Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the consolidation-is-the-name-of-the-game dept.
kriston writes "AOL
has just acquired the MP3[?] player WinAmp, the Spinner Networks
online music service, and SHOUTcast streaming audio
software." Excuse me while I pick my jaw up off the floor.
This is very shocking news. It seems all that AOL touches turns to crap and I have a bad feeling about the winamp player. It would be just like AOL to put banner adds or something equally as annoying in winamp as they have with AOL IM. If this isn't motivation to switch to the penguin I don't know what is.
I would try it out at least...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I might even use it, if it was any good. Unfortunately, there are a lot of little things that make Nutscrape really annoying for me to use, Mozilla isn't stable enough yet, and Opera doesn't even appear to be trying. At least IE for Linux would give Netscape some competition and possibly get them to clean up the annoying bits. But I seriously doubt Microsoft will produce anything useable for Linux anyway. They're not going to make any money off it, so why bother? I just wish someone would produce a browser for Linux that I actually liked using. I'd even (gasp!) pay for it.
Ugh, I wish I proofread that post before I hit submit.
It would be nice to be able to edit your posts after the fact, but that would probably just open the door for abuse. *sigh*
BTW the title came into my mind from the old "Hungry Hungry Hippos" commercials.
-OT
Re:Im sooo sick of sellouts.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
What are you talking about? These weren't some hippy weirdos out to stick to the man. They wrote an.mp3 player and kept it up.
WinAMP ISN'T free. @ 43,000 downloads a day and asking $10, they probably paid the bills nicely while hoping for their break. Which they got. Good for them. I wish all programmers could be so lucky.
If someone drove a dump truck full of money up to your house, you'd quickly loose your 'sellout' attitude. Money is needed to survive. And lots of money makes a nice survival.
Did you ever read the Winamp credits? Right now they are full of stunt coordinators, llama wranglers, and assistants to Fifi. There's even someone credited as a "Big Biz Exploiter" - now that will cease to be a joke.
Needless to say, the next WinAmp will have zero personality, just like AOL itself. And that's if we're lucky. If we're not, it will have ads and require a lengthy login during which you disclose your yearly income and toaster preferences.
Bye, llama, we're sure gonna miss you.
It is OSS Sound Drivers
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I had a problem w/ OSS sound drivers. I'm definitely not buying their sound drivers. It was pretty much the only thing that brought down my FreeBSD system. Personally, I run mpg123 w/ cmp3 curses frontend, that way I can use it in the console too. But is there an open source prog that can do the SHOUTcast thing (not serving, but receiving SHOUTcast streams)?
My jaw fell through the floor her as well. It is really insane that something like this would happen. I guess if the money is right you can buy anything.
But why oh why would they go and sell themselves to AOL? AOL of all the companies that could have bought them? eek!
The big fish always eat the smaller fish. But I just want to see a horde of small vicious pirhana gut the big fish to the bone. Is that too much to ask?
If you ran a small business struggling to be profitable and were approached by a huge corporation willing to put millions in your pockets in exchange for ownership of the business, would you really care who the buyer is?
IMHO Nullsoft successfully made themselves very juicy corporate buy-out bait by being a leader in the rapidly-expanding MP3 industry. If AOL hadn't picked them up, MS eventually would have anyway.
It will be very interesting to see what AOL does with Nullsoft. Unless they decide to phase out the Nullsoft programmers and leave Winamp development to their in-house programming staff, nothing too bad should happen.
Damn, I shoulda suspected things were headed that way when they got into that whole mini-browser thing with Amazon.com content... But the funny thing is, that there is a really neat trend emerging here to doing business online... A bunch of computer wizzes have a cool idea to make a nice free program; Once the beta is out and everyone likes it, they try making money on it, but can't; They sell it to AOL without making any money on it. Now if I could only think of a good easy to develop utility that everyone will not mind down;oading for free, I could make myself a cool 300Mil...
Nullsoft and MP3.com are defendants in a lawsuit brought by PlayMedia, alleging copyright infringement in the use of the AMP playback engine, according to CNET. I don't think this lawsuit involves the RIAA.
@Home has a better chance than AOL. Where I live, it's got a monopoly on broadband internet, on account of the cable monopoly. AOL has to hope the cable monopoly gets overturned or start laying pipe.
