Slashdot Mirror
FCC Lifts AOL IM Limits
TypoNAM writes "'The Federal Communications Commission has agreed to lift restrictions that have barred AOL Time Warner from offering advanced instant messaging services including videoconferencing, according to a source familiar with the decision.'" A couple of years ago, the FCC made a big fuss about how it was watching out for the public interest in approving the AOL/TW merger.
Good, hopefully AOL will make a decent cross-platform video/audio instant message system.
...i'm much more likely to give my info to a smiling face!
Go read some bible: nubible.com
I remember reading about these restrictions back when they were first imposed and thought to myself, "AOL will continue to lose market share and will eventually convince the FCC to lift the ban."
It sounds like a valid reason to me. As usual, most monopolies, especially in technology, get broken down by the market sooner (Word Perfect) or later (MS?).
Forget the whales - save the babies.
"public interest"=="corporate interest"
Will having the FCC permission to add video capabilities to their clients really going to effect users for the worse? I personally am of the opinion that it will not matter too much. iChatAV already has the capability in it. If AOL's is similar I think this might be a great thing.
Excuse grammer/spelling I am in a rush.
100% Crunchier
Does this mean that the IM can have 128 bit encryption? I know gaim and trillian have it on their clients when you use AIM. I hope AOL will do this also.
Maybe I'm missing the point a little here, but why would advancement in video confrancing technology for customers be against public interest? Surely advancement in technologies is IN the public interest?
"It sounds like a valid reason to me. As usual, most monopolies, especially in technology, get broken down by the market sooner (Word Perfect) or later (MS?)."
I'm still waiting.
I have ICQ Pro (ICQ is owned by AOL) and it has features like this built in, though I have never used them. I do believe it makes use of external software like Microsoft's NetMeeting though, which is not distributed with ICQ Pro.
Do they get away with this because ICQ is not considered AOL IM? Even though ICQLite can talk to AOL IM, and I think AOL IM can add ICQ contacts to their list.
With the majority of AOL users still dialing-up it would be a shame to integrate this into their instant messaging clients. Even with broadband, Video/Audio over IP is still plagued with poor performance. It would only serve to increase the bloat of the client, something I'd rather not have to deal with.
Michael,
Relax, buddy. "Why even have laws" (as dept.)? This decision is fundamentally about allowing a company to incorporate videoconferencing capabilities into its own software.
They're not dismantling your beloved welfare state just yet. Don't freak out on us. Although I suppose the whole purpose of having laws is to keep the evil corporations from eating our children, right? So perhaps your concern is justified.
Justin
At least now there will more competition in the IM market... Also, i was under the impression that AOL had to make their IM networks interoperable with other services (MSN messenger) as deals of the AOL time warner merger... But i guess in the face of direct competition, this wasn't really possible ...
Seriously, since the current administration sees deregulation and tax "relief" as being the solutions to every business problem (real or imaginary), this isn't unexpected. And remember, what's good for AOL/TW is good for ...ummm, Steve Case?
Microsoft bundles the MSN messenger with their OS getting an unfair advantage over the other IM providers. Most workplaces don't allow their employees to install any software on them, thus they turn to MSN messenger which is already on their Windows systems. Has the FCC done anything to stop Microsoft from doing that? Anyone know?
There are two kinds of egotists: 1) Those who admit it 2) The rest of us
Never mind that her warning level is 99%...
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
Is AOL in such financial trouble that they have resorted to porn? I bet they will offer video services for the porno industry for an outragious fee which will help them financially.
While I applaud the audacity of calling people slashbutts (and still get moderated up), I have to ask: is it really necessary to have the article text posted here on Slashdot? I mean, news.com isn't going to get itself slashdotted, so there's little danger of the article text being unavailable.
I guess we're just doomed to be subject to rampant speculation, rumors, and hearsay here on Slashdot. We should really all be reading the article so we can draw our own conclusions, then proceed with the discussion...but hell, I guess I'm dreaming.
You slashbutts.
I started working recently, and after 3 years in school, I'm suffering from pretty severe IM withdrawal symptoms. At school, I used to be up on Yahoo Messenger 24/7.
Ofcourse, Yahoo Messenger has some decent Unix versions, and also a rudimentary Java one. But I haven't been able to get any of them running on my Solaris box. They have a link for a non-root solaris installation, but it requires libgtk, which I've been unable to get running.
The Java messenger crashes everytime I receive a new message. Ofcourse I've heard of Trillian and other cross-service messengers, but I'm not sure I will be able to install them without root privelages,
Probably offtopic, but any help will be appreciated.
