, and causes tons of trouble for their techs. The problem started when AOL decided they wanted to become more user friendly. The problem with this is that they implemented it so that it would remove all network connections, so that if someone opened a non-AOL piece of internet software, it wouldn't connect using the other services. The incompatance comes in not from the fact of how they implemented the install, but rather that they didn't fix it as soon as it was brought to light. The fact that when you use AOL and it destroys your additional network settings really reeks of Monopolistic practices. IANAL, but AOL better start watching out for the DOJ - right after they finish with Microsoft.
I somewhat resent this. Not ALL AOL users are lusers. I am unwiitingly forced to use AOL. I don't have the money or time to set up an account with another ISP, I refuse to use slow connections with terrible ad windows that you get with free ISPs. Just be aware that there are some decent AOL users and don't generalize so much.
And that, my dears, is the world according to DIJ.
Dijital
Diji
"I came, I saw, I WTF'd!"
Seems a bit anti-competitive, if it means that you'll lose your current settings, and AOL of course will probably be making money on call charges to their tech support line to fix the prolems it has caused, or causing headaches for competitors when all their customers phone up wanting to know how to go back to before the AOL install.
asher@cuckoo.org www.cuckoo.org
-----------------------
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
-----------------------
Nicotine free Amish .sig.
Or then again, maybe not.
"Reinstalling" can mean two things in the Windows world. Either you start from scratch; boot the computer from an MS-DOS boot disk, format C: wiping it out completely etc. blah blah, or then you just might install Windows over itself again (which really isn't a complete reinstall in the sense we understand it as it preserves most of the old registry settings and almost all of the installed 3rd party software.)
It would seem likely that P. Graham was just performing the latter procedure (and didn't have the technical knowledge and competence to even try the former option.)
Cool! I like that. It's amazing that it restores the MBR amd FAT tables perfectly.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
I have been telling customer that this is happening with AOL v.5 for months along with all the other techs here, now only if people who use AOL read this article and say to them selves , "Gee I fond this act to be one that is imoral and wrong , I belive it is in my best interest and others to cancel AOL and start and account with the competitor" instead of saying "well if AOL will take over anyother connection then I might as well not fight it" , I Hate it when they do that
Just incase anyone wanted to know how to fix the problem , all you do is delete anything that says AOL in the network control panel in win 9x
This sounds almost like old news. At my old employer we had a bitch of a time keeping sales people from installing AOL because it screwed up the network settings for them connecting to our network at the office. Not sure exactly what it was it did however.
We have a LAN here in our house that connects to the internet over a shared cable modem. One of my room mates decided to continue to use AOL to stay in touch with relatives and such. I tried explaining to him that he didn't need AOL's software but he is AOL's target audience and didn't quite understand. So I reluctantly configured AOL to use an existing LAN connection. Then one day we got one of those magical free disks in the mail, how did we get so lucky. So he decided to upgrade to version 5.0. I got a call at work because he could no longer use Eudora to access his POP account through school, so he could no longer find out what his homework was for his classes.
When diagnosing the problem he failed to inform me that he had upgraded AOL when the problem began so I thought the problem was with Eudora so I removed and reinstalled that program. Still Eudora refused to start. After several hours of testing software and network connections he finally mentioned that he had upgraded AOL. After removing the AOL upgrade the system began functioning normally again.
I feel sorry for all the customers of AOL who might run into a similar problem and end up having to pay a profesional to fix it. Plus I'm going to probably run into this problem at work when clients are calling me wanting to know why they can no longer access company mail servers and such. Couldn't this move by AOL be considered a monopolistic(?) tactic as well as a pain in the a$$. Maybe the DOJ should go try and straighten them out.
----------------
Please remove your pants before replying to me
Well, there has been that long standing joke that if you were using aol then you were screwed- that was before this new 5.0 shit. AOL has always had that crazy protocal and they are just so damn big. Being big in its selt is not bad but I have heard horrible stories of people having to cancel their credit cards and what not because they could not cancel AOL otherwise- one has to wonder if such a problem would exist with a smaller ISP.
win2k keeps a 2nd copy of ALL The dll files under the windows directory somewhere... cant remember exactly where. If you need to hack w2k, change the backup as well, or it will detect your file manipulation. teo.
The backup directory is winnt\system32\dllcache An interesting article on this is available at microsoft's technet web site and is appropriately entitled DLL Hell.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/libr ary/techart/dlldanger1.htm
-Jerdenn
AOL never *was* a dman ISP to begin with! Back in the day....a whole 4 years ago....the media called them an "online service" and called ISPs "ISPs."
Somewhere since then the popular media--and I lump ZD, CNET, and Wired in here because they contributed to the problem--started calling AOL an ISP too. In fact you commonly hear the marketroids now calling AOL "America's #1 ISP"
POPPYCOCK! AOL is nothing but a glorified proxy server with substandard interfaces to the Net. Its users are the lamest idiots on earth.
I can't remember where I read this, but this is how it goes... AOL 4.0 Can run on windows 2000, although it may warn you when you run it, it still should run fine. On the other hand, AOL 5.0 does not work with windows 2000, since it is insecure. AOL is working on it... and they have a website for it... here, but i haven't seen any changes in the past few months.
Not that I want to run it, but other users do...
I have tried both (usually tcp/ip), but i have also tried dialup. They both seemed to work flawlessly (minus the warning-dialog box).
Of course, do remember that this takes some effort on your part to do. You have to make your own system vulnerable, because you run an OS that isn't quite as dumb as some. There are others that aren't so fortunate.
So there are stupid people that use AOL on Windows. That doesn't make it their fault. Many people don't even know that there is an alternative; to them, AOL is the internet, and M$ Windows IS computers. We're blaming these people for not actively seeking a better alternative? That's not fair at all. AOL is taking advantage of people with this, and it's got to stop.
-- Your IP is showing
And I finished my undegraduate work in physics last year. I am currently taking some graduate classes in computer science. I am currently working for a company with a group of folk from Harvard, MIT, and some industry people. Previously, I have consulted for some local startups.
My command of the english language is clearly better than yours, and I don't generally take exacting care to check all of my sentences on /. for grammatical correctness. I believe the sentences you're referring to were probably simply using colloquial expressions.
But, Mr. Troll Shitface AC, that has absolutely nothing to do with the point of my post. Which was that AOL has its uses. If you are going to flame me, at least flame me for the post's relevant content by telling me how much AOL sucks.
Who ever said you had to use their version of IE? Youre free to use Netscape, IE, ftp, whatever once you have your connection.
My blog: http://jkratz.dyndns.org/~jason/blog/
Wow, I was right, AOL are communists!!!!
Buying a Dell computer is equivalent to dropping the soap in a prison shower.
I have experienced no difference in the way AOL handles TCP/IP from previous versions. I am a beta tester for aol, and am using the most recent build of 5.0 (it's not out for mac yet) and I'm on a DSL connection. In fact, My computer is a gateway for my LAN, and AOL behaves like a good little client. I can even dial in my modem at the same time and connect to aol either by DSL or modem. It doesn't interfere at all with any of my other clients and server software. These problems must be limited to the Windows version of AOL.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
This is not the first time AOL has done this. I was working in ISP tech support in '96 and whatever version came out then (AOL 3.0?) did the same thing as 5.0 does, from the sounds of it - ie, nukes all your other connections. It sucks. Got tons of calls about it. Typical AOL badness.
Aol is for old people or people that doesnt have a clue on how to use computers/internet, basicaly for newbies. If AOL does that then thats a problem for AOL users, not our problem. "we are not AOL users i suppose :) ", if you are I think you couldnt read this message with the new upgrade.
He wanted to have more time to advise AOL in their programming practices...