Screw Microsoft. Kill AOL. BTW, does anyone know of a Win32 MP3 player that supports the AMD K6-2 3DNow! instructions like Nitrane does(did)?
-Lx?
Re:heard of X11AMP? yes, and it's worthless.
by
Dj-Ohki
·
· Score: 1
(This is biased, you have been warned)
ive been running x11amp since version.9 (.7 didnt like SMP boxes..), it has crashed (its still in dev, of couse its gonna crash), but for it to take down your entire system? sounds like a bug in OSS, or are you running x11amp as root?
(if i really wanted to be an ass, i could blame it on a shitty OS that allows a user process to crash the box, but ive never ran *BSD, so im just gonna keep my mouth shut on it)
Hmm, if Bell Atlantic is so concerned about getting DSL to paying customers, they could expand their service areas a little quicker... I'd like some sort of fast Net access, and I'd rather go with BA than Media General.
-Waiting for my DSL line outside of Falls Church-
-- "We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - Major Mike Shearer, UK
I don't think AOL is taking any risk in compeating with Microsoft. Microsoft's biggest concern, with regards to AOL, is makeing sure that AOL does not make Netscape the default browser for their ~15 Million customers. So far AOL is keeping IE as the default browser. As long as IE stays put, MS will be happy.
And, as an investor in AOL, all I can say is this: Smart move. So far as I can tell, AOL is not stupid. I never really cared for them aquiring Netscape - that browser is becomming more dead every day. But AOL is very good at aquiring the best things out there... and so far they haven't screwed them up either. Take a look at the memory footprint of ICQ, and compare it to the older version. It has gotten a lot better, though I don't care for the ton of new bells and whistles. (reminds me of the ICQ home page.. ugh.) All the techies out there shouldn't be scared. They will always have their open source OS, and their favorite ISP's, etc. AOL provides a service that other's don't have, and for this, they are valuable.
I also agree, sure AOL has a problem with over commercialization and only tends to think about 1 key on the keyboard, the "$" key, and sure many of us hate the ISP service they provide (and some of the loser newbies on it as well), but so far AOL hasn't trashed ICQ and Netscape (even though I also agree that Netscape is dead) and they probably won't touch WinAMP and let Nullsoft do its thing. An example of leaving well enough alone is Tricon (headed here in Loo-ah-vul) which doesn't sell Taco Bell Mexican Pizza's with real KFC Chicken, or at least, they don't yet, and it doesn't make since for them to start. The same thing goes for AOL, it wouldn't make since to have WinAMP fans start using, say, MusicMatch, just because they through in an extra "$" so they won't. Even they are smart enough to understand this.
AOL might not be that bad...
by
TeknoDragon
·
· Score: 1
..because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise.
so what has AOL done to ICQ?
have the gone lawsuit happy against all the free ICQ clones? have you seen any AOL spam via ICQ? (well there is spam from spoofed UIN's but that's more likely from the free ICQ clients!)
at first I was afraid that I'd see the mandatory AD-space in the next version of ICQ...
but hey, that doesn't make sense!
if AOL was smart... they'd leave all these free things alone... free web browser... free music player... free message sender...
everyone LOVES FREE STUFF!!! so if AOL is the sole owner of all the free stuff that everyone loves than they can make it happily play allong with their own proprietary software...
there are so many free mp3 players and ICQ and AIM clones and replacements out there (not to mention mozilla) that if AOL ever tried to convert any of this stuff to a proprietary product they'd have horrendous competition....
I may be a little too optimistic but it isn't totally inconcievable that AOL will free up the lisences of winamp and ICQ (after they plug the security holes)
every step AOL takes in the non-proprietary direction is a step closer to the mindshare that has traditionally found AOL abhorrent (and made it the laughing stock of the internet)
if AOL decides to take this path I think it can be good for all parties involved...
Re:AOL might not be that bad...
by
rebrane
·
· Score: 1
Since when is winamp free? Last I checked, it was uncrippled shareware. I registered. Did you? (see below for more on this)
--neil
Re:AOL is out of control
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I love it...
AOL has all this money to buy other companies and their technology, but they can't be bothered to port their crappy software to Windows NT and they don't want to do anything to filter out the porno and get-rich-quick spam that's being splattered at their users, er, "members". (They're certainly not "customers" in the traditional sense, since they really don't get treated that way). Yep, they're out of control, all right.