From a grateful IM addict.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
They don't need to come up with another incompatible standard. Go with Apple.
Steve Jobs already mentioned that his stuff is open, and that he's waiting for other companies to copy it. This would be the perfect way to do it.
iChat AV is awesome, but currently, it can only do VC with other iChat AV users (on the Mac).
Hell, iChat already uses the AOL protocol and everything... What are they waiting for???
-- askien
I downloaded the latest AIM beta a while ago because it said it would have ICQ support. They've been talking about it for ages. But there was none, and now the page no longer talks about it and there have been several more beta patches.
When will I have the power of ICQ with the ease of AIM (without the evil of M$)?!
"Sorry Im not more user-friendly."
You slashbutts.
/butts.
no it's
Well, I doubt that AOL will host the video traffic themselvs. There's no reason why Gaim and iChat couldn't work together...
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
shut up, no one pays attention to you. come up with soemthing original...
"Anyone can buy a share of OCP and own a piece of our fair city. What could be more democratic than that."
Or something to that effect. Most of the stock isn't public. It's privately held in that hands of a very few. While the services/or products are widely used. The market should bow and scrape to those who use the products, not who own the stock.
Robocop II was a highly underrated movie. Not only does it feature some of the best stop-motion that will ever be done now, but it's got some damn classic lines, and plays with and breaks a few conventions, along with some decent social commentary.
Did you try gaim?
Will this mean that RR starts offering a phone number for $8.50 a month like Grande does ?
It seems to me that part of the concern here is that offering these services will encourage further network effects that lock users into a particular IM system, which includes not only the service but the protocol as well. If competition really is important, then why wouldn't the FCC say something like this to AOL? "If you want to provide this kind of service, then you must use a standard format for delivery so that other service providers will be able to compete." It seems to me that the proprietary and constantly changing nature of AOL's AIM protocol and its clients is a large part of what is restricting choice (and, ultimately, innovation) here.
I (sorta, because I use trillian) am pissed that none of the networks work together - it reminds me of small children fighting over a glass of orange juice and spilling it in the process.
At the same time I think deliberately crippling a product like this isn't going to help the average user - if you really want competition between the im makers, let them compete - add features in this case. Tit for tat, and soon somebody is paid by ??? to research a new streaming codec and comes out with something that kicks ass.
Software doesn't get better if there is no push (from customers / marketing / management, etc) for it.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
I'm just concerned that someday AOL/TIMEWARNER/NETSCAPE will be the hegemonous Content Provider For Everything.
Just the same as M$ has done to OS's on the x86. The difference being is that it's several orders of magnitude more diffcult and expensive to try to start up an ISP, verses pooling together ppl on the inet to write OS's and software.
do() || do_not();
I am on jabber right now, and I am never looking back. It is quite feature rich, extensible, and opensource. It's a bit immature, i will grant you, but with more interest comes more developers.
Yes, that means you! The coder in the back!
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
One of the key players in the persuading the FCC to let AOLIM be kept is William P. Rogerson, former FCC chair and economist at Northwestern. I couldn't find his paper but the dissenting opinions of Gerald R. Faulhaber and David J. Farber; both UPenn Econmics professors give a great opinion on why AOL has been behaving badlly (All gentlemen have held high ranking positions on the FCC). Its in PDF but their criticisms of Rogerson's draft are striking,
"AOL Time Warner's strategic behavior has not changed, and that is perhaps the most compelling evidence that they believe they can eventually tip the market by refusing to interoperate. Such strategic behavior only makes sense if the market leader expects the market to tip in its favor; otherwise, interoperation is their best strategy. But the Petition and the Affidavit are strangely and tellingly silent on this key piece of evidence.
We also note that AOL Time Warner failed to exploit its newly acquired cable assets to deploy an AOL Broadband service. Since the firm had no Broadband service, it had little reason to care about advanced IM services such as two-way video that are not feasible on dial-up connections. However, AOL Time Warner has just recently begun marketing AOL Broadband, apparently now trying to capitalize on its cable assets. It should not come as a surprise that as AOL Time Warner rolls out its new broadband offering, it wishes to be relieved of the requirement to interoperate if it offers an IM-based high-speed service. Their behavior suggests that they may well have such a service ready to roll out soon as a feature of their AOL Broadband, and wish to keep their network effects proprietary. In fact, it is precisely this case that the Merger Order anticipated when it imposed the IM condition.
