Slashdot Mirror
AOL Releases Client for Mac OS X with Gecko Browser
DietFluffy writes "America Online released an update to their Mac OS X client. The built-in browser is powered by Gecko! However, America Online plans to stick with Internet Explorer for their Windows client.
Will this make web designers think twice about tailoring their web pages to
Internet Explorer? Or will they ignore this, given that the Windows client will
still have Internet Explorer as the default browser?" And if this goes well, will the Windows version eventually use a Gecko-based browser, too?
Considering that Apple market share is fairly small and then add in those using AOL on it it's even smaller this won't make much of an impact. Most sites already work completely in Mozilla, the only ones being the ones who don't care about working on every browser, and never have.
I can't remember - Is AOL the evil corporate empire today or are they the champions fighting against M$? Let me check my calendar..
Will it be faster than Mozilla?
But it's about protecting your userbase. No point in alienating your users too soon. It'll come but not in a rush.
DWR is Ajax for Java
The Win32 / 8.0 version of the AOL client does use Gecko as the rendering engine.
I wonder if they will disable 'disable popups'.
___ I don't respond to Anonymous Cowards, and I Never Mod them UP.
Trying something new for a niche platform
makes sense when looking at the market.
AOL does not need browser wars...
but it needs to regain control of its user base.
If AOL is smart it will test the waters
before jumping in.
Consider Gecko on Mac to be a prototype for
a new AOL version for Windows.
Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
Dunno if that will happen... Didn't you read the amended EULA for Windows? Any browsers that aren't IE, are expressly outlawed, and you won't get any Service Packs if you install them... :)
?
Now that linux is becoming mainstream, it wouldn't suprise me one bit if they are in the process of making an AOL OS.
HEAD MY WARNING! =)
(im serious)
Been aol free for 3 years, and I'd never go back
Fault loves the past, worry loves the future, but content enjoys the present.
...Web Standards Project link.
I'm very glad to see this kind of progress actually taking place. Since I started not worrying about NS4 support (that is, giving NS4 dumbed-down or no styling at all), IE/win has become my arch-nemesis of web design. The broken box model alone is enough to keep a man (or woman) up nights.
I hope the introduction of AOL gecko clients, especially for windows, will put a damper on the attitude of many web authors that "IE is all that matters," and "mozilla sucks because it doesn't support industry standards."
Karma: T-rexcellent.
It's good to see AOL use something other than IE. I think they are doing this for one main reason... Beta Test! It would be good to see AOL switch to Gecko on the Windows platform for no other reason than to give Microsoft what they deserve most... Competition.
-------
Bite Me Fanboy!!
AOL is still scared to death of Gates and will not try to piss him off by taking IE out of AOL. At least I don't think so.
If your worth your weight as a Web Designer, you designs should work with all the latest browsers on all platforms and at least be viewable on older browsers. (with the exception of Netscape 4x, which we all know sucks so badly it should be relegated to the 'worst software ever released/do not support this crap' category)
Oh yeah - all web designs should also work with Lynx, because we really love those geeky people who feel the need to surf in text and cry foul whenever they see something approaching a decent graphical interface...
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Have you noticde that MS sites display correctly in Mozilla..I can even get winodws udpates..
Its a consipracy to support Mozilla!
Oh no! Mozilla is coming after AOL next!
Don't Tread on OpenSource
And if this goes well, will the Windows version eventually use a Gecko-based browser, too?
I almost said "No, not unless it's 100% compatible with sites that want to see IE"
But then I thought about how screwy the AOL browsers have been in the past.
I'd just fire up AOL and run IE, but 99% of AOL users don't know you can do that. The only twisted view of the world wide web they have is from inside of the AOL Browser.
Remember all the porn sites that used to say, "AOL-friendly?"
Selecting Gecko for MacOSX is just a good market trick. It's market share is minimal, and I have understood the users (exactly one that I know) of MacOSX are already used to not being able to view everything similarly as the majority. Therefore, no-one looses, and AOL gets credit.
