LindowsOS Will Bundle AOL Client

ealar dlanvuli writes "BuisnessWeek Online is reporting that AOL/TW and Lindows have decided to work together in bundling a version of Netscape 7 with future Lindows products. One wonders if they should instead be supporting OEone and making it scream."

Comments

Misleading Headline

[krmt]

Man, what a piss-poor headline. I was actually excited for a second, hoping that there really would be a client for AOL *the service* bundled with Lindows. But no... it's just Netscape 7, which isn't any more functionally than Mozilla really (less in some areas).

I would have personally loved an AOL client on Linux. My family has used AOL for years, both as a primary ISP and a secondary service. I've had the same email account on AOL for years (yes, it's spam-ridden, but a lot of my friends still use it) and it would be nice to be able to access it via some method other than their (once crappy, now much better) webmail interface.

In addition to that, there's the fact that having AOL for Linux would give it another crucial app for desktop migration. Not that I'd expect it to work nearly as nicely in setting up your internet connection on Linux as it does on Windows or Mac, which is where AOL really shines, but the ability to access their full service would be nice.

But no. We get Netscape, something the whole of Unix has pretty much outgrown with Konqueror, Opera, Mozilla, and its spinoffs. Too bad, back to waiting.

Re:Misleading Headline

[krmt]

It's dwindled a lot over the years, especially as a lot of the content has moved on to public webservers. But basically a lot of media companies pay for the privledge to be a part of AOL, and they often provide some content to AOL users that they don't give to the outside world.

I personally rarely use AOL for anything but email and AIM now that the web has grown so much. The real benefit would be the ability to admin my email account and the like, which I can't do without a real AOL app.

But I'm a really clued user. There's millions who aren't. A lot of people stay right there within the bounds that AOL sets. It's very organized and fairly well set up. Every portal site you've ever seen is basically a rip off of the AOL model of organizing information for the user, and occasionally personalizing something. It's passe to do that on the web now, but it was once a very nice thing.

And as for the ISP part, you can't connect to AOL if they're your primary ISP through Linux. They don't use standard ppp or the like, but something proprietary.

Re:Misleading Headline

[DrXym]

Ho hum. Netscape *does* have more functionality in some areas. For starters it ships with an AIM/ICQ client, has a spellchecker, a radio button and ties into Netscape/AOL sites and all the content that brings, not to mention that it has been tested to within an inch of its life. You wouldn't get equivalent stability from Mozilla unless you stuck with the 1.0.x branch. It certainly doesn't have the DOM inspector, JS debugger or Chatzilla, but then most new users wouldn't care about those anyway.

Now, is links to Netscape/AOL sites functionality? Well not to someone who knows their away around (from using the web already), who knows about Google, DMoz etc. and has no fear. But we're not talking about people like that - this is someone buying a $199 PC from Walmart here! Newbies need guidance, they need form, they need hand holding and services like AOL and Netscape 7.0 provide that. You might not like it but there it is. New users appreciate being immediately able to read news, shop, chat with friends without struggling for hours in frustration to figure it out before giving up. From Lindow's perspective it cuts down on their support calls, and perhaps Walmart will experience fewer returns too. So everyone wins, profit for Lindows & Walmart and a better experience for the user.

It's no different from learning to swim - you can teach someone in the shallow end with water wings and instruction or throw them into the deep end and walk away. Which approach do you think will be more effective, and which will lead to severe trauma and lots of dead bodies?

Good Entry Point

[e8johan]

This is a good point to insert Linux onto the desktop of average Joe. Despite Lindows licensing tricks they open a door for open source software.

As Windows licenses are expensive it would be nice to see for example Dell to supply computers pre-installed with Lindows. This would still let the average user to use Excel, Word, etc. But allows easy installation and adoption of applications such as KOffice, Gimp etc.

Today it is hard to get a Windows computer to run *nix (open source) apps in a native looking way, but this could change all that.

Re:Linux and AOL

[FuzzzyLogik]

Much to our disappointment, companies like Lindows and the other "easy to use" distros are trying to convert those windows users (yes the ones that don't know how to run word if the interface suddenly looked a little funny, like gtk or qt, atleast that's the argument). In other words, having AOL for linux is a good thing for THEM, not necessarily for US the ones that know how to use our machines just fine the way they are. So with this wonderful "ease of use" comes dumbed down applications and windows looking/acting distro's. AOL has been a prime candidate for this for a long time. it was inevitable.

Logik

Re:Linux and AOL

[krmt]

I'll give you one example. My family, until the last two weeks, used AOL as their primary ISP. They have tons of hard drive space, and I could have potentially set up a partition with Linux on it for when I come home, and for my little brothers to experiment and play on.

However, I know from a lot of experience that Linux is really difficult to learn if you don't either have someone right there teaching you or an internet connection, and I wasn't going to be there all the time for my brothers. So I didn't bother with Linux because it wouldn't have been that useful or comfortable for me. With an AOL client, someone like me could get their internet connection on Linux.