We urge the FCC to proceed cautiously. While conditions have evolved since the Merger Order that suggest network effects and tipping are not as urgent today, other evidence suggests that it is perhaps even more urgent. The FCC needs to recall that AOL Time Warner has in its own hands the ability to offer advanced IM-based highspeed services without let or hindrance: it need only interoperate with its competitors, as it promised the world it would do two years ago, to the benefit of all customers."
Real men use SMS (because real girls don't use IM).
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
Gaim has GPG (GnuPG) now.
Check out Gaim-E plugin for gaim.
Although I've not used it, I find the gaim-encryption to be a great working plugin for gaim. Even works with the windows port of gaim.
I don't buy this argument -
Reality Check But, hey who am I to say anything. Our Good old friend MS destroyed Netscape - so what are you going to do about it ....
I personally believe the conspiracy angle more .. after all this is the same FCC that adopted new rules that will permit broadcasters to expand their control of media properties. Michael Powell is not fooling anyone. From the same article "With even greater power, big broadcasters such as News Corp., Disney and AOL Time Warner Hey, look who's here ... will amass even more cash.", a lot of which will go to the Bush Relection coffers - so now you understand why Dean has to spam but Bush doesn't.
God help me ... I am so paranoid these days of this "New" world ... lol ...
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
The devil that AOL has become is threatening to swallow the whole debacle. Just look at SCO as a counter point example. Slashdot is a bastion. Free as in Freek. the spaceship is calling. enter babylon and ye shall ascend to the devil's gate.
- arnie
Given that Apple has added video to iChat, and that MS is planning to fold video messaging into Longhorn (or whatever) why not let AOL compete in the market?
No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
no you shut up, slashbutt.
You've got IM!
From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
*shudders* so many chins...
This message was brought to you by the death of 30 brain cells.
The field was clear for years for someone else to develop such "advanced" systems. Everyone (except Microsoft, whose system was unwieldy and difficult to work with, despite its being included with Windows) dropped the ball despite having an open field. If AOL can now develop such a system, and people like it, more power to them!
I'm not surprised in the least that the current (toothless) incarnation of the FCC is letting AOL slide into video chat without getting anything in return. However, I had forgotten about this restriction when iChat AV came out and now my mind is filled with all sorts of questions.
How closely did Apple work with AOL on iChat AV? I thought the borked SIP implementation was to promote Apple hardware (iChat AV only videoconferences with iChat AV... which only runs on Macs), but now I wonder if that was a result of negotiations with AOL. AOL's IM, at the time, was the only major IM service to not support video, right? So, was the iChat AV-only restriction a way to prevent Yahoo IM/MSN Messenger growth on the back of Mac-to-PC video chat?
Was the borked implementation just a proof of concept for AOL IM-only video chat? (I find this hard to believe, as it implies AOL drives iChat develpment. iChat AV was an obvious evolution of the original iChat, which included some of the iChat AV widget images hidden/unused in the resources of pre-AV builds.)
Was iChat AV a way to build up a large (fanatical) user base for AIM video chat while working under the FCC restriction? A trojan horse that would give AOL an edge once the FCC (inevitably) caved? Only time will tell, but this would be my bet. Look for iChat AV to AIM video chat soon(-ish) and continued incompatibilities.
I mean, how likely is it that AIM will be able to video chat with MSN and YIM? If they were going to go for compatibility, they would have done it already (and by doing so, had the restriction lifted honestly -- by meeting the FCC's original concerns).
Why would that be surprising? Most cable systems already (for years) carry soft-porn. e.g. HBO, Showtime, Playboy. And with those carrying digital channels, some of it's hard-core.
w0w d00d! joo r l1k3 7 m1ns la+3 sux0rz!!! omg!@!
come on, nothing in computing matters until MicroSatan gets smacked HARD. Dammit, they are still an unbroken monopoly paying off every elected official(and judicial) they can get their hands on.
Basically, all laws and deregulation in this country were bought by special interests. There is NO LAW BY THE PEOPLE anymore, only by despots.
Fuck the system, it's wholly corrupted by money. No single citizen will ever get a break (unless you are OJ, with a ton of cash).
FUCK OFF ASHCROFT YOU GOD DAMN FASCIST PIECE OF SHIT.
bla bla bla AOL TW pay off FCC chairpersons bla bla bla IM bla bla bla Linux and Mac and Windows sucks and is teh ghey bla bla bla bla
This story is useless to us. Know your audience. Slashdot doesn't care.