And then most web developers would be out of a job, since AOL users account for a large portion of online sales.
Gecko or IE, it doesn't matter since any AOL users can still use whatever darn browser they please.
InKonu
A lot of sites actually do ban AOL users, since the integrated browser, despite being somewhat built upon IE is very inaccurate. It uses weird compression methods and has problems displaying graphics.
This is why you frequently see sites that say "AOL users... If you have problems displaying these graphics, click this link instead".
As long as _I_ don't have to support their user base, what's so bad about AOLOS?
Why fight M$ when you can let AOL fight M$?
I suspect that a lot of the supporters of Linux started out like I did by being disillusioned by the alternatives. Now, more than ever, with the positive press for Linux out there, the more people see that there ARE alternatives to M$, the better for all of us.
Right?
___ I don't respond to Anonymous Cowards, and I Never Mod them UP.
>> most web developers would happily ban aol from their sites as most of the users from that particular service dont have a clue.
... web design is like art man, it's gotta flow --that's why we should do the whole thing in flash!"
Yes, but their managers won't let them do it... but "hey, the managers just don't get it
Sure!
:)
;)
How many people out there use their home computers only for web browsing, e-mail and basic text editing? Lots! Of course it may hurt Apple's sales, but it will hurt Microsoft a lot more
Maybe it could be release as an GameCUBE add-on kit, an OSX Kit, so it would fuck with the XBox sales too
Imagine, Linux in the PS2 and OSX in the GameCube!
The DOJ isn't going to do anything to MS, MS will be allowed to continue doing business how they please. Pretty soon, MS is going to start pushing MSN even harder. People will buy their PC and it will come with an MSN subscription and will come preconfigured to connect to the Internet via MSN. It will most likely use completely proprietary windows only connection and communication protocols. All software that people need will come on their PC, and they'll pay per use or rent monthly, and pay via their MSN bill.
Whether that really happens that way or not is yet to be seen, but the danger to AOL from MS/MSN is very obvious, and if AOL wants to stay in business they had better start pushing to bring MS down off it's pedestal.
AOL could start by spending less money giving me coasters, and use standard connection protocols, etc.
Most people who use AOL continue to use AOL because that's what they've been using for a long time... AOL needs to start worrying about it's future.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
Comment removed based on user account deletion
If AOL goes slow, then ppl have a chance to change to MSN. AOL would be better off making a fast cutover.
At the same time, they should find the biggest used sites that are MS and encourage their neutrality. Believe me, a large number of sites will switch to open stanards if they watch their numbers drop.
BTW, it should be easy for AOL to write a quick batch test that can examine all the big web sites. Then send out e-mails to webmaster notifying them that they are losing millions in business.
The reason being that its easy. Most clients of web companies use PCs with the latest version of XP and IE installed - why?
.NET you can actually SMELL the IE bias as soon as you start building a page. This keep development costs down and delivery schedules easy to estimate.
Because its easy. IE has its flaws, but its pretty much universal and good enough. With
By building for IE and offering to 'do a mac version if you get complaints / lose customers' most web houses cover their arse while keeping it simple. And the carrot? 'Its cheap as chips to do in IE, but a bitch to do cross browser - so it'll costs lots more - it'll be cheaper in the long run to do two versions, and you probably wont need the second version anyway!'
IE is here to stay.
Gnutella
WinAmp
IM
Mozilla
http://www.kubuntu.org/
Err... no... I guess I didn't frequent Big Gay Al's Warehouse of Hot Man on Pig action.. but shit, if they're AOL friendly how could a person like yourself not sign up?
On the other hand, MacIE has incomplete support for certificates - try going to a site with a certificate from an unknown (to IE) provider in MacIE and it would not let you in (in version 5.1 and under at least).
Besides, they already have a browser product that uses Gecko - the one used by their subsidiary, Compuserve. It makes sense to migrate AOL on Windows last, since there is no pressing need.
