Slashdot Mirror
AOL For Linux Leaks Out
Thomas Charron writes: " CNet reports that http://www.techpages.com/ has leaked a *gasp* Linux AOL client. More info can be found here: http://new s.cnet.com/news/0-1005-200-2520423.html. Note, this isn't the AIM messenger, but the whole hog of the AOL access software.." See our last story. Debian and AOL, two great pieces of software that go great together?
I can just see it now...
Steve Case: "We would prefer if you would call it AOL/Linux instead of just Linux because without AOL you really wouldn't have anything there at all.. just the kernel. Don't get me wrong, I respect that Linus Torvalds guy and all, but we feel that AOL should be part of the name to give credit where credit is due"
I showed this to a couple of Cow Orkers and they did understand why this is such a huge deal. Most of the opinions I heard were basicly "Why would someone smart enough to use Linux use AOL?" Let me break it down:
AOL is competing with Microsoft. Microsoft is yet again pushing MSN, which means that the two are in direct competition. One thing you don't want to do in business is give money to your competitors. AOL recognizes that Linux is a viable option, and are building a strategy around this.
AOL is also working on a set top box (with Gateway IIRC). The TiVo proved that Linux works on the TV, and AOL can't wait to get to the people too dumb to click Start. Remember, newbies are AOL's bread and butter. If AOL can break into the WebTV market, they're going to soar.
Now obviously they aren't going to set the user in front of a Login: prompt and expect the user to log in, type startx, and figure out how to start AOL and run pppd with a chatscript. They'll be using the Linux kernel, without most of the GNU tools that Linux users are used to. One of the things I could see them doing is distribute the AOL client with their own AOL distribution of Linux on those coasters^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H CDs that they give out to everyone in the US. Then you just boot from the CD-ROM and voila! Instant AOL.
I'm just glad that a big company finally "gets it" about what you can do with a stable, open source operating system.
--
Why can't I moderate something "Wrong" or at least "Grossly Misinformed"?
This is for the embedded/appliance market. It is unlikely that AOL cares much for the relatively small number of Linux desktop users (compared to their 50 million Win/Mac users or whatever they have). This not only gives MS a preview, but the Netpliance et al guys a look at what their biggest competition is going to be in a short time. If those guys can adjust quickly enough, they might be able to grab some of AOL's big slice of the pie.
What I am wondering is whether we will see anyone try to do with full client software what MS and others tried to do with AOL IM - make a client that can connect to AOL's networks. That would be a big step forward in getting people to switch from AOL to something else.
-------------
The truth is out th- oh, wait, here it is...
"Debian and Linux, two great pieces of software that go great together?"
I know *I* never use Debian without using Linux.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
Wouldn't that be:
(Sappy AOL Guy Voice)"You've Got Root"
Throwing in a few million of lusers with ipv6 stack changes the balance drastically. And AOL will have much less problem with MS calling for a standard.Standards, sure, here is a standard, but it operates via IPV6. Oh you do not support it. Sorry, you lost...
Just random thoughts, but that is what I would have done with this boxes...
Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
http://www.sigsegv.cx/
*disclaimer* I cannot stand AOL client, it is a disgusting mess. Furthermore, I really do not care for AOL in general, and I would even feel sorry for my worst enemy if I discovered that person used AOL. So there.
Now, with that out of the way, I would like to express that this might be what we are looking for. Kinda. You see, many of us want Linux to become a nice mainstream desktop OS for the average user. Many average users use AOL. Now this might work well to bring the average users to Linux.
Ok, not that the average users are starting to use Linux, they realize how nice it is to not crash all the time. As time goes on, they progress to better users of Linux and realise that they do not need AOL anymore. Thay blow the client away and start using regular PPP connections and there ya have it, the desktop userbase that Linux needs so desperately.
What we (the developers etc out there) need to be aware of is that people like a pretty GUI, ease of use, intuitive controls, and NO TECHNICAL JARGON! If Linux distros can evolve to include even MORE internet tools that have an emphasis on ease of use while still containing the flexibility that a power user can use (some are getting there already!) then I really see Linux becoming a great desktop OS in the next year or two. Like I said before, the AOL thingie might be a blessing in disguise because it will look familiar. The scared average end-user will like this familiarity and be that much more comfortable with this OS.