Re:Maybe you've been brainwashed too...
by
Roofus
·
· Score: 1
Well, as long as I can rent a T1 and get Linux for free, there will be at least one ISP keeping it real;)
AOL gobbles and the masses pay for the pleasure
by
tomwhore
·
· Score: 3
[ed note. this one rambles a bit, but stick with me, it has a payoff]
The simple fact is this...Much of the value systems found in folk who care about the net is absent from the mainstream masses who are now the majority of the net.
But who the hell wants to be mainstream? If your looking at being a pseudo geek, some modern day wanabe who wears the right clothes, speaks the right speak and uses all the Hip Appz the you are doomed to loose. You will always be exposed for the utter lamer you are.
Things were a bit different when the implemntation of advancement was in the hands( wether by procalim,dictate, or by stealing them) of the people doing the grunt work of building the code. Back then you could be a vlaue to the growth or a bystander to it or a particpant in its day in day out evolution in one of a million ways.
Now its suits, roots for hire, and loots. Money talk and jihads are nice PR. People feel that by using the right appz they are "netSavy" or tht by being seen reading the right mags they will be "in". Dont worry that you cant understand, or even try to , 3/4 of the Linux Journal you walk around the office with. Dont worry that if push came to shove you wouldnt be able to get your rig back up and running without a whinny call to Tech Support.
Which lead us to the point, that being about Winamp being snatched up by AOL.
SO WHAT.
If you are on/. and are the salve of one particular brand name, you are doomed to loose. If you are so weak as to let other people force you to use softs and apps not of your liking, and let yourself be trapped in a closed system hell, then you are doomed to loose.
When winamp came up it was heralded as the great saviour of the music distro sceen, and it was. It had its glory and is now moving to another phase. I say fucking great, congrats to the AZ boys and gals and I hope you save a little of the cash for your golden years.
To those that need to be on the bleedig edge of NonCorporate living its time to get a new mp3 player. BIG FUCKING DEAL. There are a whole slew of em and more comming out.
The folks at Nullsoft did thier thing, they got in the dirt and built something that was of use to the nets growth and use. Nothing can take that away from them. They did it, and if your gooing to belittle that fact, ask yourself...what have you done to make the net a better place?
Mirror time folks. The Nullsofties and folks like them deserve to take their creations and do what they want with them. Nothing is stopping the folks at Kjofol or Sonique or Icecast from taking up the ball. Nothing at all.
Its the net, and its a big old tumble of fun. If you cant stand the chaos, go get an AOL disk and enjoy the massmarket version of it; beacuse honey, its gonna be a bumpy ride and I dont want to be dealing with your getting sick everytime we hit some turbulence.
Onward folks and keep your eyes on the prize
-- Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
Re:AOL gobbles and the masses pay for the pleasure
by
RomulusNR
·
· Score: 1
If you are on/. and are the salve of one particular brand name, you are doomed to [lose]. If you are so weak as to let other people force you to use softs and apps not of your liking, and let yourself be trapped in a closed system hell, then you are doomed to [lose].
How does that affect this issue? I mean, if you're a big "Winamp fan", then perhaps you're happy about this latest development, cause now Nullsoft will have expanded funding, maybe hire more people, and improve the program beyond what it is.
Sure, I use Winamp, and for the same reason I use Netscape 3. I find both programs superior to what I've been able to find in terms of viable competitors.
But how does one's dislike of a small "independent" startup going AOLwards on you have anything to do with this mythical church of the "pseudo-geek", of having to own all the kewl 0DAY 4PPZ?
When winamp came up it was heralded as the great saviour of the music distro sceen, and it was. It had its glory and is now moving to another phase.
That's right... had. But which happened first -- the end of the glory, or the beginning of the acquisition?
The Nullsofties and folks like them deserve to take their creations and do what they want with them.
Sure thing. (And whenever someone points that out, the inference is "...so don't complain." Why not?)
If you want me to believe that Nullsoft's only viable option at this point, and I'm not just talking about the company, but the four people who operate it, was to be bought by AOL, I simply won't believe it.
Perhaps they feel they "owe" it to their users to keep the project alive. Perhaps they feel that they's put too much effort into it and they don't feel they've gotten the full ride for their quarter. I don't know, but I don't think this was a do-or-die situation. And I don't know why we're not entitled to criticise them for it.