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
VA and IBM are taking different directions. VA, whose roots lie in the open-source world of Linux, is trying to move more toward proprietary software in an effort to boost its revenue. Meanwhile, IBM, which earns considerable revenue from licensing its patents and from selling proprietary software such as DB2 and WebSphere, is embracing open-source projects such as Linux and Apache.
FUCK open source it's a dream world
off of www.cnet.com
Actually I expect to receive by M.Sc in computer science within a year. Believe me: computer science doesn't have a lot to do with the name of a browsing engine. But then again, you wouldn't know anything about that, would you?
IMHO, IE is by far the best browser out there. I'll admit, this may be so because sites taylor to the IE crowd, but I've found for speed, user friendliness, and ease of use, IE takes the cake. I use galeon on my Linux workstations, but I feel its more unstable and less reliable than IE. I know competition is healthy, but when I is the best then they need to come up with something to compete.
People who have witty things here blow.
I don't understand everyone talking about how it will make web designers make their sites compatible for all browsers. I use Mozilla and have never come accross a site that renders with serious errors. Most pages look the same in all browsers.
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-949505.html?tag=fd_t op
VA released the source code underlying the SourceForge site as an open-source project others help improve it or use it on their own for free. But when the tougher economic times struck VA, it decided to sell enhancements that it wouldn't share as part of a product called SourceForge Enterprise Edition.
Such proprietary moves don't always sit well with the community of open-source programmers, which has a philosophical, political, economic and cultural attachment to the collaborative sharing that characterizes open-source programming. Indeed, the Free Software Foundation--whose work starting in the 1980s led to the open-source movement--has begun its own version of the SourceForge site called Savannah.
If AOL makes an operating system (which I doubt they will) it will probably just be a Linux distribution with that stupid gold triangle stamped on everything...
Welcome! -- You've got hosed!
or would that be a good thing?
What, you have trouble understanding the difference between Gecko, a rendering engine, and Mozilla, a browser built around that rendering engine, and you're trying to tell me you'll be getting an M.Sc in a year? Holy shit, what do they teach you these days?
You're right though, I wouldn't know anything about that. I'm quite happy to have been working and earning decent money for the past 5 years.
Micro$oft stopped distributing AOL with windows a long time ago. AOL has nothing to loose by replacing IE.
recompile.org
IMO, Mozilla blows away IE 5 on the Mac (as opposed to being about even with IE5/6 on the PC). It's faster and neither are preloaded. Very smart move.
So close and yet so far from the world's perfect ID number
Actually, no. But then, I don't give my patronage to that kind of sleaze...you know, the kind of sleaze who have anything to do with AOL?
MacOSX has like 9% total marketshare, so even if two thirds of those people used AOL thats only 6%. The shrewd web designer will just continue testing on netscape 4 and assume that Gecko will do better.
I mean at the end of the day, we're still talking about AOL.
There are 01 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary, and me.
Does it really matter who you 'target' for anymore? Gecko and IE seem to render almost everything identically these days.
... and all I wanted for xmas was a magic 8 ball, but i got this lousy
Will this make web designers think twice about tailoring their web pages to Internet Explorer? Or will they ignore this, given that the Windows client will still have Internet Explorer as the default browser?
;)
I run a good-sized website in my spare time, and I do my best to account for all browser types and such - at least within reason. Some moron complaining about some browser I've never heard of on his Commodore 64 not working well doesn't affect me much...
Anyway, what percentage of users are using AOL on Mac OS X? I would wager it's a rather insignificant percentage compared to all the AOL users on Windows. This will have no impact on designers who prefer to go IE-only on their sites.
This is just one more AOL groupthink idiocy from the same people who bought NS because it was not IE. Now this "We're better than good, wer're different !!!"
C'mon - the company is in deep shit financially and however they can provide a C+ average function for free is what they will do. This has nothing to do with you.
Unforunatley for us guys in the UK, there is still no OSX AOL client.
l
AOL UK keep on saying that they have no plans, but will monitor the US and other markets. The link to the story is http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/39/22952.htm
Just to be the devils advocate, I have been reading up on lots of browser stuff for the redesign of my site and from what I have learnt it appears that Internet Explorer is better on the Mac than it is on the PC. This is mainly because IE on the Mac is far more standards compliant with better CSS2 support and full support for PNG transparency.