Note: this may just be for net-appliances, and if so, you may throw everything that I just said out the window...
Why the hell does linux NEED commercial acceptance?
F /...
Why has practically ever new linux/bsd user in the past two years decided their favourite flavour of unix clone HAS to dethrone microsoft?
I for one don't give a rats ass about Microsoft. I have to use them at work, but you know what its not so bad to use windoze to fill out expense reports or look at badly formatted documents. I'm directly responsible for about 60 servers running mostly equal parts solaris and linux (with some osf and freebsd thorwn in for good measure). They *ALL* have their place.
You people really need to stop looking for some new war to fight everyday... if you got that much energy to spare why not waste it on something that matters almost as much but is more fun, sports teams. Or better yet it spend it on a PERSON you care about.
hope this helps,
---
Solaris/FreeBSD/Openstep/NeXTSTEP/Linux/ultrix/OS
--- I do not moderate.
I definitely agree. My family is semi-computer literate, and my younger brother has expressed an interest in learning Linux (cool!). My family uses AOL exclusively for connectivity (parents are dumb) and they couldn't care less which OS the use, so long as AOL works. AOL for Linux would allow me to give them a much more stable machine, and let my brother screw around with Linux as well.
We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked.
The distant rumbling sound you hear is simply the average IQ of the Linux user base dropping to half its former value. There is no cause for alarm.
Hmm. I wonder ... if you install AOL for Linux, does it 'accidentally' un-configure your eth0 and ppp0 interfaces, leaving only 'aol0' active?
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
So, no, i don't think this is aimed at you or me, but perhaps the iOpener crowd.
thelocust[dot]org
wrighty.
Just port AOL to Linux, put it into a sealed network appliance with a few neat user apps like greeting card printing and a few games, and voila!
Microsoft has lost a significant portion of their audience.
AOL is planning to control the internet in the next 10 years.
Wow does this mean that I will be getting AOL skeet shooting fodder (CDs) in the next Linux mags that I get? I will have to say that excluding stand alone AOL boxes this is probably not a good move on AOL's part. What user that uses Linux on a normal basis would pay for AOL's service?
Ohh well at least it is a token gesture from the worlds largest ISP.
Telcos have alot of dark fibre in the States. Most people assume that's optical fibre...but it's actually moral fibre.
I'll go one better here. AOL disklikes Microsoft in a pretty big way, and the feeling is mutual. First, they co-existed in a sort of uneasy way. Then, Microsoft rolled out MSN, which competes directly with AOL. Then, AOL bought Netscape, even though they were ostensibly pushing MSIE, a move which couldn't have given the Redmond crew many warm fuzzies. Next, we had the Instant Messenger Wars, which enabled us to witness the bizarre spectacle of Microsoft calling for standards.
What chafes AOL so badly is that no matter what they've done , they've been stuck with Microsoft, because the vast majority of their clients use MS operating systems. For the first time, it looks like they may have the opportunity to change that.
If I were Steve Case, I'd be thinking very hard about funding Linux development in a highly public way, or making an alliance with some OEM which sells Linux systems. That would pave the way for OEM boxes running Linux, preconfigured to use AOL.
In fact, now that I think about it, I'm starting to scare myself. Little Linux boxen, stripped of their "nonessential" functionality, all set to connect the average joe into a world of happy AOL-Time Warner content. I think I'm going to curl up with some milk and cookies.
Is this right?
Surely the majority of people who are likely to take up Linux are the same ones that seem to abhore AOL (as suggested from the content of 90% of the posting here)
I don't think Joe public really sees the need to switch to Linux because the relative merits would be lost on him. M$ (for all its many faults) runs his apps and he gets loads of support by way of the huge user base.
So AOL is on Linux - its also on M$ so why change?
Flame in indignant fury if you want but it won't change the fact the most PC/net users are NOT techies.
I realize there are a lot of people on /. who won't be able to see through their "l33tness" to realize how this will benefit everyone, but this is exactly the kind of thing that Linux needs to begin to have commercial acceptance.
I want to use linux. I want to be able to buy games on linux in a store (not choose from 6 3 year old ports I have to mail order) and other software.
To get all of this to happen, Linux needs a larger user base. The number of AOL users is huge. I know several, and almost all of them use AOL because it is the only affordable choice in their area.
