Has AOL Lost Its Sex Drive?
TheViewFromTheGround writes "Why have the years since the merger with Time Warner been so hard on America Online? Michael Wolff, a consultant who advised Time Warner not to buy AOL in the early 90's, says that the the big problem is Time Warner's denial of AOL's core value: a monopoly on dirty chat. The argument says that AOL was successful because they had a critical mass of people and that it skillfully marketed talking dirty by appearing to be family friendly. Now, the old media bedfellow is pushing AOL to stop its pimping ways."
Unfortuntely, it seems like in the exec war TW-ers are winning (if not already won). It was mentioned in some story on /. a while ago. Too bad, as for my own political reasons I regard TW as a major evil[0] whereas AOL as a minor bad thing.
-DVK
[0] As an example, i'm boycotting CNN for the last 3 years 100%, and would switch to aletrnate cable provider in a second had TWC-NYC not been a monopoly where I live (can't have satellite in our building).
"The right to figure things out for yourself is the only true freedom everyone shares. Go use it"-R.A.Heinlein
I don't think I've ever read an article posted here that was such obvious tripe. AOL is not number one because they have sex chat, they're number one because they're EASY TO USE.
Say what you will about AOL's reliability, tech support and the general IQ level of its users, it is and always has been pretty much "click-and-go".
I set it up for people on occasion now and it just works. And when I used AOL in 1991-97 it was easy to use and "just worked" then too.
(remember the DOS interface -- when there were only about 25,000 users?)
load "windows7"
Denis Leary, is that you?
No, it's George Carlin.
I pledge allegiance to the flag...
of the Corporate States of America...