As far as IE on the PC goes version 6 aint so bad because it is step closer to better CSS2 support, though it is still a far cry from Mozilla's CSS and PNG support.
aus.music.scrapbook
We develop for whatever the two main browsers are at the time and attempt to 'gracefully degrade' content for older browsers.
At present, rendering must be accurate for ie4+ and netscape6+ (mozilla) - earlier browsers, so long as they more or less work - tough - we don't have the time or money to make um look pretty.
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Thanks for proving my point. And have fun flipping burgers for the rest of your pityful life..
Oh, and there's an IE skin for Mozilla, which along with custom splash screens and icon sets, allows you to ease your co-workers into Mozilla.
CowboyNeal for president!
"Hit any user to continue."
As far as I recall, web designers/builders/maintainers/whatevers have traditionally ignored AOL, passing them off as irrelevant (for a variety of reasons from the custom browser they used to use, to the fact that AOL users are stupid by stereotype). To answer the question posted in the story, yes, I think the trends towards developing for Internet Explorer will (sadly) continue, for two reasons. First, the irrelevance AOL is considered to embody (read up), and second, because web design doesn't pay what it used to. As a result, those who want web sites built want them built as quickly as possible. Making cross-platform web sites is more expensive than IE-only.
It's still good to see yet another large company "support" open source software... Even if they do nothing other than lend credibility to a particular project.
Why bother.
Yes, Burger King noew have computers set up by the fryers so that us employees can surf Slashdot as we work.
Jeez, do you not even need common sense these days, or are you getting your M.Sc from one of those spams?
Anyway, you had a point of some kind?
the target market of AOL is people who care deeply what rendering engine their browser use.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yet, there is one very painful area in which free software has not stepped up and provided GNU replacements. This key area is preventing the adoption of free software for the standard desktop, and it must be remedied soon, or all will be lost.
Thus, I propose that the FSF take up the following projects as soon as developers can be found:
Until this hole is plugged in the free software front, we are fighting a losing battle.
Curmudgeon Gamer: Not happy
I really doubt that, have you any statistics that shows that the latest versions of XP and IE are already more popular than older versions?
That means read all the ... links (I just made it up.) Anyway, one of the links posted on the article is this...
There are so many pages out there that have been developed with IE specific features, that making this switch too soon would stop people using the AOL browser all together. If they roll this out slowly, it will give developers time to switch. That's why it's more important than ever to notify sites that do not work well in Mozilla and NS6 so that the developers get the message and get their sites fixed. That being said, if AOL would make a rock solid commitment to moving to gecko, it would really light a fire under the developers and thier bosses to be proactive in finding the problems in their sites. I'm no fan of AOL, but if they can help get standard based web pages more common, then I'm all for them!
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
AOL is the SINGLE most important demographic for anyone in the B2C space. They are followed closely by people that use MSN's search engine. People that use Yahoo's search engine are a distant third.
People that run NS6/Mozilla are meaningless. Google searchers with any browser are kinda worthless.
NS4 users are important, you get people at work at low-tech companies.
I mean, it depends what you are doing. If you are building crazy flash sites with loud annoying noises, ignore AOL. My sites try to make money, like hell I'll ignore the largest contingent of shoppers, just because people think that they are stupid.
I'll take an semi-illiterate user running AOL 5.0 on an 800x600 monitor visiting my site over a "1337 Linux Hacker" running a Mozilla beta shopping me and 12 competitors to save 50 cents...
Alex
Remember all the porn sites that used to say, "AOL-friendly?"
Yes.
Yet another joke that stopped being funny. Yea Yea I know maybe I am old and crumegony, but I remember when slashdot was for discussions, and not rehashing jokes that were not funny nor clever the first time.
I mod down any one who says "I'm sure I will get modded down for this"
Because AOL owns Netscape, it seems like AOL/Time Warner would want to incorporate Netscape/Gecko into its product. Remember that Microsoft crushed Netscape through bundling. It would be a nice irony if AOL could crush Microsoft in the same manner.