It was the beginning of december, and I was using a regular dial up account with a 56k modem. I was running MSIE 4 and wanted to upgrade to 5. It would take hours on my slow internet connection. I then realized that the AOL5 cd that came in the mail a few days earlier had MSIE 5 on it! I poped it in the drive and tried to install ONLY MSIE 5. The biggest mistake of my life. Although it didn't install the AOL lite crap, IE 5 was AOLified. The top of the screen said Microsoft Internet Explorer provided by America Online! The Icon in the corner did not have the familier windows symbol, it had the AOL symbol! I felt like I had commited a sin (and I am fairly sure that God is going to punnish me for that). Then, only weeks later, I got a DSL. My computer still had the AOL text, but I managed to remove the aol symbol in IE. The sad thing is, there is no way to uninstall it! You can uninstall the AOLified 5, and go down to a normal version of 4, but as soon as you reinstall 5 (even from microsoft's website) it defaults to the AOL crap! I need a few days to sit down and seriously search the registry for the AOL crap and try and remove it. I also might try installing IE5.5 Beta.If I find a cure, I'll let you guys know.
CNN reported today that the the new model Ford Taurus is equipped with a mechanical arm and sensor that waits until darkness, then explores your garage, looking for non-Ford vehicles, and if it finds them destroys them with a mechanically launched grenade.
"!!!!" "!!!!" said customers in horror.
"We believe we're doing them a favor," said a spokesperson from Ford. "They might own substandard non-Ford vehicles. By demolishing these junkheaps we're helping them upgrade to a better car."
"Like our new SUV, for example," he continued, whipping out an ad chart, "the most innovative and comfortable road experience yet."
But a spokesperson for consumers said, "!!", making incoherent sounds of frustration before throttling himself with his own necktie.
If this so-called "ordnance marketing" campaign proceeds as planned, Ford may expand it to older-model Fords, its spokesperson says. "Any less would be selling our customers short!"
Once again Slashdot takes an opportunity to bash AOL without getting the whole story. When you install AOL 5.0, it asks if you want to make it the default resource for web,etc. It's not just done without your knowledge. I,for one, am happy to be able to set it up that way. I'm tired of having a seperate copy of Netscape or IE pop up everytime something comes up that uses the default browser instead of using the one I have open. Yes, I use AOL and I like it. Yes, I am a geek. The one doesn't prevent the other, Slashdot editors' opinions notwithstanding.
I really miss the floppys. The cd's make nice coasters, but the floppys were great. At school I'd sit at a couple old macs with a box full of them and format enough disks for a couple classes.
--Have a Johsonville brat.
That's what AOL'ers get. I'm against AOL, and I believe their users get what they deserve.
...and who's idea was it to install NetBEUI by default? And why does s/he still have a job?
You're not considering innocent bystanders. I tried to count the hours that my service techs have spent attempting to restore normal dialup networking to users in the last week. I'm well over 40 man/hours at somewhere like $30 per -- if you add in the users' hours, AOL is costing my company serious money here.
The really big problem is that officer-level execs with laptops containing business critical information are installing AOL at home and then ranting at their IS departments when they can't get dialin access. When a VP of sales is down, you can't say "sorry, we don't support stations with AOL installed." That's how to get fired.
But you can, however, lay the blame at the right feet -- Microsoft's DUN setup is a P.O.S.(TM) hack; they designed it to allow the novice user to set up an internet connection themselves, but there's much arcane crud a user needs to know to set up the Network control panel properly. It's more complicated than the "normal" Windows user can handle.
AOL is just adding a shit addition to the brick shithouse that is Windows networking.
Market cap is the wrong number to look at. Try revenue, which paints a much different story.
Actually, if you read AOL's 10-Q for last September (most recent available), you'll see that they make 3 times as much from subscriptions as they do from ad revenue.
Revenues: (millions) .... $350 ...... $122
Subscription services..... $995
Ads, commerce, etc.
Enterprise solutions
Total.......................... $1467
For details, look at the SEC filing.
That being said, I agree with your conclusion that the high value assigned to AOL is due to its future potential as a marketing medium. But today, it turns a profit by selling access, not ads.
-cwk.
so yea, aol sux, we all know that...but lets be honest here. Compared to microsoft and thier ways of taking over your internet links. AOL's client does not do that. It does a simple procedure of asking you when you first start it if you would like 2 have aol handle all of your internent shortcuts. You dont HAVE to do this. And its as simple as changing the defaults in internet options to change that. CNN is mistaken, and probably does not understand windows, and its ways. Then again, they are not alone.
FINALLY AOL 5.0 for Windows. But when will we see a Linux version of this? I long to see AOL beat the crap out of Linux.
- Steeltoe
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
But now that AOL owns CompuServe's dial-up network, and is merging with Time-Warner, their attitude has changed. After all, by forcing the user to log in via their software, they can force users to view advertising. (They recently informed users that their "marketing preferences" -- which eliminate advertising -- expire after one year, letting the ads through again.) And AOL can also regulate content. If they firewall a site on the Net, users have no recourse.
These developments raise red flags about the proposed merger.
On the local scene, a member of our local community network has at least one family that cnanot log on after installing AOL 5.0. We're getting ready to send an all-points bulletin warning members of the danger. (We once encouraged members to join AOL as well if they wanted AOL's exclusive content; we obviously cannot do that anymore.)
We also need to go and help that family, plus any others who run into problems as a result of AOL 5.0. Can anyone provide a succinct technical explanation of what AOL 5.0 is doing when it installs, so that we can get them back online fast?
--Brett Glass
The proper link is aol-0_5.tgz.
Kenneth
Up at my website in a few minutes (I have to boot to Linux and back to Windows) will be the last released version of a guy named James's code. He hacked the AOL IP tunneling code. I personally have not been able to get it to work, but I bet a bunch of Slashdotters with AOL as their only "ISP" could :-). It doesn't have any of the AOL front-end interface things, but the guy also hacked the AOL mail protocol, and there are a bunch of AIM clients for all sorts of OSes (I like gAIM, check Freshmeat for it).
A possible use of this code, besides AOL access under Linux, is a port to Windows as a networking driver. On my local AOL number, you dial it from a terminal and login as "aol", so you should be able to interface this with Windows Dial-Up Networking (username aol, password whatever). You'd again only get IP tunneling.
The reason I am posting it myself and not linking to his site is because, last I checked, his site is down. I hope I am not violating any licenses by redistributing this.
If you figure this out or have a better link, tell us.
Kenneth
I think my favorite quote is "AOL can reduce a perfectly good computer system to a paperweight," it seems the PM's at AOL are making decisions like a bunch of arrogant 13 year olds. Not only are they NIH (Not Invented Here), but there also KOI (kill other inventions).. ok I made that last one up.. but it makes sense.
I mean why don't they stop fucking around and just make their own proprietary hardware and OS? They obviously want to at this point. Then they could keep Microsoft's dirty hands off their 20 million (or whatever) IM subscribers, keep their beloved customers from installing anything but AOL. It's pretty obvious from this act that that's what they really want.
-Jon
this is my sig.
Why isn't Microsoft in an uproar about this? This could cripple their MSN service plus hurt them even worse by tying them to AOL. If anything Microsoft should include a patch before Win2k goes out that actually keeps AOL software from being able to do this. Normally I don't support the empire, but they would be in the right by doing this because they would be protecting people's rights as well as protecting their business interests. This would be a first for them, and maybe they would like the taste of being on the right side. Just my $.02
I am not certain that this is not a good idea. A huge percentage of the population *wants* to stare at the shadows on the wall, secure in their "knowledge" that what they see is..er..real. Let the be safe and pablum fed...as long as those who have crawled from the cave are not forced back in.