Yes, I speak for every body, except for the fat ones.
Know your audience? This is perfect Slashdot discussion.
"I like aim."
"I like ICQ."
"I like trillian."
"Aol Sucks"
"Aol Sucks"
"Aol Sucks"
At least it's not another SCO article.
http://use.perl.org
The FCC restrictions were bogus. AOL NEVER restricted its own userbase from downloading other IM clients. They had just as much right to try to block out others illegally hacking into their network (hint hint--> Microsoft) as any ISP has over blocking out spam. Microsoft complained the loudest over AOL's potential monopoly (isn't that irony for you?) and then contributed a substantial amount of money for campaign contributions. Now let's look at Microsoft with its closed Xbox system (which I own one). Do you think for a moment they'll allow AOL or Yahoo to port their instant messaging to the Xbox(or Mozilla Firebird as a browser)? No way. Incidentally, Sony sought out AOL to provide the Playstation2 with IM capabilities once Sony gets serious about online playing with the release of the PS2 hard drive. To stick these restrictions on AOL for the past three years while failing to break up Microsoft's OS and Office productivity packages screamed of hypocricy. AOL should be complaining to Justice, the FTC, and the FCC about how all the other cable companies have blocked AOL from offering AOL Broadband directly to their customers... BYOA is not the answer, it should be single-source billing...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
"Personally, I highly recomend this service to anyone that burns a lot of long distance minutes."
I would, but obviously you need a broadband connection on one of the ends. One not everyone has broadband, because it isn't available, or the economy's soft, and broadband is considered a luxury. Cellular has better market penetration, and is seen more as necessary than a luxury. And the sound quality (as well as convience) is acceptable.
Plus cable broadband isn't as reliable as phone service.
I really hope that AOL interoperates with iChat AV.
Unlikely in the extreme.
As another, very informative post in this thread pointed out was noted in the dissenting FCC opinion, AOL-Time Warner has had the option to deploy instant messaging for the last two years, with all of these features, provided it interoperates with others (such as iChat).
They have chosen not to do so, because they anticipate greater profits through customer lockin despite the fact that it has taken them two years to buy off the FCC.
Hell, iChat already uses the AOL protocol and everything... What are they waiting for???
The FCC to lift the modest restrictions they have placed on AOL-Time Warner, so that they can break interoperability with those protocols, locking in their own customers (and those of their "strategic" partners) while locking the rest of us out. Apple may or may not be on the losing side of that equation, but rest assured that the internet at large, and the software, information, and communications freedom it has come to represent, most assuredly is on losing side, thanks to yet more bad governance from Baby Powell, the FCC, the Baby Bush administration, and Washington in general.
As a cynical aside, I do not expect to see good governance in this country again in my lifetime (and I am reasonably young).
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
If i changed my nick to RichBodyBuilder, would that automatically make me a Rich Body Builder? Wow, the power of the internet.
Some days are easier than others.
http://use.perl.org
Comment removed based on user account deletion
..when you can use . Milkbone is written entirely in Perl, has a GUI, and supports the OSCAR protocol (i.e. it isn't using the crippled TOC protocol that most alternative clients use).
It's also wickedly extensible and configurable. And it's open-source, of course.
one more avenue for porn peddlers. Now they can send a quick peek-a-boo for a few pennies on paypal.
Microsoft did not destroy Netscape. Quit being such a patsey. Netscape destroyed itself. Everyone that was there when it happened knows it, we saw it happen. Netscape 4.x was the worlds biggest POS. They opened the door and let MS waltz right through. EOL
Well, they have had it for a long time. Well, OK, it was one on one video but the infrastucture was/is there. I remember back in AOL 3.0 or AOL 4.0 they had beta tests of video conferencing in the IM software... on regular AOL (which is always last in IM technologies) and not AIM.
;)
Then it was going to go back into beta testing after a year long hiatus but the AOL-TW merger happened and it was put on ice for a little while. I'd expect some news from AOL soon
"Tread softly because you tread on my dreams"
Centericq is a text client that works (really) with ICQ, MSN, Yahoo!, AIM, IRC and Jabber. In your message you say that you like yahoo, so you are luky here :)
A screenshot of the beast:
http://konst.org.ua/en/centericq/screenshot/6
And the site:
http://konst.org.ua/en/centericq/
It works under Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, Sun Solaris, Windows and MacOS X/Darwin.
Andre
Interoperability?
In the law there is no overlap between theft and copyright infringement whatsoever.