However, Apple's market share is small enough that this may simply be an experiment to see if Microsoft responds.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This is such a troll comment. Get real... corporations need to make money. They PAY all of us honest hard-working folk. I don't know why all of you *NIX folks are so anti-MS, so anti-AOL, anti-corp... Without the MSes of the world, where would modern home computing be today? What gives you the right to insist that they ever be restricted from capitalizing in a free market.
Get a clue, go read Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged".
Corps are greedy and out to make money, period. What else should they do? If you want a centralized, free-everything society, ask the folks in Russia how communism worked out for them.
If you like Linux and *BSD like I do, fine, good for you. But why this constant march to kill off corporate software developers? If you actually succeed, you realize a lot more of your collegues will be out of a job and SOL. It's ridiculous, corporations are the heartbeat of any economy... so don't come crying when the feds bust MS down so bad that they fold it up and move abroad and you lose your job. Jerks...
I can't be to descriptive, since I'm kinda breaking my agreement... But I will tell you that AOL is currently testing a AOL Windows client that uses Gecko. However, it is based on the 7.0 client. As for 8.0, it is currently in testing as well, but uses IE as the underlining browser.
Believe me, I wish I could test 8.0 with Gecko, but for the time being, it will be 7 w/Gecko or 8 w/ IE.
Where does it say this? The linked article just says "no major changes", but that could be taken any number of ways, like "no major user-visible changes". I'm guessing he average AOL user won't be able to tell the difference between an IE based AOL and a Gecko one.
I really don't think we'll know which way AOL is going until 8.0 is actually released.
The Free desktop that Just Works
I don't know why you all bash AOL users all the time, I mean after all you all have to be AOL users as well since slashdot is part of AOL. The only way you can get here is by going to AOL KEYWORD slashdot.org.
"The two most abundant elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity." -Harlan Ellison
OS X.2, will include an Apple derived IM client using AOL's network, and now AOL ditches IE on the Mac. Maybe the two are working up some larger plans in order to push on M$. They are already pushing AOL chat on OS X and now they are pushing IE off as well. If the Mac starts to make a resurgence on th e consumer's desktop, maybe this will make a people wake up and realize that there are other things other than M$ out there that deserve their attention.
...it'll probably be in my letterbox any day now!
--- Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit? | Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?
The "browser" within AOL has little visual resemblance to IE, Mozilla, Gecko, Netscape, or whatever. The AOLer sees a window. In that window, a website may or may not open. Nowhere is there an IE or Gecko logo. I'd bet that 90% do not know nor care that the underlying tech is from the evil empire to the west, or from Gecko.
All the AOL user sees is "AOL".
Let's see: there is a respectable university who is going to give me a M.Sc. And there is an "anonymous coward" from Slashdot how thinks that would be incorrect.
:)
Now, who has more credibility? The university, or the anonymous coward? Hard one.. NOT..
The news.com article mentions nothing about AOL using Gecko in its windows client so I don't even know why the submitter references it.....
Also, as an AOL beta tester, I will tell you that there currently is an AOL 7.0 w/ Gecko in testing. The plan is to get Gecko fully compatible w/ AOL, and since in that time they havge started testing of verion 8.0, it will then be moved into 8.0 for the final release, to the public.
Two wrongs don't make a right, three lefts do!
I'm curious to see the interface on OSX - anyone have any screenshots?
Hi, I'm AOL. I'm going to by a company called Netscape, so that I can make money off of the product that company makes. Then, when I distribute my own product, I'm going to distribute my AOL cdroms with Netscape's chief competitor. My goal is to look back and think to myself that I completely wasted my money when I bought Netscape.
AOL should be punished for its sheer stupidity, not to mention all its other offenses.
