Slashdot Mirror
AOL/Microsoft Talks Break Down
andres32a writes: "AOL-Time Warner and Microsoft talks over including AOL in the upcoming Windows XP have broke down. Get the scoop here." There's also a similar BBC article - this is a follow-up to this previous slashdot story, which reported that AOL and Microsoft had reached a deal. My guess: they're still going to reach a deal. AOL has too much to lose if their software isn't pre-installed, it was their key to success in the first place. And Microsoft has too much to lose if AOL moves over to a Netscape-based client.
AOL didn't buy Netscape for the browser. They bought netscape for the Netscape.com portal and its users. AOL doesn't care about technology (as is immediately evident from their service) - all they care about is the number of users they have, and the number of those users that they can charge a monthly fee. Whether or not their stuff runs on Microsoft software, or Netscape sosftware or on Mrs. Jone's apple tarts, they don'e care...
I'd be willing to bet that AOL has been busy porting the entire AOL client software package to something based on XUL and Gecko. I had heard a rumor that this was happening, and that because of the "chinese finger trap" contract with Microsoft, that the one they had in the test lab actually used Mozilla for everything except web browsing -- how ironic! If negotiations have broken down, then they'll be able to go with an all-Mozilla solution. Look at the benefits:
- The popular AOL client software is now free of all that legacy crap they've been working with for the last decade -- it's now very dynamic and extensible.
- It's now portable. America Online users will now have the same online experience, whether they're on a Winbox, a Mac, a set-top box, a kiosk, or a portable tablet type of thing. And the work required to make it run on generic Linux machines is so trivial, that they just might say "what the hell" and release one.
- Let's not forget that you don't have to go through Microsoft anymore to get on the Windows desktop. AOL can make preload deals with the major manufacturers of home computers and get that icon on the desktop anyway.
I think that AOL is better off without Microsoft. And the computer using population is certainly better off with some real competition on the Internet.--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
I'm not so sure that AOL really needs MS to preinstall AOL in XP. AOL has, what, 30 million subscribers, by now?
I think that the market for "newbie Internet surfer" is at, or near, the saturation point anyway, so I don't think it's that important for AOL to be preloaded on XP, any more.
Also, take into account slowing PC sales; the expected lackluster uptake of XP; constant rumors of AOL coming out with a standalone AOL network appliance, and suddenly the Win desktop doesn't look as important to AOL as it once did before.
I think MS is being stupid for haggling over the Media Player issue. Suddenly having 30 million desktops running Mozilla doesn't really do much good for the "embrace and extend" project...
---
Because it's more strategic to them to attempt to subvert the web to IE standards (under the agreement AOL would use IE vs their own Netscape), than to try to make a few bucks off MSN which isn't very popular anyway.
Given that it's Time Warner-AOL who have stopped the talks, not Microsoft, it seems apparent that everyone knows who has the upper hand. Time Warner is obviously a formidable competitor even for Microsoft, and with ICQ/AIM they already own instant messaging and have a HUGE base of AOL users whose switch from IE to Netscape would be a major defeat for Microsoft who are continuing to struggle to have any kind of success in the internet arena other than IE's popularity.
I'm guessing Microsoft are going to back down.
Microsoft would never stoop so low as to hurt the technological medium with underhanded tactics.
Why just look how netscape...
Hrm...
What about their excellent mail client that is virtually bu...
Hrm....
Still we see an excellent server platform that will bring the internet to much broader horiz...
Well, shit, there goes the planet.
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
Whether it is execute as well is simply a different question, but it certainly is an IE5 level product - i.e. they're the same generation.
It's a little rich to argue that Netscape abandoned the users that they had built up by practically inventing the popular, easy browser. It's a lot easier for someone to jump on the bandwagon than to invent a whole new paradigm.
How is Mozilla more of a technical accomplishment? It'll have full standards support, it is cross-platform and very portable, and this is down to the fact that it is an entire platform (like it or loathe it), rather than just a browser, it is very modular, e.g. the rendering engine can be embedded into tiny devices, showing things just as on any other, and I personally think it's very intelligently designed, from the ground up. Regardless of whether you like it or not, most criticism is that Mozilla isn't just doing what IE does, but doing a great deal more - and I'm not convinced you can deny that this ambitious foray won't produce somehting more technically accomplished than IE...
I for one hope that they don't come to an agreement. That way we'll see Mozilla on a lot of desktops. Even if they were to include an crappy release like Netscape 6, they're AOL users, they wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Right?