I don't agree with the "boycott winamp" cry, but I should be able to work my way toward encouraging companies to release products and take opportunities that meet my own values. Not everyone tries to make their money by prettying themselves to look good for AOL, and those people get more of my respect than those that don't.
Regards,
-- Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
Just a misgiving here, but if AOL has NullSoft, they would also own the copyrights associated with the WinAmp player . . . right?
Given that X11Amp uses the exact same user interface as WA, it seems conceivable that AOL could order a "cease and desist" for use of their UI graphic design (whereas Justin/former_NullSoft would probably not have cared, given that Windoze is his territory)
If AOL is seeking exclusivity over the WinAMP brand name/image, that might be a likely Step 2 . . . .
-- iSKUNK!
Re:Well, wow.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Well considering the BLISTERING development pace that has occured with ICQ since its procurement...
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Alex+Belits
·
· Score: 1
Like someone else said, about the best thing about IE over Netscape is using IE to read Slashdot, because it "backs" up discussion threads as one would think it should be implemented.
And until it's done use the middle button.
-- Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Look, if AOL walked up to MY door with a sack full of money, I wouldn't turn 'em away. In my opinion, grousing about somebody else "selling out" is restricted to people who haven't been given the opportunity to sell out. If it gives the ppl at Nullsoft the financial scratch to go do something else cool, bully for them! I like Winamp a lot. It's feature rich, nicely modular, and well-supported. However, there are only so many features you can throw at an audio app before it becomes bloaty, and I think that Winamp might be nearing that cusp. Bully for them if they sold it and want to go do something new. (Like, say, sailing to Barbados or whatever...that's what I'd do!)
If it was Microsoft's sack full of money, on the other hand, I'd find a big dog to feed 'em to. A guy's got to have his standards! : )
So let's review here: AOL has "content solutions" via its software and WinAMP. Apple has "content solutions" via Quicktime (which plays MP3s, btw). Microsoft has "content solutions" via Windows Media Player (or whatever their latest attempt is called) and Microsoft Audio (which DOESN'T play MP3s). AOL has the Sun/Java platform behind it, Apple has MacOS/MacOS X behind it, and Microsoft has Windows behind it.
Looks like the convergence wars have 3 sides.
-- -Rafi
Remove the Spanish to email me.
heard of X11AMP? yes, and it's worthless.
by
Lx
·
· Score: 1
i have. Couple it with OSS, and you've got a product that'll take down your system faster than ever imagined possible. I'm sorry, but when an mp3 player can take down FreeBSD, it's total crap.
There'll be no battle. RIAA already accepts MP3, they just want it copy protected (i.e. they want to remotely control your music assets, REGARDLESS of format). Thus expect AOL to build RIAA approved switches and triggers into their MP3 clients. If you have no pirated MP3s, do not exchange music with friends and do not rip CDs for personal use then you shouldn't care. I take that back, you will almost certainly have your privacy violated by AOL if you use their software, with or without RIAA involvement. In short, if you love you DIVX player, you'll love the new AOL offering.
Re:I hope they know what they're getting into.
by
altman
·
· Score: 1
My take on this would be "He cares, but not *that* much". He's sold the company, not his soul - yes, there may be anti-competitive clauses about him not leaving and writing any other MP3 players for a bit, but he's still free to persue a life of religious fulfillment (or whatever), and he's also a considerable amount richer than before. I'd be happy:)
Who cares about WinAmp? Winamp is to mp3 like Redhat is to Linux. Besides, it has a crappy hard-to-read UI and only one good plugin (Cthugha) . The thing to be more concerned about is ShoutCast. The potential of this technology, along with it's current distribution model, makes it an awesome thing to behold. Will they leave it alone, start charging site licensing fees? Buy up the makers of mp3spy (and as a result, Gamespy 3D), and stick AIM in for the chat feature?
AOL's history with acquisitions so far is "don't touch a good thing" (and this is an actual quote from somewhere).
--
But isn't the purpose of the Doomsday machine lost if you keep it a secret!
{I doubt anyone will see this comment; the post is several days old by now.}
> Buy up the makers of mp3spy... ?