As a developer, I always strive to make sure my creations are best viewed on the widest range of browsers and operating systems possible. For quite a while now, I have moved to Mozilla for almost all of my web browsing and developing needs. Of course I still need to use IE in order to download Windows updates, but Mozilla is my browser of choice and I make sure that my designs are viewed the same on Mozilla as they are on IE and other browsers. Still, differences in browsers sometimes eliminate certain desirable design features because they do not have a compliment on the other browsers.
JasonBlogs
Ive been doing web dev for nearly 6 years now, and very heavy client side web dev (browser code). The deciding factor in building a web site that conforms to more open standars vs. browser specific rules is usually who is winning the browser war.
Granted, MSIE and MACIE are very different, but the difference between MACIE and MACNS is huge, massive I must say. If the percentages grow higher and higher for NS (I hope they do) then you will see more websites abondoning browser specific code in favor of cross browser code.
Google Zeitgeist
Or you will see more sites implementing CSS the way it was suppose to be used. Just take a look at the newly redesigned Yahoo Mail in IE and then in NS, well done Yahoo. (except what is with this more than often asking me of my pwd lately?)
Simmer down, now... -SNL skit reference, no attempt to simulate the accents used...
Really, though, I thought the comment you are reacting to was an attempt to point out exactly what you are saying. At least that's the way I saw it.
Although there is a thread of bias against large corporations here, I think the real negativity towards AOL tends to be from those who don't like the infusion of the clueless into internet society. It used to be the realm of the geek. Now everyone participates, and the noise to signal ratio has gone way up.
I don't harbor negativity towards AOL for this. Rather, I feel that developers have done their job well when an interface disguises underlying complexities. AOL's interface allows my parents to get online without extensive training
Microsoft, on the other hand, is a different matter for most of us. For me, I dislike Microsoft, not for their monopoly, but for their methods of acheiving it and maintaining it. If you haven't already, read The Halloween Documents. They expose the kind of things that Microsoft does to hurt the Internet, hurt healthy competition and ultimately hurt the consumer.
For me, my enjoyment of Linux has nothing to do with Microsoft. I am a computer hobbyist, and the learning I can to with Linux makes it fun for me. I would have no problem with Microsoft having a monopoly over the commercial market as long as they were doing it ethically. The market should be won by having a better product, not by destroying competition through underhanded and arguably illegal means.
Will this make web designers think twice about tailoring their web pages to Internet Explorer? Or will they ignore this, given that the Windows client will still have Internet Explorer as the default browser?
If the designers aren't already doing something to make sure their sites are at least palatable on browsers other than IE, its unlikely that this will make any bit of difference to them. Of course the smart ones out there are already designing for standards compliance and won't have to worry about it.
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.
HIBT?
I could see the reasoning behind this, but where does the linked article mention that AOL 8.0/Win will still use IE?
reech bee-yond ur clip-0n
I'm just curious: does anyone know if this embedded Gecko is taking stuff out of the Chimera tree? Or maybe a better question: where off of Mozilla did they branch?
The so what is this: While AOL users often don't care what is getting them to a particular web site, web logs reflect what kind of browser is being used to visit a site. Let's say you're CNN, or even slashdot...if your logs indicate a large % of a particular browser, then you will build for that browser. That's what the business folks look at, and tell the web people to build for those audiences. So it is very important that usage statistics show significant numbers for browsers other than IE so that common standards are followed and systems other than Intel/MS/IE are supported by web builders.
Would any self respecting Mac user actually use AOL?
Speak for yourself. You may think that doing a half-assed job is just fine until someone complains, but that's not how a professional operates. My latest web app is used nationwide by over 2000 auto dealerships and processes ~30000 apps a month, and I can assure you that going IE only was never even an option. In fact I would likely have been fired. Beyond all that, I would truly enjoy hearing you explain to a business manager that you had purposely designed a system that some (even if only a few) of your customers cannot access easily.
LEXX
"Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
The key words is "default". This has never been about customer choice, except for the very *few* of us who have some ability to see which one is better or worse. The customer really doesn't care what browser he/she uses. Really. They use the browser that they use because it's already there when they turn the machine on. BGate$ figured that out many moons ago.