The worlds largest ISP (isn't it?) is going to begin to support Linux. Other companies will see this, and have no choice but follow. You'll soon see PC makers just starting to realize they can actually make money selling linux machines to the masses, not just servers.
This is a major victory for linux, and anyone who is intelligent enough to quit the "redhat sucks, aol sucks, newbies aren't worth pissing on" bullshit attitude which is so prevalent here, and in the Linux community, (and has done more to hurt Linux than anything else ever could) Should be really exciting at how big this step is, and how broad the benefits will eventually be.
I'm no AOL fan, and certainly the first few versions of this will be buggy and broken, but in the perspective of things which can happen to benefit linux in the long run, this is well up on the list. Put away the elitist geek comments, and look at the big picture here.
________
There is AOL for Linux! There is AOL for Linux! There is... ummm... AOL... for... ummmm... there's..... ummm... oh crap.
Ceci n'est pas une sig.
*sigh*, too bad you're so simple minded you can't say anything good about this matter. You're giving the typical knee-jerk reaction I'm confident many posters will give, and it's sad, it really is.
Don't you see, a huge provider with millions of customers is now supporting Linux. Love or hate AOL, it's things like this that are helping to bring Linux into the mainstream.
Now you can go over to mom's house, granny's house, even your niece and nephew's house, install Linux, Star Office and AOL and they have the same functionality as Windows!
Don't knock AOL because it's for "dummies" or anything like that, look on the bright side. This has the potential to bring millions of users over to Linux.
Why would any selfrespecting linux user put AOL anything on his box?
It's not necessarily for linux addicts, but if granny talks to her family via AOL, and you want to setup a system for granny to use that she will be familiar with and you do not have to worry about paying an extra Franklin+ for an OS.
Anything that takes Linux a little closer to mainstream, anything that makes one more person standup and say "now linux has everything I use, I think I will try it," anything from a major internet company that makes people take notice of Linux is a good thing for the Linux community.
Who knows, this may attract the next Linus who currently is 8 years old using AOL to check email to let Daddy show them Linux and open their mind.
I really doubt I'm going to run out and sign up for AOL just because they have a linux product - but I will have a little more respect for them and I will definately consider them the lesser of two evils (in comparison to MSN).
Wheeeee
Time to play the devil's advocate here...
To all of those who say, "AOL on Linux will help us destroy the evil Microsoft that we must all help to destroy," don't get too excited yet.
Let's face it, MSN really was never a viable competitor to AOL. MSN started out rather quickly, hoping to capitalize on all of the new Windows 95 users (remember the MSN icon on the desktop?). But they ended up getting hit by all of the problems you'd associate AOL with: busy signals, poor service, etc. MSN has finally gotten their shit together and made themselves into a decent service, but they will never be on the level that AOL is. They came into the arena when AOL was ten years ahead of them, and they're still paying for it.
And BFD if we get AOL on Linux, that's NOT going to bring more newbies over to Linux's side to warrant a dent in Microsoft's revenue. Do you want to dent their revenue? Rather than drooling over having some 15-year-old lamers using Linux because it can run AOL, focus your attention on the office suites out there. StarOffice anyone? While it's true that a lot of people use AOL, a lot more use Microsoft Office. And while Johnny Q. Newbie can check his AOL mail on Linux, he can't open, and work with, his Word documents or Excel spreadsheets on Linux either.
Let's not forget getting support for all of Johnny Q. Newbie's peripherals either. Sound card doesn't work? Video card doesn't work? Digital camera doesn't work? Scanner doesn't work? Printer doesn't work? Then what's the point of jumping to Linux if your major components don't work?
Now, I expect that people will tell me, "But Linux is OPEN SOURCE, so people will flock to it!" Folks, if people wanted to use Linux because it was open source, they'd be using it by now. Pardon me if I sound inflammatory, but a lot of people out there couldn't give a shit if the OS they were using was open source (or free as in speech, depending on what distro you use). They want to be able to get their work done, to be able to do the same things they could do on Windows.
I'm sorry to bust your bubbles, but while AOL on Linux is certainly a good step, you've got a long way to go before Linux can become comparable to Windows in the home user market.
Think about it.
--
--
The real Raunchola isn't cool enough to have any imposters
I can see it now - OpenBSD the last bastion of defence against the (other) evil empire!