The insightful moderator comment is right - I just read on mp3.com that checkout.com has bought a large chunk of gamespy. This company is owned by Michael Ovitz. They're going to use mp3spy to promote their content. For all the details, try: http://mp3.com/news/265.html
[sigh]... I though someone could just make a nice looking front end for shoutcast (the web site is rather ugly and slow to load, esp. the rock/alternative genre). But they have to get bought up in the crazy rush to invest in anything having the symbols M, P, and 3 in its name. Too bad. Why can companies just leave well enough alone? Now I have to go back to using that ugly site (unless someone wants to make a free version?)
Re:Shoutcast --ph3aR
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The same listings are available at yp.icecast.org. Much nicer looking too...:)
It doesn't matter. Equating Shoutcast with the be-all-end-all of streaming MP3 technology is as much a sin as saying Redhat is Linux, too. Shoutcast is just another streaming player, and really no more different from RealAudio or any other streaming format except for the files they're sending over the connection. Very little hubris goes into the statement that I could have probably written Shoutcast or a suitable alternative (sans all the Win32 GUI stuff) if I had the time and inclination, as could have a lot of people on/. Thus it really doesn't matter what AOL decides to do with Shoutcast. Even in the worst case scenario (AOL colluding with RIAA to produce an SDMI based Shoutcast, or, worse, just killing it) there will always be someone out there willing to write an open version. In this case, it's Icecast, and it's already starting to take form.
--
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
Who worries about MicroSUCK ruling the world? If they go on at this rate, AOL will *own* the world. Already three pieces of software I use every time I boot Windoze (and one I use in linux) are owned by them...
Just as everyone was getting bored of Bill Gates as Satan, here comes AOL.
-- " There is a rational explanation for everything.
There is also an irrational one. "
What is a good FREE MP3 player?
by
Nafai7
·
· Score: 0
I need one that will run under Windoze since I am stuck using it at work...
I'd like one that is compatable with Icecast (shoutcast).
Re:What is a good FREE MP3 player?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
SONIQUE!!! http://www.sonique.com Free, and uses icecast
Re:What is a good FREE MP3 player?
by
TwistedGreen
·
· Score: 1
you could check out Sonique... never used it, but i've heard it's good... that's www.sonique.com.
Re:What is a good FREE MP3 player?
by
Utter
·
· Score: 1
Freeamp works on both Linux and Windows. Not as good as WinAmp but good enough for me and it's free (I think the license was GPL but I can't remember exactly).
Your thesis breaks down when Microsoft products are considered.
That is really not the same thing. The quality of Micros~1 products has not gone down, since it has never been up. People had to buy crap from Micros~1 when that was the only you could get without spending too much money. So many simply accepted the fact that the OS was supposed to crash once every hour, and didn't know it could be any other way.
Now more and more are starting to use alternative systems such as Linux, but windows will live a while longer on people buying it out of habit.
True enough, but AIM's ads are relatively unintrusive. (Oh, dear me, look what I've become...tolerating ads...) It's still well-designed.
MS doesn't want payment, they want IE. And that's true, AOHell'rs don't realize that they're using IE.
I think that AOL has something like a 16% market share...The Monopoly wants the stats on IE, they don't want payment. If they want more money they can milk it from the OEMs with licensing fees.
it's a bit less serious than freedom... :)
by
Artemis+Entreri
·
· Score: 1
It's not purely monopolization that we have to worry about. It's only natural to assume that some companies will try and merge with, or aquire, all the companies that they can. Granted, I still think Microsoft has it's head up it's..well..you know. But what worries me is...what do you think will happen when AOL gets it's hands on the most popular mp3 player? Is AOL going to buy into the whole anti-mp3 campain, are we going to have to pay for it? The acquisition of winamp and shoutcast by a conglomerate makes me shudder, because there's no end to what they can do to what has, up to now, been one of the joys of computing..free expression of music. Oh well..we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed.
Spank me if I'm wrong, but AOL doesn't own Mirabilis or anything ICQ-related. They make Instant Messenger, which I believe is in direct competition with ICQ for the ytalk GUI market.
If you look, there is no '=' in my post... I did not say that more money equals better development. The makers of winamp will will now be able to concentrate more on the development of this product.
Another thing... what is the deal with everyone all of a sudden saying
"Looks like im gonna have to find another mp3 player!"
No, you dont, you shouldnt. If winamp is what you have been using, use it. Just because AOL bought them, doesnt make it a bad product. I still use, and love netscape, guess what? AOL owns them!
grow up, use what you want to use, but dont base it on the financial backer.