Example: My customers (HR for one of the largest U.S. Government Departments) use whatever is in front of them and write contracts to conform to whatever they are using. I have a middle manangement user that, until last week, had never clicked on the "Up" button to get to the next higher directory. Don't laugh. She's an expert in her field. She hasn't needed to know that to do her job which is making sure that people get paid on time and right the first time. (Ok, I was a *little* *stunned*, but my point stands.) My point is that I think *most* of the users (at work, anyway) have no real preference on what browser they use. They just want to do something or get information so they can do something. This is not a browser war; it's a marketing war.
Then again, perhaps it's like the guy who conquered the whole planet in Harrison's "Deathworld 3". Nowhere to go but down now, Billy. Hope you enjoyed the ride. Remember Digital and Computer Data Corp? Bah-ha-ha!
...mozilla didn't support layers, because they are not part of the w3c standard ?
An AC wrote:
;)
...) => Microsoft.
> Get real... corporations need to make money. They
> PAY all of us honest hard-working folk. I don't
> know why all of you *NIX folks are so anti-MS,
Yes, corporations need to make money. But they don't need to engage in terror marketing, bullying, and above all, breaking the law (of which Microsoft has been found guilty in a court of law).
> so anti-AOL,
My main beef with AOL/TW is the Time Warner part of the equation. The portion of that that participates in the movie and music industries follows the time honored tradition of greedy sharks that enslave the artists, and milk and now criminalize its customers.
> anti-corp...
I can't speak for the rest of Slashdot, but I'm not personally against corporations per se. I love Apple. As I see it, a corporation has these duties:
1) To the shareholders: to make money to make a good return on their investment. Shareholders own the company.
2) To the employees: to treat them fairly and try to keep ye old paycheck from bouncing. Without employees, the corporation can't do much.
3) To the customers: to offer good products, good prices, and good service. Customers are golden, without them, the corporation doesn't make money. They are expensive to replace, so every reasonable, fair, and law-abiding effort should be made to keep them, and keep them happy, so they come back for more.
4) To their community: the corporation must obey all laws and pay all taxes. It is good PR to do some charitable work.
> Without the MSes of the world, where would
> modern home computing be today?
There was home computing before Microsoft. Do Apple and Commodore ring a bell? There would be a much freer market with far more choices. After all, most of our choices were killed off by Microsoft.
Then a funny thing happened. Many people got fed up with Microsoft's evil ways, and so many of those choices are suddenly back. And they brought new friends...
> Corps are greedy and out to make money, period.
There is nothing wrong with being "out to make money", if the customer feels they got their money's worth. My idea of a greedy corporation is one that takes without giving back value. Microsoft's "unearned income" is a good example. That is money they exhorted out of their customers for stuff they had already paid for (their lovely new licensing scheme).
Prosperous corporation with happy stockholders, happy employees, satisfied customers and proud community => good.
Greedy corporation with unhappy stockholders (somebody's not paying dividends and the stock is down), unhappy employees (now what are those stock options worth?), mad customers (you want me to pay another $$$ to keep this buggy piece of BSOD working?!?), and irate community (doesn't pay income tax, doesn't bother with laws,
> If you want a centralized, free-everything
> society, ask the folks in Russia how communism
> worked out for them.
The free-everything folk bug me too, especially the Mac ones. I've gotten very tired of trying to explain that charging fair prices for good products does not make Apple evil.
> so don't come crying when the feds bust MS down
> so bad that they fold it up and move abroad and
> you lose your job.
The feds probably won't bust Microsoft. Nope, Microsoft's greatest foe is their own much-abused customers. The tide has turned against them; the market demands competition. Conveniently, the compitition is rising from the dead and coming out of the woodwork.
Microsoft can be easily broken up, without the governments help. Just let Microsoft make their customers mad enough to leave, and call the pieces "Apple", "Linux", "Mozilla", "Corel", etc.
Godzilla 2000, the Dreaded God! The battle for Earth's future has begun!
The future Millenium threatens.
Godzilla cannot be assimilated. By Millenium who would embrace, extend!