Having said that, I'd like to stress that the most important part of the alagory is that we, as those who have crawled beyond the mouth of the cave, need to return and attempt to help those still bound...rather than simply mock them. Granted, some will never want to leave, never want to forfeit the security of the cave and the shadows. Just remember that some simply bought into the hype and don't know any better...and need to be shown that just because it came pre-installed on their new it is not the only option.
Ver 5 is simply a further "refinement" of the walls . Get used to it...it appears Earthlink is also heading to the pervasive with their 5.0. Just reach out to those you know who still believe the shadows are real and try to guide them. I have personally helped at least 20 people in the last 10 months or so evolve beyond aol.
Education is better than apoplexy.
rootrot
While holding a monopoly is not illegal, using that monopoly advantage to discourage (to put it euphemistically) competition through unfair business practice is.
(Insert ObMSvsDOJref here)
To prove AOL guilty of that, you would have to be able to prove that the behavior encountered after installing their upgrade was coded with the intent of making it difficult to impossible to engage in trade with an AOL competitor (like switching ISPs).
How likely do you think it is that anybody would be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the problems caused by the upgrade were not bugs?
Cue coder-playing-stupid-for-the-media: "Oops! guess we shouldn't have replaced all of those DLLs with ours. That will be fixed in the next release."
So E is relatively prime to (P-1)(Q-1)... Odd, that.
I can't remember who said it, but there is a saying,
"never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence"
I think AOL is going down the MS path, they are so big and feature packed, and such a hold over their market, that they simply CAN'T make good software anymore.
Also, they suffer from the same MS desease of not even considering anyone would use anything else. So they do not take breaking other software into account.
AOL 5.0 does not run on Win NT. It runs only on Win 9x!
I work as an ISP Tech Support 'Specialist' (I like the ring to that :) Anyways, having AOL 'take over' your computer is bad, but it guarentees that the person will get connected. I have customers in rural areas with god awful phone lines get connected to AOL at rates above 40K. Any other ISP they try just won't work. I personally don't want AOL (or any software) taking over my computer, but it does help get people connected. As for AOL and other ISPs coexisting together, it can happen (even 5.0), and without removing the AOL adapter. All you need to do is make sure that there is only one winsock.dll and wsock32.dll (in the windows directory). After that, everything works. Trevor
Not that I would disagree with you regarding AOL chasing eyeballs, but please don't confuse market capitialization ($146Billion) with annual income (much less). If these two were the same, then the big first day pop internet IPO's would be semantically equivalent to a pyramid scheme (they are dangerously close as it is).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I said that AOhell didn't need to sink $ into Time/Warner, they needed to upgrade their R&D. I hate to say it but I said so. I use AOhell 4.0 (I'm 16, don't flame me. If I had the choice, I'd be local so I could use my Linux box) It crashes all the time. Did they go to Bill Gates for their software models, or is it just me? 3.0 was probally one of the more stable versions, even thought on my site I've got AOL version 1.6 for DOS. I'm gonna try to install it on my XT, hope it doesn't screw it up. It'll be cool to have it on there though. Roboto's page Note:cannot be viewed in IE. This will re-direct you to another page. Applet courtesy MSBC. It's in the downloads section, if anyone is interested.
Don't call my crazy, that's what they called me back in the home!
win2k keeps a 2nd copy of ALL The dll files under the windows directory somewhere... cant remember exactly where. If you need to hack w2k, change the backup as well, or it will detect your file manipulation. teo.
I don't know of any Netscape engineers who had to work on the AOL Client and stayed there. The only ones I knew about worked on the calendaring/when.com thing, and they found greener pastures fast.
I've had AOL 5.0 installed on my computer since it came out, and I access the internet through cable, and I've had absolutely no problems with my connection or networking. AOL is evil, but it's a necessary one for many of us who need it. I've been a member since 1990, and changing my main e-mail address would create problems.
-Henri
OTOH, the hole problem can be easily "patched" with a piece of scotch tape. Personally, I'm building a mobile which I plan to hang in front of a window to reflect the rays of the sun.
Welcome to the year 2050! I get up in the morning to put on my bathrobe and take a shower in AOL Shower 4.5 and then enjoy a nice breakfast of "Captain AOL Crunch" and watch some TV. I get direct AOL Cable and can watch any network, except the ones that AOL doesn't own (yet). I get in my AOL Car 8.0. (I got the new version of my car just the other day!)Where do I work? At AOL of course, where else would I work? That's where everyone works, even the children in third word countries make data disks for AOL. On the way to work I pass Blockbuster AOL Video and DominosAOL and AOLKroger and..................... This story is a bit exaggerated but I think that AOL is the new evil in the world, Microsoft may be under the spotlight and may well be broken up, but looks like AOL is eager to take the reins as the dominate evil force in the computer world. Who knows, next thing we know we'll have "AOL Windows 2001"
I haven't read the article, but so far it doesn't sound like they've really changed their product. My only experince with aol was working in a computer lab at school. Whenever someone tried to install any aol product (usually instant messenger) it would crash the machine and we'd have to image blast the drive.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Is this a big surprise?
/. ?
I installed AOL years ago, and it screwed my machine then....5.0 just means 5x as screwed.
Why is there even discussion of AOL on
"I think there is a world market for, maybe, five computers." __ IBM Chairman, 1943 __
I have AOL 5.0 with a LAN and Modem attached to my PC and dial out to multipul LANS. AOL does no so such thing.
It's was bad enough dealing with Microsoft's screwups -- now we have a new set of clowns joining the act.
When you are dancing with wolves, never limp
As a small ISP, I've been playing with this one quite a bit. What you need to do here is delete the AOL DialUp Adapter from Control Panel->Network. And with everything windows, reboot. Also, DO NOT ever touch the AOL software again. If there's a shortcut on the desktop, delete it. AOL will recreate the AOL Adaptor if you start it up again.
In reading the article, it seems as if there's little difference between this and what Internet Explorer and Netscape Communicator do upon installation. Perhaps there's more to it, or perhaps there's an M$ plant for the story, but really... just click no. :)
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
I have had AOL5.0 working for 3 months on a Win98 boxen with no problem. During that period I have also used Windows DUN, a VPN client, and now DSL with no problems. Of course, it took me a few minutes digging to figure out how to keep AOL from leaping to my rescue whenever I connected to the net in other ways. For those of you in need who have IE 5.01, select Internet Options from the Tools menu, once there navigate to the connection tab, if AOL is your default dial up, be sure to unclick "Alway's dial my default connection" That cleared up several problems for me. Of course I am very careful about what I install on this machine, which seems to make a huge difference. That's what allowed me to have uptimes over a month on a laptop running Win95. Does anyone know if AOL will run inside of VMWare on Linux?
I link a bunch of them together, and wear them on my head...it keeps the voices out.
what does this mean? it means that if you use aol as your internet connection (and god alone knows why anyone would), you're s.o.l. it won't connect to the net -- you have to go outside aol for that.
which raises the question: WHY would you have aol???
if you don't like the system, change it.
Seriously, that's a good idea. I used to do pottery, and cds would make good drying bats. They can also be cut down to the profile you need, smoothed, and then used as throwing ribs. I did miniature wargaming for a while, and the best use I found for AOL cds were as bases for terrain. The don't warp like cardboard, or even masonite. So, how 'bout an arts and crafts section on Slashdot? "Okay, here's how you use a dead motherboard in a flower arrangement..." :^)
"Always there are two: a master and an apprentice."
I say they deserve it. Maybe AOL 5 will teach them a lesson about proprietary/integrated software.
chris@xanadu:~$ whatis /.
