Slashdot Mirror
AOL's new Linux PC
minus_273 writes " MSNBC (of all places ) has an intersting article about AOLs new PC. We have already heard of Lindows , WALMART PC and there was speculation of AOL Red Hat. Well, it looks like this is what AOL decided to do. All 3 are mixed into one. AOL now has a beta 7.0 client that is distributed with Lindows along with AIM and Netscape. I wonder if this stuff will work on normal Linux without WINE."
I use linux and have had an AOL account since 1994. AOL had some troubles when they launched unlimited service, but they are now quite reliable, and nationwide. With linux, they will support the 3 major platforms. I dont like time warner, but they give us Netscape / Mozilla, Winamp and ICQ for free. For the average American to use Linux, we need an isp like AOL that is nationwide, and supports linux.
-- the computer doesn't want any beer, no matter how much you think it does. NEVER, EVER feed your computer beer.
1. AOL client for Linux
2. Native game support
Now, as much as I tend to mock AOL users, being that AOL is not a convicted monopolist, they're the lesser of two evils by far. But now that #1 on my list looks like it's happening, MS better be very nervous. There's millions of AOL users who own a computer and do nothing but connect to AOL on it. There's now NO compelling reason for them to use Microsoft software.
This news has made my day. I'm being optimistic and hopeful here, but could this day signal the beginning of the end of Microsoft? (Especially since some games are coming out with native Linux support.. like Unreal Tournament 2003)
Most people with proficiency in Linux hopefully aren't dumb enough to use AOL.
Most people with proficiency in AOL have no idea what Linux is.
Xavodim.com
Um, ICQ was free long before AOLTimeWarner ever got their hands on it. ICQ has turned into ugly, ad-filled bloatware since it was bought out. I miss the streamlined design the interface had seven years ago.
Denver Isuzu Suzuki
The question is, would they still be free had AOL not stepped in and funded their continued development thanks to their subscribers' revenue?
:)
Maybe. Maybe not.
"Old man yells at systemd"
It's time to lose the "MSNBC (of all places)" type comments. They consistently put out interesting tech stories with no bias towards or against Microsoft, and I they seem take their journalistic impartiality seriously.
No, I don't work for them.
A few kudos to AOL though
- AOL floppies were formattable (free blank disks)
- AOL CD's became coasters, the new cases are rugged and nice for DVD's/etc
- As you mentioned, they support Netscape/Winamp/ICQ.
I reserve the right to apply a -1 to AOL for ICQ adware. I use trillian so it doesn't matter to me, I use their network so they still provide me with a decent service. The needs suit the audience. If AOL can help people get online and on linux, I really don't mind them - so long as they're not lagging up my battle.net games.3: Somebody's lagging, who's your ISP?
2: What's an ISP?
1: The company that provides your internet connection
2: Oh, I'm using AOL
1: Kill player 2 first, he's AOL, that'll clear the lag
Yes, I often saw this on b-net - phorm
Or would they even be around today? Netscape was doing poorly to say the least when it was bought by AOL.
And people don't do that with Windows already?
Before I moved, I was Windows support for a _lot_ of people. Part of what helps Windows is that there's already the network of friendly computer literate people that know it.
Now, I'm not saying that Linux is just as easy as Windows. Not looked in for a little while but it certainly wasn't then and information I've heard since hasn't suggested that's changed. But, it remains that Windows is already beyond many users, so Linux being so isn't as much of a problem as some people think.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
It only got one line of play in the article but that fact that Wal-Mart is selling the same computer for a $100 more that includes windows is significant.
Never before has the public been offered such clear presentation of the real cost of Windows. (At least not in such a large forum.)
Always before MS has been able to hide the cost the consumer is paying. Now that Wal-Mart draws it out in black and white, users will finally have a REAL choice about what OS they want to use on their PC.
On a system with many users, limiting the damage caused to a single user to himself is a necessity. On a system with one user/administrator, it's meaningless.
Besides, can you really think of any single click that can render the system unusable? In any case, if the user is persuaded to enter a command or install a trojan, forcing them to type the root password first makes no difference.
Having users and accounts also doesn't help Internet security much. Email worms aren't affected at all, and many important servers (like sshd) have to run as root anyways. And a server running as a lesser user can still cause just as much harm to the Internet, for instance by participating in a denial of service attack, or relaying spam.
I'd agree with you, except for one thing. A lot of software I want/need to run is not available on Linux. If Linux develops to the point where "average morons" use it --- even if it's not a particularly overwhelming percentage --- more software companies will find it worth their while to port their products to Linux. Therefore I do have a significant interest in seeing widespread adoption of Linux by average users.
Not sure about 800mhz part, but a 1ghz C3 is about equivalent to a 800mhz celeron in int tests, and vastly worse in float tests.
:p
It seems that it has a horrible FPU, and fairly decent ALU. Hey, it's 200$ for the whole machine, not bad if all you want to do is web browse, play 2d games, check email and go on AOL chat rooms
But I agree, this is not good avertising to call it similiar to a 800mhz celeron (or 850mhz duron, which is even more far fetched).