Seriously though, it would be nice to see Mozilla get some marketspace this way and it is getting good enough (especially speed-wise on Windows, Linux needs tuning) that most people would be happy with it. XP is not going to be running on your P166, so the requirements are going to be fine and I doubt most AOL users upgrade all that often. From what I've heard from some Mozilla developers, the AOL folks hate Microsoft with passion, so don't be suprised if they stick with their horse rather than ally with the evil empire.
It just seems a damn shame to me that the success of products is not determined by their quality but instead by bundling deals such as this. If Mozilla/Real is better suited for AOL's needs and it's customers, why should they have to deal with this kind of strong-arming? A real world example of why monopolies are bad for everyone (except the monopoly).
A damn shame, really... I guess that's how the whole world works though, not just this industry.
---
python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
Yeah, right. If they wanted to use Netscape, wouldn't they just go out and buy Netscape, then promise to continue development even though they're reaching exclusive deals with MS?
- --
Oh, yeah.... Tried that once. heh.
-----------------------------------------------
I read the first line of this story and thought: This reminds me exactly of the sort of news you'd see on CNN, describing peace efforts between two conflicting nations. Does that frighten the shit out of anyone else?
.
Jake
Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
Here's what to me seems damn obvious. Contrary opinions are welcome;
AOL is simply the latest in a long line of victims both from before and after Lotus. Sometime between XP's release and the next major revision of Windows, MS will...
The only reason they aren't doing this now is that they had/have contracts, and the DOJ case hasn't completely gone away -- though I expect that the good people at Microsoft are betting on it.
Does anyone honestly think it would be any different?
^ - There were different competitive word processors in 123's hayday. 123 dominated spreadsheets. True that Lotus didn't help itself, and had a poor transition to GUI versions of 123, and the failed attempt at getting people excited about Improv (a great program btw).
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
AOL was succesful long before it was pre-installed on any OS, and MSN was pre-installed on an OS before AOL, yet it doesn't have 25 million subscribers... I'm not saying preloading hasn't helped them, but to give it all the credit for their success is going too far. No, for that we have to give credit to the limitless stupidity of the public at large...
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?
AOL has too much to lose if their software isn't pre-installed, it was their key to success in the first place.
Huh? Michael, AOL's success owes nothing to being pre-installed on Windows. Or didn't you receive one of the endless AOL floppies/CD-ROMs?
In fact, Slashdot's mocking of AOL to the contrary, AOL is the perfect example of a company that can be successful despite Microsoft. Say what you will about AOL, but the secret to their success was the fact that any idiot could plop a floppy into the drive and it "just worked". In fact, for a long time it was totally self contained -- it found the modem and used it's own communication software. No Internet setup, no TCP/IP setting, no nothing. Boom! You're connected.
In fact, this should be a lesson to the Linux-on-the-desktop crowd about how to beat Microsoft. Make it simple enough, and the world will beat a path to your door. The other example is Apple, whose simplicity has kept them alive despite high prices, incredible arrogance, crapping on their developers, decade-behind-the-times software (up until recently), poor selection, on and on. The only thing they had going was simplicity, and it has kept them alive this long.
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
"AOL has too much to lose if their software isn't pre-installed, it was their key to success in the first place. And Microsoft has too much to lose if AOL moves over to a Netscape-based client. "
But those who want to see an open-standards-based, platform-independent Internet have much to gain if this deal permanently falls through. If AOL starts using Mozilla as its browser, that instantly creates a large user base for a non-Microsoft browser, reversing the strong trend towards Microsoft hegemony in that area. Meanwhile, if Microsoft stops bundling AOL in its operating system, fewer of the newbies will automatically sign up with them and fail to ever discover that AOL != The Internet. So AOL's and Microsoft's losses are gains for fans of a non-proprietary Internet.
--Dan
--Dan
Web Tips
Ah, here we cut to the chase, MS didn't abandon its users for 3 years, that is the difference.
And they didn't try to create a IE5 level product (which Mozilla isn't, btw) from scratch.
They had a good product in hand in IE4 days. And they kept making it better.
Netscape, OTOH, scrapped their old code base and *didn't do anything significant* for 3 whole years.
How is Mozilla more of a techincal accoplishment than IE6, btw?
--
Two witches watched two watches.
Which witch watched which watch?
Parish & Co. would tell you that AOL and MS won't work together because they are mortal enemies, since MS is killing AOL.
He may be viciously biased, but I like this guy. There's a refreshing purity to his sincere hatred. He's not promoting anything, just attacking MS, and he comes up with some good ammunition.
--
Hmm... AOL loses, Microsoft loses... why, that's good news for everyone! =^)
--
--
Mmm... delicious white marbles...