/.: nothing appropriate.
AOL is for those who have no clue about computers, operating systems, Internet, etc. I don't see any reasons why AOL software should not take over their PCs (and their minds as well)
Ohhhh the money I could save if I could only make them writable again...
My other car is a motorcycle!
I smell a conspiracy a-brewin'... btw, frank rizzo is back :-)
A genius writes code an idiot can understand, while an idiot writes code the compiler can't understand.
Can you imagine? I get kind of upset when Linux is becoming a catch phrase...now every AOL newbie and MS Office Certified person will be banging down RedHat's door...OH! The horror!
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
I'm also a tech support agent for an ISP, and this is true, the only fix we've found for it is deleting the AOL adapter, which AOL replaces the next time you start the program. evil.
Everybody denies I am a genius--but nobody ever called me one!
hey...i'd just like to point out to all the people that complain about carma whores and biased moderation that THIS POST was a prime
example of why slashdot still works pretty well as a fair forum, provided the posters make a logical argument and don't just scream and shout.
.02
_________________________________________________
Global Domination(TM), runs in the family when it comes to all big businesses. However, I don't think it is their fault altogether.
There was a time when only people who loved and lived with computers had access to them. Now, every Tom, specially Dick, and Harry has access to one. It has now become a consumeristic item. As long as there are people who think that MS Windoze is the only OS and Web==Internet, the exploiting of human gullibility by unethical corporations that bulldoze all forms of competition will continue.
If you don't understand what we are talking about, you are missing a lot in life. Click here to get a life
The reason that AOL 5.0 didn't work properly on Windows 2000 is because it wasn't designed for Win2K. AOL has always been for the Win9x kernel, and things are handled differently in the NT kernel. I am quite sure that there will be a Win2k compatible version coming down the pipe soon enough.
As far as I can tell, the browser simply sets itself as the default browser, it does not prevent people from using other browsers. Now, this may be monopolizing the computer, but a (windows) program that does this is not news. Netscape and Explorer both give the 'use as default' option, and with similar results. The only reason this made the news is AOL's recent steps to takuing over the world.
With AOL's lightning fast speed, customers will be able to download the new upgrade in just a few short days. If people are too impatient with the DL speed(who isn't content with a dazzling 2 KBPS), they can just wait until they receive about 20 CD's over the course of the next month
"Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit"
A very large company taking control of your desktop and forcing you to use their applications?
And since you get an AOL "100 hours free!" CD with every magazine, software package, and ten with a computer you buy, then isn't that reminiscent of Microsoft's actions?
As far as I'm concerned they're exactly alike. AOL should be taught a lesson.
rm -rf * does not destroy FAT tables, they are correctly updated by the filesystem as each file is removed.
/somewhere/else/win98.zip
The MBR is not touched at all. Neither is the boot block.
tar -xf just re-creates the files and the filesystem (vfat) takes care of updating the FAT tables.
So where is the magic?
You could as well say:
deltree *.*
pkunzip -d
The linux solution is just easier to handle (no interactive input required) and a lot faster, since you always get disk caching, which is usually not activated when booting from a WinDOS floppy.
Netscape, Internet $explorer, and now Aol al ask to become the default during installation. The problem is that Aol seems to be the only one that can't do it without screwing something up. Although, the biggest problem is also AOl's biggest success. Aol is the definitive Internet for Dummies. Its not hat the problem is so bad but that the users are just no competent to fix it. Oh hummmm Maybe Aol just wants to be default so it can make sure you get all your spam mail in a fast and expedient manner.
"I mean, All you can definately say about a fellow who thinks he's a poached egg, is; He's in the minority." James Burke
Because of the bugs in the software, the overwriting and corrupting of system files, and the sudden control it has over internet connections, I feel something should be done:
Call McAfee, call Norton, call all the anti-virus software makers and tell them to add AOL v5.0 as a virus!
Who's with me??!!
They make great field archery targets at 10-15 yards.
-------------------------------------------------
I bent my wookie
test
Looking at it another way, if I chmod -R 777 / and allow users to add and remove arbitrary kernel modules, and some user fux0rs my system, who's fault is that? Simple: it's my fault. Sure, properly behaved users and/or applications wouldn't hose it, but not everything is properly behaved. Some OS designers recognize that, and others don't. And the ones who don't just invite the kind of abuses AOL is perpetrating.
So don't blame AOL. They're just taking advantage of others' mistakes (both the OS designers' mistakes, and the users' mistakes for refusing to accept the reality - that the world is full of apps that can and will do Bad Things). So AOL is a trojan. Big deal. It's not the first trojan, and it won't be the last.
Is AOL evil? Probably. But the people who use it, and who use operating systems without access control, get exactly what they deserve.
-- TM, wondering why people care about this nonsense when they don't even use it
I got my comp with AOL 4.0 installed, I removed it from my computer after checking to see if PPP worked with my isp (mindspring). After removing it, ppp failed to work and the man at the clone store I had baught the computer from had to put in a new modem to get ppp to work again. When I ran the AOL uninstall program, it decided to remove all of the modem drivers and winsocks drivers as well. Kind of silly, but what do you expect out of America Offline?
-[ World domination - rains.net ]-
coaster
frizbee
cutting tool
Sabotage your friends
Be a CD Hurling Ninja Like Jet Lee
alt.sex.fetish.aol
Kill MSN execs by CD stabbing thru the heart as they sleep in their coffin during the day
windchimes
These and other helpful household hints comming to you from O'Reilly books and Martha Stewart, in "AOL 5.0 for better housekeeping."
-[ World domination - rains.net ]-
Microsoft's problem has always been lack of discipline - their software is the worst offender in the overwriting system files on install category. That's why they didn't do the right thing - it would have involved admitting that they had routinely broken security and stability out of sheer laziness.
If this isn't enough incentive for the FTC to block any merger of AOL with a media outlet, I don't know what is.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Damm them for going to CDs. I NEED MORE FLOPPYS AOL!!
Linux is only free if your time has no value. Windows is only free if you threaten to use Linux.
Well, I just got this nice pretty box from AOL today. I instructed by wife to place it in the approriate file(round that is...)
Yet I wonder if AOL is going to wind up with a class-action lawsuit for sending a deadly computer virus in the US mail. I mean - explain the difference between this and a mail-based virus? They both wreck your machine!
Have you compiled your kernel today??
You think BO2K is bad???
:)
Well now we've got the ULTIMATE trojan, AOL version 5.0. Not only does it completely dominate your box, but it has a chirpy voice that says "You've got mail!" Where's that feature in BO2K?
It slices! It dices! It does all kinds of things that you didn't ask it to do that we know are for your own good!
AOL 5.0: Ph33r it.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Why would you want a coaster with a hole in it?
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
> Also most home machines comes with win9x preinstalled and no install cd - win9x dies and you cant reinstall it.
Then the OEM is committing a violation of Microsoft's license agreement. The CD should come with it, or they are probably pirating that CD.
Anyway, name one established brand that ships their computers without the CD. Not Jeb's Corner Whitebox Shop, a national brand. Just one.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
From the article:
These include deleting and reinstalling software, and sometimes tinkering with arcane technical settings.
I thought only those Unix clones had arcane technical stuff. Are you saying that Windows can be difficult to understand?
(not a troll but a lame attempt at sarcasm)
ZOMG I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW ABOUT YOUR FEELINGS ON MACINTOSH VERSUS WINDOWS, VI VERSUS EMACS, AND HOW YOU'RE NOT A DORK
> AOL is telling people what it is going to do -- it's going to be the main internet connection.
There is a difference between being the "main" connection and the "only" connection.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
send flames > /dev/null
Only 'flamers' flame!