Another example is a friend who was curious about Linux after I had talked it up so much. So I installed Mandrake as a dual boot for him to experiment with. His family uses AOL as their only ISP. He couldn't really stay in Linux very long before he found he needed the internet for something. The best way to learn Linux is to use it, and he wasn't really able to use it to learn it.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea. The ability to move over slowly to Linux is important, and it's much harder to experiment when you can't get help online (IRC, google, discussion boards are critical resources). An AOL client would help those millions of people with curious kids and AOL as an ISP to try Linux.

Re:One would also wonder...

[dgil]

Because AOL will buy the Lindows company ?

It's not "Linux" - and that's the point

[Zeddicus_Z]

Lindows isn't aimed at your average Linux geek. Its core market will be people who want a cheap, functional OS (at the very least, cheap rules out MS solutions) but don't/can't/won't/ use GNU/Linux.

To misquote the oft-cited Slashdot Linux line - "I'm going to install (%distro) on my parent's home machine!" But would you really? Would you really install Red Hat or Mandrake on your parent's machine, when you know all they need is a web browser, an email client and perhaps an instant messenger client? Would you *really* take the time to install it, secure it, solve dependency issues and then *teach* them step-by-step how to use the OS until they reached the point where they weren't calling you five times a week for support?

The entire reason Lindows exists is to provide a cheap, functional and easy-to-use alternative to Microsoft on the desktop. They seem to have the first part worked out, but it remains to be seen if they can get the last two right.

Linux geeks aren't going to replace their Debian or Gentoo boxes with Lindows, because its not what most of them want (primarily). If Lindows fails to get the "mum and dad" and "I just want to do my homework and then use IRC" groups of people, than it will die a slow and painfull death.

That is why an AOL client on the Lindows desktop would be beneficial. It's a quick, easy and relatively painless way to get normal, non-tech-savvy users on the 'Net.

Of course, this is all rather academic because if you'd read the article, you'd know that the headline is BS and that the linked story talks about including Netscape 7, not AOL.

Stop Press: AOL Claims Netscape 7 Use Icons

[Jugalator]

Look:

With its AOL licensing deal, the Lindows said that consumers can enjoy the versatility of Netscape browser and communications capabilities right out-of-the-box with an icon-driven interface.

Whoa - icons! Let me get this straight... Are they saying they'll use those new, often abstract, graphic representations of commands you give to the computer? This, my friends, seem to be a browser for the 21st century. Let's all embrace Netscape 7 in all its glory.

Nice!

[miffo.swe]

Its nice that more userfriendly alternatives comes out on linux. If AOL supports linux it will mean that more users will have the ability to try it out. Surely not all will stay but some like me will quickly fall madly inlove.

An interface like AOL makes lindows idiot friendly. Many of you 373343 hAxx0r5 may find that disturbing but i like the spinoffs it makes. More users means more people bugging hardware manufacturers to release drivers for consumer products etc.

I think its high time we stop snearing at newbs and people that just want to use the box, not administer it. Compare to autos and the development from daily self service from the beginning to almost no service today. It is inevitable that things is done by automation in the future. Who wants to work on their car every day just to drive to work?

Just like with cars self service of computers will become a hobby someday.

Re:Nice!

[miffo.swe]

I didnt mean that this is the mother of all usability. What i meant was the more alternatives the bigger chance of someone hitting the spot.

The world is full of greyscales not black and white.

"I still fail to understand how AOL would automatically make a Linux distribution easy to use, where no involvement with AOL would make it mostly just useful for "l33t h4x0rz""

I complained about how some of us that have used linux a longer period sometimes snear at the average user. I can manage linux quite well but thats because i love it and have the incentive to mock around with settings. For someone that wants a clean tool it can sometimes be a little to complicated and if someone caters that need it will benefit us all in the long run.

An AOL client would make the transition for those used to it much esier on linux. As for mozilla its a developers version and that shows whenever you want to install a new plugin or java. Netscape is more targeted at the normal user of windows and not the normal user of linux. The normal user of windows is what this would target.

All this Lindows hype - What about Mandrake ?

[bushboy]

It seems Mandrake always gets left out in the cold when it comes to hyping a "Linux for the masses" desktop solution.

Mandrake is perfectly positioned to fill all the needs of a home Linux user, from the beginner right through to the advanced user.

As for AOL teaming up with Lindows - all that is mentioned in the article is Netscape 7.0 being 'integrated' with Lindows.
In short, all this means right now is that Lindows will use Netscape as it's primary web browser.

The whole thing is just one ugly "Lets get on the Linux bandwagon to screw Microsoft" marketing stunt.

The last thing Linux needs is meddling and interference by AOL/Time Warner - can you just imagine. If they adopt Linux in a big way, in a few years, they'll be claiming they invented it and will add tons of proprietary closed source bunk.

Re:Linux and AOL

[evilviper]

Everyone has already nailed you with the "Lindows is going after Windows users", but I've got something else to add.

