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?

Comments

Re:Doesn't this make sense?

[Vigilante Moderator]

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"

Why they're doing this...

[GeorgeH]

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.
--

Sure do!

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

"Debian and Linux, two great pieces of software that go great together?"

I know *I* never use Debian without using Linux.
--

Re:"Not much of an alliance" isn't the half of it.

[arivanov]

I think I'm going to curl up with some milk and cookies. And an IPV6 book. The only thing preventing IpV6 from wide acceptance is the lack of support at the desktop.

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...

I wonder...

[IGnatius T Foobar]

Hmm. I wonder ... if you install AOL for Linux, does it 'accidentally' un-configure your eth0 and ppp0 interfaces, leaving only 'aol0' active?
--

Doesn't this make sense?

[TheLocustNMI]

If AOL is to ever make a net-appliance, what do you think they would have it run? They don't really hold that much of an alliance to Microsoft. So, i think the obvious choice for an OS in a net-appliance would be Linux.

So, no, i don't think this is aimed at you or me, but perhaps the iOpener crowd.

Can you say sealed AOL appliance?

[Hairy_Potter]

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.

"Not much of an alliance" isn't the half of it.

[sammy baby]

They don't really hold that much of an alliance to Microsoft.

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.

Hooray!

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

There is AOL for Linux! There is AOL for Linux! There is... ummm... AOL... for... ummmm... there's..... ummm... oh crap.

Don't wet yourself over this

[Raunchola]

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.

--