Y'know, I think we're all missing a big opportunity here. Just as the Christian Fundamentalists saw the "impending Y2K disaster" as a possible chance to minister to those who could be converted by adversity, we should see the AOL problem as a chance to convert people to better means of Internet access--free means of Internet access.
Here's a list page that keeps track of all free ISPs for all operating systems.
Worldspy's system requires no ad-banner viewing (though why they want you to download nine megabytes of Javastuff to use it is a bit beyond my comprehension).
Pro-USA offers free ISP service into perpetuity (or at least for as long as the service lasts) for a $30 total setup fee plus filling out one marketing survey per month. This service is simply the same sort of basic PPP that any ISP provides--so Linux is perfectly acceptible.
Of course, I expect that the reason many of these people continue to use AOL even with the rapid growth of local and free ISPs is the extra "value-added" services AOL provides...forums and specialized content and such. In which case many of the people will be unreachable.
But anyone who connects to AOL simply due to a promise of free hours should be told that there are unlimited free hours out there for the taking. Not to let them know is unconscionable.
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
....what wonderful innovations AOL will bring to us as a result of their purchase of Time Warner...
maybe forced video rentals of the crappiest Warner movies ever made?
----
Celebrate the finer things in life
Not to be incredibly off=topic, but couldn't AOL manage to cripple Microsoft to a point, if they offered an "AOL computer". Load it up with a AOL-bastardized version of Linux (or some other open source OS, to cut down on time making it) and make it an OS for newbies. AOL everywhere, and they can connect it through TW's Roadrunner.
Thoughts?
Moderate this up, people!!! This is the funniest reply to one of my comments EVER!!!!! ROTFL!!!!
Thanks for making my day more fun, Mr. Coward!
To the editors: your English is as bad as your Perl. Please go back to grade school.
My girlfriend has AOL 5.0 on her computer and has no problems connecting to any ISP (NetZero, dialup to her school, etc).
AOL is telling people what it is going to do -- it's going to be the main internet connection. If they don't like it, say no! If people are too stupid for this, what are they complaining about?
______________________________________
um, sigs should be heard and not seen?
rooooar
It seems that we're nearly living in a new Dark Age. There are hordes of the uneducate who see the miracles of technology dangled before their eyes: daily transubstantiations, revelations and manifestations. These things all obviously happen, yet there is no understanding of how, so belief is compelled and rationality suppressed. So quiet possibly the journalist is happy with just lumping the problem of the moment into the category of "AOL caused" without trying to elucidate how or why - unlike your attempt to speculate on the causes.
Apart from a few very old philips PC's, you can't kill a PC from software. So I assume you're talking bollocks, right?
Most computers without win CD come with an easy restore cd, so most often that'll work. But if it doesn't, find another PC of the same type, and copy the disc. Or get a vendor boot disk. The PC isn't broken in any way.
Finally, a counterexample to that old saw.
Or maybe it's just another example of that saying about evil turning on itself.
One evil "upgrade" thwarts another.
This is also the main cause of "OS Rot", where over time as the user works on the machine, it slows down, and gets more and more unstable. As they are installing things, different versions of important things creep in, and before you know it, stuff wont work right anymore. Deleteing or (ha ha ) uninstalling the program usually doesnt fix the problem, as the uninstal routine won't nuke the new stuff and bring back the old stuff.
If you are a masochist, you can go plumbing in the depths of the system, checking files for date and size against the stuff in the cabs on the CD... but then office might not work. Often, installing office is like installing a Windows 9x service pack. Trying to figure out the correct versions becomes harder depending on how much stuff you have installed on the box.
Back in the day, when I was on the phone (convulsion) we often saw HUGE problems when people installed AOL. AOL had this nasty habit of trying to install it's own libraries for running the modem, and in many cases, replace the TC/IP stack with one that was an order of magnitude smaller than the one windows had. It would take a fiel that was roughly (running from fuzzy buffers here) 700 odd KB and replace it with one that was 40-60! No doubt designed just to run AOL, nothing else, thank you very much Steve Case. This was back in the AOL 2/3 days, but I can't imagine things have gotten any better.
If you are running a windows system, and you havent partioned the OS to the C drive and everything you use and want to keep intact to other places (and with tweakUI, you can do this easily..) then you deserve the endless ordeal of installing all your software again, and restoring data backups.
Anyway, Nuking the OS and starting over is usually the easyist way to fix problems caused by bad installs...
What's funny is that they waited so long to tell anyone about it - this story's been out for AGES - since October, in fact. It was also on MSNBC (which has a content-sharing agreement with BugNet) back then.
Hmmm...
http://www.bugnet.com/alerts/buga lert_102099.html
Coming soon - pyrogyra
I don't begrudge the 20 million subscribers that they have, and, so what if it takes over all the Internet functions of your WinXX computer?
/. geeks. Why do we need to get up in arms about it? Most of us run Alternative OS's anyway ...
... IF that person actually complained to AOL, if not, then, what have they got to respond to?
If you fail to read the installation instructions and warnings of *any* software you put on your Personal Computer, then, you will suffer consequences.
Certainly this will give AOL some bad publicity, but as has been said in the article, AOL isn't getting many formal complaints.
This isn't the "kiss of death" for AOL - they are a pretty popular ISP, and their "easy-to-use" software is targetted at the general public, not us
On another note, the laptop being hosed by AOL software is certainly a horror story, and if AOL Software was responsible, they should at least make an attempt to apologise
... maybe we can have special tags ? hehe.
.my 2p
America Online, with 20 million subscribers, said complaints about interference by its latest software are overblown and the result of customers not understanding that if they click yes during installation to allow AOL to become their default Internet browser, AOL largely takes over all the online functions on the computer.
This is AOL, right? The service for people who aren't supposed to know anything about computers and therefore can't be trusted to make the correct decision during installations, right? Way to go shoot your money cow, AOL.
"If a member picks yes, we make their lives simple," said Jeff Kimball, AOL's executive director for its client software.
Simple, eh? Well, that is the future of corporatism where everything is merged into one entity, and all you have to do is pay homage to the master and his one true way. Marge Peircy's He, She, and It comes readily to mind.
I am surprised that CNN is reporting about this, with the merger with AOL and all, but I guess they were really strapping for some news since the y2k riots never materialized and they started running reruns.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The Ultimate AOL Disk use page. 100 and one fun things to do with your AOL 3.5" disks. And while we're laughing at AOL, read a "journal" of an AOL newbie : )
Does this mean I don't have to share my cable modem with my mom anymore? Or will that "bring your own access feature" still work?
Kind of like the idea of not having to share my bandwidth.....
Nuintari
--Nuintari
slashdot : where an opinion can be wrong.
I find it incredable and hilareous that the woman mentioned in the article (the one who's laptop crashed and who got screwed on the $145 "fix") actually WENT BACK to a previous version of AOL!?! Instead of turning right around and signing up with a local ISP _that day_ she went back for more!?
To me, this is the pinical of every stereotype thrown at AOL users. To be shot in the foot and to go back for more is mind-boggling.
Yes, the article mentions she is currently "shopping" for an ISP, but come on to even think about going back after that incident is lunacy.
In Soviet Russia...michael would be rotting in Siberia!
other uses for AOL CDs:-
-coffee saucer so you don't stain your desk with your morning cup o joe.
-donut holder...mmmmm donuts
-area 51 prototype toy for all the cheap bastards at Xmas and birthdays
-stack em. They make a great booster chair for your cat
-Wall coverings. Goodness knows that I get enough of them in the mail that I could have some really cool CD wallpaper (label in of course). Imagine that with a disco ball in the middle of the room. Neato.
Im sure there are more, but Im to tired to think of them now.