(From my lyrics to Godzilla's theme from "Godzilla 2000 Millennium")
It always appeared to me that Macs were the designer's platform of choice. It is possible that Mozilla will do an end run around IE through designers who will want to get their default Mac browser to work with a page they created.
If AOL wants to remain in existence, AOL needs to help topple the MS monopoly, first in browsers and then the desktop OS would help.
AOL doesn't give a rip about toppling MS, nor should they. here's why:
1) Right now, AOL only has to deal with two OS vendors, MS and Apple. And if Apple went away, they wouldn't be too bad off. But the point is, AOL is able to cut a deal with MS to keep AOL in Windows because of the DOJ, browser marketshare, et al (I'll touch on that in a sec.). Fragment the PC market into several OS's, and AOL is going to have a harder time cutting deals with various OS vendors. Worse yet, if Linux goes mainstream, how does that help AOL? It doesn't; in fact, most people savvy enough to use Linux despise AOL. I think it's safe to say that even if AOL did offer software for Linux, most distro's would shun it, or AOL would have to pay big bucks for inclusion.
2) AOL is the largest ISP on the planet. MS is still rabid about ownership of the browser market. AOL owns the number two browser. Mix it all together, and you see that AOL has some leverage against MS. As long as they keep signing deals to keep IE as the browser of choice for AOL, then MS doesn't have to worry about losing marketshare. But, just have AOL switch over to Netscape, and MS loses control that they've spent years fighting for. I have no doubt that switching over to Gecko on the Mac is a thinly veiled threat; "Don't push us." So, AOL get a pre-install deal with Windows, and MS remains the browser of choice for the world's largest ISP.
no further comment.
Minor Update? Hardly. Yeah, we got a free upgrade from 10.0 to 10.1 (which made sense, because 10.0 was really an early-adopter beta). But 10.1 is solid stuff. 10.2 is, by most reports, a substantial improvement.
You don't want to upgrade? Don't. Probably nothing will break. You'll just miss out on the groovy new stuff you already think isn't worth paying for. Just stick with 10.1 until 10.5 comes out...
At least Apple doesn't charge $200 for a word processing program. Now that's abusive...
Hardware overpriced? Go to Sun Remarketing and get a circa 1999 fruit-flavored iMac for less than $500. Buy an extra 128 MB ram and presto! One good OS X box. Not top of the line, but serviceable.
This is not meant to be a troll but...
the line "Now that linux is becoming main stream" makes me laugh. I suppose we can hope though!
It's = "it is" (nothing more, nothing less)
Its = everything else
Correct: "in its balance sheet"
Correct: "It's a really nice day today."
If you can't replace "it's" with "it is", you're using the word incorrectly.
Don't forget about AOLserver, AOL's GPL multithreaded, Tcl-enabled web server.
cpeterso
'nuff said
I'd say if the changeover proves to be easy for the mac they'll do it for Windows too. Then Suddenly IE drops down considerably in the market share
Which explains why Apple is partnering with Earthlink...
Anyone willing to bet they will screw it up?
Don't take life too seriously. It is only a temporary situation. Usual disclaimers apply.
Does anyone remember when you could go to the store and see two sets of AOL disks: The MSIE one and the Netscape one? I propose that now, out of contractual agreement, they re-adopt choice of the masses. This will make the transition hit from both sides (the user and the ISP), as well as let us see how everyone reacts in the real world.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
It's = "it is" (nothing more, nothing less)
No, it also means "it has," as in:
It's been a week since I issued a grammar flame.
Juiz de Fora IRC
As if, in your wildest dreams the little company that could would make a computer that held the power of Unix and embraced the utility of open source would ever appear. You dreamed it and now it is here. I expected hails, but only hear dissention. Your wildest dreams have arrived and you only find trivial faults. Fools. Steve Jobs is a flawed vissionary but will only go farther than your wildest dreams. I can't believe what I'm seeing. Sell your car for this one or wait until the next one, but don't hate what is before your very eyes. Ahhh, bohtisavta!