It's clearly raving stupidity.
Yes. Coming from you.
I'm not sure who you are satirizing.
Which proves the above. It is obvious that he was satirizing Michael.
Perhaps you can give a direct url or instructions.
I am not a fan of cluttered websites.
I thought you could already do this with AIM. What the difference between what they want to do and using a webcam with your IM, or "video-phone"?
That's some fine thinking you're doing there.
More than likely Bush. =P
Colin Powell's son, who is on the FCC, and was appointed, by one George W. Bush, as the guy in charge of the AOL/Time Warner stuff, including the IM snafoo.
I work part time for my school and every system we setup gets an install of both Netscape 4 and 7. Which includes AIM no matter what these days.
WTF?
Is there any movement out there to create a standardized IM protocol? We have one for just about every OTHER major IP application, (Mail, news, etc) so why not develop an open IM protocol and let people release their own clients with their own feature-sets that operate within these designated standards?
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.
From the FCC web site: "Mr. Powell, a Republican, was nominated by President William J. Clinton on July 31, 1997, and confirmed by the United States Senate on October 28, 1997." That took about 10 seconds and a few mouse clicks.
It always amazes me that there are only a handful of instant messaging systems, browsers, audio/video players in mass use, when creating them is not that big a deal for your average c or c++ or java programmer with a little knowledge of network programming.
With the ACE framework (in c++), you can develop a cross-platform, distributed, fault-tolerant, real-time audio/video instant messaging system quite easily -- much more robust than anything AOL can come up with. You can add your own encryption and other security measures as well -- aren't we all sick of spy-ware anyways?
Well...just a thought.
When the rule was made IM was regarded as the next killer application. The fear was that IM was going to replace email and AOL would corner the market. Reality was IM is a usefull utility.
AOLs current problems have nothing to do with IM clients. They did well in the modem era because they had a easy to use product that was well marketed. AOL has done a great job fscking up the transition to broadband. Plus TimeWarner already had an online service prior to the merger... Roadrunner...
-- $G
SightSpeed uses a much better videoconferencing codec than H.323. It was first developed as the Linux-based Qvix.
When you discover that your online girlfriend with the modelling career is actually a dude who has a job posing as the "before" model to a weight-loss or acne-treatment company.
Or, when your online girlfriend who really is a model request video chat and discovers you aren't really built like Shwartzenneger...
Chats are a geek's last bastion of reality denial... throwing cameras in could make a lot of people sad.
I think it really depends on your provider, whom your connecting to, and a number of other things. Hell, I remember 2-3 years ago connecting on dialup at 56K, having a voicechat with a small video video open to a gal in Australia. I can't remember if I was sending video too, but I think so.
Of course, doing anything else but voice/video chat was near impossible because it sucked up bandwidth, but if I could manage it nicely enough with the video codecs for 3 years ago on a slower PC with dialup and netmeeting... I'm sure there are decent solutions today.
I think a lot of the problems nowadays are related to firewalls, and maybe stuff like kazaa clogging up traffic. I haven't really used video/audio conferencing in the last while simply because I haven't found a tool that plays nicely with my firewall and doesn't require an extra bounce off a centralized server (now that is slow).
a) In the case of video/audio conferencing, it could save a bundle on expensive phone-support calls.
b) When I used to get stuck with something, I'd pass on a question to some of my informed techie friends and hope they'd know the answer. Ditto the other way around. It's a great way to pass tech information/support along.
Yes, he was nominated by Clinton, but he was put in charge of the AOL/Time Warner stuff by Bush. He was even highly responsible for his father making vast amounts of money out of the AOL/Time Warner merge... though of course, Colin sold his stock just afterwards - coincedence!?
If you don't want to appear sloppy and probably ill informed, then get a spell checker (and use it) and check facts that are easy to verify. When Jerry Pournelle predicted that computer networks would make all knowledge easily available I wonder if he also predicted that so many would not bother to use that capability.
It's not goatse, but it's another one that you almost certainly don't want to see...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Since when were libertarians considered to be socialists? The Republicans are HUGE on government spending. The libertarians wouldn't spend a penny while the republicans will spend billions and the dems will spend ten times what the republicans would spend. That makes the pubs more socialist than the libertarians. Do your homework nex time.
Thanks for answering my offtopic questions. Will try and hope to get atleast one of the solutions working tomorrow.
I had understood Jabber to be a client, not a protocol. Guess I'm behind the times. I'll go look closer at it now, thanks.
This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.