-------------------------------------------
Please give your mod points to others, Im at the cap. They will appreciate it more
Did he say he wanted it to work properly? No, he said he thought it would be fun to see what happened. Just like you don't put a CD in the microwave unless you're hoping to see sparks.
--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Pottery.
Seriously. My mom is using them for her pottery. See, you put the piece onto the CD, and then when you want to move it, you have a platter! Very useful indeed, since it means you don't have to let the piece dry (somewhat) on the wheel or attempt not to deform it moving it. There are commercial things that do the same, but they cost money; AOL CDs, on the other hand, do not.
---
END OF LINE
I ran into this early on at work. I thought it was just a goofy install and I didn't think any more about it. I discvoered that the AOL Dial-Up Adapter is what messes it up. And if you remove it from the Network control panel, AOL puts it right back in when you run the program. Here's all you have to do: Go into the SYSTEM control panel, open the Device Manager, choose properties for the AOL Dial-Up Adapter and click "Disable in this hardware profile". AOL can't figure that one out. Then you can have people dial into your LAN.
Some people take their .sig way too seriously
I just saw that CNN is running this story on their Airport News channel and Headline News channel as well. The story on there is much the same as the article. It seems to be getting allot of play by CNN, not just a page on the web.
They do note AOL's recent deal with Time Warner and that CNN's parent company is Time Warner.
I wonder what Martha Stewart does with hers?
Coasters would be entirely too obvious. I'm sure she has some much more inventive use for them.
And a note to every online service sending me CDs: I have an ISP and a Linux box. If your software doesn't run on Linux or *BSD, thanks for the coaster.
The net will not be what we demand, but what we make it. Build it well.
I work at an ISP as a netadmin/tech support. The tech room gets calls _every day_ from people that want to get AOL off of their machine. I know we all have heard the story before, and I'm not the first to say something, but I just hope someone at AOL reads this thread. Why make it so difficult?
It doesn't help AOL one bit to make their software hard to remove. Their tech support won't even help you do it, they give you the usual Microsoft run around stating that its easy to use and they can help you get it working. When the customer comes to us to help them, he gets angry. I know most of us using *nix don't have this problem, but DUN on a windows machine is a really big hassle to reinstall. These problems just make for an angry AOL customer, who is now awake to what kind of a company AOL is. The customer then tells their friends about how bad AOL is. Bad word of mouth is can destroy good PR, even if you do own Time Warner.
The worst part is that done correctly, AOL can be a decent service for a lot of people. My brother is a geek who runs linux, but he loves Mac's, always has. He uses AOL and has so for a long time because there is this awesome mud there. I tell him there are better mud's out there, ones you don't have to pay for, and he's tried them, but he just likes this one. And I can understand that, its his preference, but even he hates the run around he gets with his connection and if he could find a game that is as entertaining to him elsewhere, he would take it up in a second.
My prediction is that AOL's burning of their own customers will be their downfall, not crap technology or terrible business ideas. For a service that touts its ease-of-use, to make so many people so angry is going to have serious repurcussions (sp?). Look at how Microsoft is today, sure they might still have the market share, but people are seriously looking into alternatives because they are tired of the problems. Everyone gets what they deserve, it just usually takes a while.
Dave
I wanted to rant harder, but its been a very long day, and I think we all have read this before, but its my tuppence.
--------
WWGD? (What Would Goku Do?)
Apps can no longer overwrite System dlls. Well, they CAN, but win2k instantly restores them. I'm sorry, app makers may bitch, but this is the way it SHOULD be. Besides, they can run any version of DLL's that they want in the new Win2k "side by side" mode from their own directory. This is why Win2k improves' stability. For the skinny on dll hell and Win2k's attempts to fix it and how it's going more and more to *nix style static libraries read this article on the MSDN site.
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
Having personally seen a couple of destructive installations of AOL 5.0, I can assure you that the problems it can cause are not obvious.
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
When did AOL release an NT client for it's software? They don't have one available on their page. Are you sure you have that right?
When I'm singing a ballad and a pair of underwear lands on my head, I hate that. It really kills the mood.
-Tom Jones
Then, after putting out a marginal product, a company gets rewarded by its customers. They are eager to buy the next release, in order to get bug fixes and design fixes, the latter otherwise known as `new features'. They are eager to buy the company's books in order to learn how to use the obfuscated product. And they are eager to sign up for the company's support, consulting, and training services necessary to keep it running. With these benefits, a software company has little incentive to put in the (tremendous) effort to reorganize itself so that the above default result doesn't happen.
Someday, software customers, like those of other industries, may wise up and simply stop buying shoddy software. Perhaps in a few decades.
Ok, this might be a troll...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
But I admit it, I have an AOL account. Why? Well about 70% of the time I am here at school (Harvard) where we have the fat pipe bandwidth kicking it live. And the rest of the time I am either on the road for business or at home in New York. At home, I have BellAtlantic DSL. But for a period of about 2 months this service was going down every other day (until I finally got through to somebody who could fix it).
What's the point? Well, when I'm on the road for business or at home and the DSL goes down, I need something that will work, let me use an SSH/telnet client and check stuff on the web. Nothing fancy. AOL does this. Since my VAIO notebook runs Windows, AOL is fine for on-the-road usage, and it has all the access numbers there.
Is AOL a good general usage ISP? No, definitely not. My Linux boxen would all be stranded if that's all I had. I don't even really consider AOL to be an ISP per se. But AOL has been a shitpot more reliable than other dialup services for me, and they make taking my notebook on the road ridiculously easy.
Now flame away. :)
Two quotes are pertinent to AOLs latest action. They point out that flat rate pricing "...creates an incentive for the ISP to passively or actively degrade service quality, since per subscriber usage and cost decrease with worse quality but revenue remains the same." A little later, they state,
Hmmm.
(Note: for the purposes of this comment, AOL is considered an ISP, although the authors do mention that "...AOL's Internet service provision is now handled by UUNet, so AOL may properly be said not to be an ISP any more.")
I've upgraded to AOL 5.0 and I'd noticed that it ASKED me to confirm associating certain things such as http:// ftp:// mailto: etc .. urls ... It does NOT force these things upon one. One has the option to choose if one would like AOL to be default EVERYTHING or default onething or more ...
For the longest time, I've wondered where national news services get there anecdotal reports from. Case in point:
They call up their friends, and they ask their friends to ask their friends till they find someone with the story to support the article they want to write. It's called truth in reporting.
Most likely this is a separate bug due to an incompatibility in AOL's custom TCP/IP stack
....
but still tries to lump it in within an article about AOL taking over the Internet services of the entire computer
Isn't AOL's installation of a custom TCP/IP stack part and parcel of the process of taking over the Internet services of the computer?
I remember reading this in on December 29th in the online issue of the Washington Post . It kind off pissed me off because I had to reinstall Windows on a friend's machine several times because I advised her to upgrade from AOL 3.0 to AOL 5.0, and for some strange reason it corrupted the msmouse.vxd file each time we tried to install it. We had to reinstall Windows and each app one by one before we discovered that AOL 5.0 was the problem.
;
Ironically I discovered the Washington post story that evening while browsing the web. I'm amazed it's taken this long to get posted on Slashdot. Here's the header for the Washington Post story, can't provide a link because it's been archived.
AOL 5.0 UNPLUGS OTHER INTERNET PROVIDERS
Article 27 of 510 found
ARIANA EUNJUNG CHA WASHINGTON POST STAFF WRITER
Friday, December 24, 1999
Page E01
Section: Fast Forward
Word Count: 936
Iris Rache, a 68-year-old real estate agent from the District, may describe herself as a technology neophyte, but until last month she had few problems juggling her three online services--America Online for personal e-mail, RCN Corp.'s Erols as a backup and a residential-property database service for work. But then she upgraded her AOL software to the new 5.0 version.