I would say, if someone would write a single control panel-type interface, where the important things could be configured in a centralized locations (e.g. network, software packages, display, keyboard, mouse, etc) and make it blatantly obvious that it should be used (links on the desktop, and in an obviously labeled menu) then I would put Linux up against Windows.

The problem with Linux isn't that there's no tools to configure it... the problem is that the tools often don't quite work, there are a lot of different ones (at least one for each subject) and their interfaces aren't always as easy as windows equivalent (although some do surpass their counterparts). In fact, being able to configure everything in one place, and having it work right the first time, every time, would be a substantial improvement over Windows!

If any distro got to that point, I would distribute it to every non-gamer I know (games are the big hold up, keeping people I know, from switching).

So, in case you got lost in bracket-hell, I'll say it again. With just a LITTLE work, I think Linux would be user-friendly enough to completely replace Windows.

That said, I still think more could be done with OpenBSD than Linux. Since it detects all hardware at startup, and loads drivers for hardware automatically, you would only need a very simple program that parses dmesg, then automatically reconfigures XFree86, and put up any messages, like "A new NIC was found, please type the IP address".

Re:Thank you

[krmt]

Interesting. You're right, there it is. AOL client 7.0 sneak preview.

So my next question is how do they do this? Is the client fully native? Compiled with winelib? Just run through wine? Will this work on my debian setup?

Still, thank you for pointing this out. This is great news, especially if it can run in Mandrake and the like. Hopefully we'll know more soon.

Re:Linux and AOL

[Wdomburg]

>The point is moot, anyway, since they're not
>really bundling the AOL client, but just Netscape
>(which is what the poster above is complaining
>about).

Right now at least... But, if you go to their website, they say they working on it:

Even though AOL can't currently be used as your
ISP to connect to the Internet from within
LindowsOS (that's being worked on)

And provide a link to download it:

http://www.lindows.com/aoloffer

And give you screenshots of AOL 7.0 running under Lindows:

http://info.lindows.com/aol/#client

It would hardly suprise me if, come the time of their Lindows 3.0 release, there was an AOL icon on the desktop like you get with a lot of OEM manufacturers.

Matt

Re:Where'd that headline come from?

[dj28]

They are testing an AOL client for Windows. For some reason, the story didn't post to it. Anyways, here's the URL: http://www.lindows.com/lindows_products_details.ph p?id=15

new AOL commercials on CNN

[theflea]

Will the AOL commercials on CNN change significantly? Old commercial: grandma type says "it's like having a verbal chat [twiddles fingers]...electronically!" New commercial: father type says something like: "AOL uses ipchains/procmail filter/ext2 file system/gecko rendering engine....and that's important to me"

Slashdot, you're killing me

[sethadam1]

I can't believe the growing ridiculousness of this website.

First off, what terrible research. You should have linked to the actual website, where'd you see that there actually is AOL for Linux coming our way.

Secondly, rather than let the uncompromising, closed-minded crowd continue to hate LindowsOS because it appears to be stylish amongst the l33t, you should have posted an actual story (submitted and rejected) that would be truly informational about LindowsOS, like this story.

This is turning into selective and irresponsible technology reporting.

Has anyone actually READ the EULA of OEone?

[Spackler]

OEOne sounded good, so I figured, what the heck. I cranked up the script in lynx, and let it rip.

Well, the EULA that pops up makes Microsoft look tame.

It starts with the usual disclaimer of how they "take no responsibility for the
consequences of running this script."

That seemed pretty standard, although worded a little harsh.

It then goes through some normal install stuff, then comes the fun!

Issue 1. Your bound by the license of any other software they install, even though you don't see them.

Issue 2. Any software, or plugins they OEOne installs can ONLY be used while using OEOne's desktop, and can not be called directly.

Issue 3. Automatic communication. They can do any communication they want to, but you can shut off "MOST" of it in the pref settings. (MOST? Oh, that's nice and gray for a EULA. Stated clearly, it means that you can't shut it _ALL_ off)

Issue 4. DRM. Yup, it's in there, and they can stick in as much as they want.

Fortunately, you can hit cancel, and throw it all away. I looks to me like they are trying to complete directly with Microsoft, with restrictions, and control over my machine. I switched to Linux to get away from that crap! Sure, the screenshots looked nice, but I'll never be seeing this on MY machine.

Give Netscape some credit

[IGnatius T Foobar]

I'm tired of all the Netscape-bashing. AOL has spent a lot of money developing Mozilla -- true, there's some amount of outside development, but the bulk of it has been funded by AOL for use in their Netscape product. The least you can do is lend a few kind words. Personally, I use the Netscape-branded browser (Netscape 7 is a very good browser on all three platforms) and I use their portal site. You should, too. All of this stupid Slashdot groupthink of "Mozilla good, Netscape bad!" completely ignores the fact that if there were no Netscape, there would be no Mozilla. Or the more likely scenario -- if AOL hadn't acquired Netscape, Netscape might have gone out of business without the backing of a big tech player, and most of you would be using Mozilla 0.2 right now.

Give Netscape some credit, folks. They're trying to be a good open source citizen. Don't disappoint them with a childish "take take take" attitude.