Until recently I worked at a smallish Australian ISP, with baout 8000 users. Our plan at the time was for 120 hours per month, then we started charging extra. Every now and again, someone would be tempted by the free 100 hours with those horrbile green cd's that they get in the mail.
When they did this, the "AOL dial up adapter" would destory the standard windows dial up adapter, thus disabling the normal connections.
I started tech support at the start of 1999, and we had a steady stream of ex-AOL people, and people who were tempted by free hours, and all of them needed to reinstall their DUN (dial up networking) components.
This leads me to beleive that AOL is evil, and has been using this same tactic for at least a year now.
Teo de Hesselle, teo@student.UDE.au
Given the recent article regarding the new proposals which would in effect make shrinkwrap licenses binding, what would the effect of that be on the market?
Basically, I'd assume that AOL, Microsoft, Bubba Joe Dean Productions (an upstart from the bayou, of course), and anyone else could basically build payloads into their programs. (In a hypothetical case that would obviously be unfortunate) you could be running Windows and, say, BJD Productions' Mudbug Bucket Simulation, and all of the sudden, a window pops up advertising MS Mudbugs, at which point your program crashes and a few important DLLs are corrupted.
Now, since you agreed to a license that says MS isn't liable, you have a problem. Not only that, but every time you try to reload Bubba's sim, it ejects the CD. Of course, that's just because of the new virus-scanning software that installed itself last time you were online (paid for by MS). MS's response is to get the update to Bubba Joe Dean Productions' Mudbug Bucket Simulation (which BJD ends up charging for since it takes so much effort to keep updating it every time MS updates their "warware").
I guess what I'm saying is that we really need to (... must... say... sentence...) help the AOLers out here. We (the people who can see the future possibilities) need to hold the torch to AOL now, while this behavior isn't commonplace (outside MS and others, who are already on the firing line). And we must defeat any legislation that would take away our ability to fiscally hurt companies who financially hurt their customers (MS and AOL have a conscience that only a politician can see).
Help the unenlightened and they will find out and eventually learn to use the source.
It's pretty bad that you just can't tell anymore whether this is a result of incompetence or a deliberate move to monopolize the computer. After a great deal of thought, I can only come to the conclusion that it's just incompetence.
After all, AOL is a flat rate service now. They get their monthly fee whether the user logs on or not, so they have little incentive to prevent anyone from logging on to other providers. You could even claim that they should encourage users to spend as much time as possible using alternate providers, because that way they won't be tying up AOL's phone lines.
Still, the conspiracy theory folks are going to have a field day.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
Normally I just sit and read posts, but I really gotta get this one off my chest. The new AOL upgrade is such a piece of junk. You have no idea of how many people have installed that little gem on their system. I work as a tech support agent, providing technical assistance for my company website. The other day I had a customer call in who could not access our website because it was giving him "the page cannot be displayed" error. He said he would access our site alot, but he first started noticing a lot of problems after AOL did it's auto-update when he closed it down. I asked if he was getting any error messages besides that, and he said, "yeah, I get one that says not enough memory to load registry or the registry is corrupted". Then I asked "are you sure you're getting that off our website?", and he said, "No I get that when I try to boot into Widnows, it's the first thing that comes up." At this point I refered him to AOL, and informed him that the registry was a very important key to having a functional computer, and they would need to account for what their upgrade did to his system. At this point he tells me, "Yeah, I already called AOL, and they refered me to you, and said it was a communication problem with their server and yours." I can understand that mabye sometimes people make mistakes, or misjudge a situation, but come on', I swear they must have a bunch of Monkey's chained to keyboards working for them. With that said...
A little bit of clarification here:
:-)
AOL has *always* taken over your IP configuration whenever you connect, or at least it has since AOL 3.0. I figured this out a few years ago, when I realized that this one girl I was troubleshooting(heh) over ICQ had somehow managed to appear on an IP address far, far outside our dorm network.
AOL doesn't trust *anyone's* code--they put a custom VPN style interface into every windows machine they're shoved into. (This is that "AOL Adapter" thing.)
Incidentally, AOL makes for quite an excellent covert channel--high bandwidth expectation, protocol unhandled by most sniffers(as far as I know), and a Linux client. Never, ever allow AOL access out of your corporate firewalls
This latest behavior *does* seem rather insane. They're basically uninstalling the software of other companies--that's far and away beyond the expectations of the user doing the installation! That exceeds the implied contract, and has all *sorts* of problems with sheer fraud--what if AT&T phone service automagically prevented Sprint from calling you with a lower rate? What if NBC sent hidden signals to your television station removing CBS and ABC from your channel listings? (Yes, I'm noticing the irony with the recent CBS brouhaha.) Hell, what if putting in a demo for Quake 3, Unreal Tournament was wiped from your hard drive?
Lets expand on that: There'd be a significant amount of anger if Id Software sold a "competitive upgrade" for Unreal Tournament at a reduced cost that left UT unplayable, but even that would pale to the rage if the user wasn't warned prior to purchase or even installation that installing one game would remove its competitor.
In the name of simplicity, that's what AOL is pulling.
And what about the privacy implications? After all, half of privacy is the ability to sequester oneself in a private domain. (All "explicit privation" methods fall in this category, from locking one's door to calling someone on a pay phone.) AOL's behavior intentionally removes the options of accessing a private domain, requiring intentional and difficult re-enabling of those alternate ISPs.
Not good. Not good at all.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
which will tell you that you need to set
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon\SFCDisable
to 1 or 2 to disable the file protection.
what fun!
--------------------
this space left intentionally blank
--------------------
this space left intentionally blank
No, they got it wrong. Again. The correct, time-honored solution would be:
$ chown root.root /dosc/windows/* /dosc/windows/*
$ chmod a-w
"Those who do not understand UNIX are condemned to reinvent it -- badly."
-- Henry Spencer
Schwab
Editor, A1-AAA AmeriCaptions
That's what AOL'ers get. I'm against AOL, and I believe their users get what they deserve.
I'm not tyring to sound supiror or anything, but why didn't these people do research before they signed up to AOL? If they would have, they would have read survey after survey about how AOL is rated dead last in about every customer satisfaction survey. They would have read about the horrors of 5.0 before they installed it. Not to mention they are drasticly overpaying for service. $21.95? Most of the local ISPs around here are $14.95 or under, and offer everything AOL has.
I mean, people research what cel phone company they use. They research what long distance phone company they use. But they just see a corny commerical on TV about people that "have a special kinship because they have AOL" and sign up, install buggy software, and alot of the time screw their Windows/MacOS install.
So I say good for them. They should have known what they were getting into before they handed over their $21.95 a month. Just like people that don't read long distance agreements when they sign up because if they sign up they get $25. And then realize that they pay 30 cents a minute. If someone can't do a little bit of research before they make a decision like finding a ISP, or a long distance company, and they get get screwed because they didn't, they got what they deserve.
Maybe next time, they will read a couple articles and ask a couple friends before making a decision. That is, unstead of falling for a comercial with some idiot pre-teen going "I've got mail, yipee horay!"
Last year, AOL decided to crash into the Brazilian ISP market, with a bang. They were aiming to get at 20-30% of the market by now.
Current situation: not even a full 5%. Market penetration: almost zero. Of course, there was a lot of hype about AOL, but there are already a few very well-established and powerful ISPs around here who were able to set up a defensive strategy. The day after AOL officially announced its Brazilian entry, I received a free Internet CD-ROM from ZAZ, the second largest Brazilian ISP. (I didn't install any of those, mind you. I like my neighbourhood ISP just fine, thank you very much.)
My point is, some people did install AOL's free Internet CD. The result was pretty much as described in the main article. No warning, of course, was included in the CD-ROM cover. But Brazil being Brazil, some of these people decided to avenge their lost setups. They sued AOL. Big time. They made a lot of noise about it. They got it on the cover of just about every major newspaper around here. They successfully managed to spread this meme to the near-entirety of the Brazilian Internet-using public. The end result: AOL is going nowhere here.
Let us celebrate.
(Here's a more-or-less related article; it's in Portuguese, you might want to use your favourite translation program.)
To the editors: your English is as bad as your Perl. Please go back to grade school.
I installed AOL 5.0 on my home machine after I set up my regular ISP account. There were no troubles when I used my existing AOL account. It just asks if it can become the default browser and email application, just like every other browser or email app.
The only difference between AOL 4.0 and AOL 5.0 is that 5.0 adds a dial-up networking connection. However, did doesn't overwrite anything.
In fact I had less troubles with AOL 5.0 than 4.0. Sure AOL has terrible connection speeds, bad traffic, stupid users, but then give credit where credit is due. If a user is so dumb that they don't read a message on their screen, then they deserve what they get. AOL targets the lowest common denominator, and they get a huge outcry about their software. I imagine these are the same people whose interactions with tech support are posted on every computer humor site. Imagine what would happen if these people were forced to install Linux... It wouldn't be pretty.
My company does support for a number of medium-sized organizations, and I've seen a couple instances of this sort of thing. While most of the sites we support have high-speed internet access through my company's network, a number of users have AOL software installed for one reason or another. Don't ask me why, I can't get a straight answer either.
Just today I had to reinstall one WinNT workstation in order to get it working properly again. Various actions on the system would reliably BSOD the machine. None of this started on this particular machine before the user installed AOL 5.0, and other than that the machine was configured just like the hundreds of others in the same organization that are chugging along just fine. Absolutely ridiculous. You think with the kind of resources they have they could put out something that works properly...but then again, look at most Microsoft products.
"That's Tron. He fights for the Users."
Ummm.. that's what an operating system SHOULD do. An app should not be able to overwrite the OS. WIn2k has FINALLY gotten it right. If AOL follows the new procedure, they can run their .dlls in "side by side" mode so they can run any version they want, from their own directory and not unduly screw up everything in the OS as they have been doing for years..
DO NOT DISTURB THE SE
The reason she had to reinstall windows is because for some strange reason (at least on the machine i tried to install AOL 5.0 on for a friend) AOL 5.0 corrupts the msmouse.vxd file. You can test this easily by trying to install AOL 5.0 on a Windows machine and after it crashes have the machine boot at prompt you before performing each task on bootup.
After this occured the machine would always freeze upon booting unless booted in safe mode. Since I had no idea how to edit the msmouse.vxd file or even how to tell what was wrong (plus my friend was getting hysterical) I reinstalled Windows.
Also if you read the December 23rd online issue of the Washington Post where this story first broke you'll notice that the article qoutes several ISP's help desks as being swamped by calls from people who tried to install AOL 5.0. it would be a simple matter for the AP writer to call an ISP and get a story from them. On the other hand journalists famous for creating imaginary victims to humanize a story.
PS: It seems shitty code is contagious (Netscape 4.7...)
Microwave 'em for three seconds, label side up with the lights off. Enjoy the light show, but don't cook them any longer that that, or they get leathery. :^)
(CNN is owned by Time Warner, in case ya didn't know)
Maybe CNN doesn't want to be acquired...
______________________________________
um, sigs should be heard and not seen?
rooooar
Or something like that....
.dll's , and Windows 2000 is notorious for reverting those same system dll's upon attempt to replace them.
What I mean, really, is that AOL 5.0 seems to shamelessly install rogue system
For my own amusement, I tried this experiment on a test machine on my network. Sure enough, AOL misbehaved, and within seconds of completing the install, Windows started telling me it was reverting files. Amusing, actually.
I'm actively working on figuring out exactly how W2K does that - file police. I'll let y'all know if I find some way to defeat it.
"We see this advancement in AOL's networks as a breakthrough..." said Case in a press announcement earlier today. "This is exactly the kind of upgrade our customers expect from AOL, and I won't disappoint them." Later, Case was quoted as saying "With just this modem added to our networks, we're capable of handling approximately 500 more users. They'll get to share this modem, as well as the 4 others we have here at AOL's network center."
When asked what prompted this hardware upgrade, Case stated that the release of AOL 5.0 was "pivotal" in the decision. "People expect us to keep pace with the changes in technology. The new AOL 5.0 software does that, while making our customers' lives easier." We gave the experts in our test labs a copy, and had them run a test of AOL 5.0. When the software was installed, Microsoft Windows took on a different appearence. The Windows logo on the Start Button was replaced with the AOL logo, and only 2 options were available on the menu: 1) Connect to AOL and 2) Crash System. Both menu options had the same effect, and a connection to AOL was never established.
With the recent AOL+Time Warner merger, predictions are abound with AOL's next upgrade, but nothing is cerain. Eyeing the future, Case closed his announcement. "We're looking to the next phase in AOL's development. Our new strategy: "AOL Anytime, Anywhere" is going to be hugely successful. With the addition of our next modem, scheduled for 3rd Quarter 2002, we hope to be the Internet provider for today as well as tomorrow."
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Here's the article at WindowsMagazine that CNN was reporting on:
Fred Langra's column AOL 5.0: The Upgrade of Death?
AOL is not an internet service provider, any more than MSN or Compuserve simply provide. These are really interfaces that allow users to access a number of community-based features, including a sort of debased web and NNTP experience.
I spent Christmas with some AOL users and they were asking me questions like "how do I delete that word I just typed?" These are people who not only lack the expertise but also the volition to turn to any, purer ISP.
Since AOL sells themselves as an intermediary, they reasonably plan their software around the notion that no one will attempt direct transactions with the net. If they tried to produce software that gave full functionality to advanced users *and* coddled beginners, they probably would end up with a confusing and inconsistent UI story. It's the dumb-down equivalent of "make the common case fast".
Moral of the story: if you want to run two or three ISP's on your machine, don't install what is essentially a wrapper to protect you from the complexity of the internet!
And, just to be even-handed: AOL SUX!!!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
NOTE: For options 1 and 2: Both of these options require a kernel debugger to be hooked up for those options to become useable. If a kernel debugger is not hooked up, Windows File Protection is not disabled.
I presume you know how to hook up a KD?
For the longest time, I've wondered where national news services get there anecdotal reports from. Case in point:
Peg Graham of New York installed AOL's latest software on her laptop weeks after its initial release in October with disastrous results: Her computer crashed. In vain, her laptop manufacturer urged her to reinstall her entire Windows operating system -- she did three times -- before she finally paid a local repair shop $145 to fix it.
Afterward, she returned to an earlier version of AOL's software she considers less risky. She suspects the new program suffered conflicts with the laptop's network hardware she used to connect at her university.
How does the author of this AP news story find out about Peg Graham? Also, her problem is entirely unrelated to the issues of AOL taking over the Internet duties for the entire computer. Most likely this is a separate bug due to an incompatibility in AOL's custom TCP/IP stack, or it could be a problem with Windows. Obviously, if she reinstalled the operating system three times, and was still unable to fix the problem, there was something else going on. The point is, the author of the article does not know what caused her $145 worth of damage nor whether her story is unique case, but still tries to lump it in within an article about AOL taking over the Internet services of the entire computer. The author does this to make the story seem bigger and more urgent.
Sig goes here