Three other posts have already voiced pretty clearly my opinion. No one 'sold out'. WinAMP is a product, a service, and a neat gadget. It is fully within the ethical, moral, legal, and reasonable bounds for Justin and crew to sell WinAMP to AOL, or even to Sun, Microsoft, or Apple if they so chose. It is not in AOL's court to do something cool and productive with their handful of gadgets; maybe legitamize mp3s in a way the Rio cannot, but selling CDs, services, and other goods by offering free mp3 content from AOL music broadcast servers, or something equally innovative.
Or they do something stupid, and team Nullsoft gets a nice paycheck, and AOL loses a bunch of respect and money.
Good for team Nullsoft! Way to go!
-AS
--
-AS
*Pikachu*
Winamp contaminated??? What happened to MP3Studio
by
GW+Hayduke
·
· Score: 0
does anyone have any information on what happened to mp3Studio (formerly available from mp3.nederland.net) I lost the tar-ball during a system re-install and trying to get it back or better yet, does anyone have a link to a mirror? (yeah I know this is a plea for sware and not a followup to the story, but damn when is AoL going to stop??? with the porting the new AoL 5.0 (incorporation IE5.x of course) to Linux?? oh yeah and I bet RedHat will be the first to jump on that boat..... hmm is that an iceberg I see in the distance?
AOL is now getting to the point of being the phone company, television station, magazine publisher and radio station all rolled into one. the still don't even support NT much less any real OS.
Well... I have 3 users that keep M$ Winbloat just beacuse of AOL. That's 3 x [the users they tell] x [the users they tell], etc..
Get the idea? I do, I hate it but I do.
-- If you lika me like I lika you...
Re:Can you say: Monopoly?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A monopoly is defined as one company with tight control of a specific industry. AOL is the opposite of a monopoly, they have small portions of many markets. They are large corporation, and you can hate them for that, but they aren't a monopoly.
I wonder what the consequences will be for the lawsuit against MP3.com and Nullsoft? AOL certainly has very deep pockets, lots of lawyers, and the willingness to use them.
--
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
Re: Legal Implications
by
Hasdi+Hashim
·
· Score: 2
I feel like I was literally taken from behind. I never saw this one coming.
Scenario #1: RIAA's lawyers will back off. They took on Nullsoft and MP3.com because RIAA knew they couldn't afford to be tied up in litigation costs. AOL is another matter (You wanna mess with me?)
Scenario #2: RIAA's lawyers will give it a shot. Surely AOL has spare change somewhere to cover the legal expenses, reach settlement, etc.
Scenario #3: RIAA will cut a deal with AOL. This is probably the end of cheap music distribution as we know it.
This better be a joke. What were these two monkeys thinking for signing up with AOL? Lesser of two evils?
Rod Z
Re: Legal Implications
by
Bill+Currie
·
· Score: 1
And PlayMedia are big enough for this sort of thing? What's the bet they're backed by the RIAA?
--
Bill - aka taniwha -- Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak
Re:Well, wow.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I am pretty confident that AOL can screw up anything...including winamp. fortunately for me I dont use winamp anymore...x11amp
Scary that AOL owns three of four, eh? I think so....
Why is that scary? There are plenty of instant messanger clients, MP3 players, UnZippers and Browsers in the world... who cares if AOL is buying the most popular ones. If the quality goes down, people will switch in droves.
If I were AOL it certainly makes a hell of a lot more sense to buy ICQ than say, Tribal Voice, or Netscape instead of Opera, or Nullsoft instead of whoever makes Sonique..
--
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
clawson
·
· Score: 1
...probably about as many people who have downloaded IE for HP/UX and Sloaris.
Do I worry? No, because I have no plans to install it. Like someone else said, about the best thing about IE over Netscape is using IE to read Slashdot, because it "backs" up discussion threads as one would think it should be implemented.
And the only ONLY cool about the Winamp login, which will be sorely missed...Was the wonderful greeting...Winamp really whips the llamas ass. I can't wait until there's some stupid AOL idiot-fuck saying "Welcome to AOLAMP"
This is a sad day for cool programs.
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
Almost there. What about this little tidbit? Check out Katt's article on IE/Linux.
I don't know why, but AOL is annoying... This brings a couple things to mind: 1.) What is AOL's track record with these buy-outs? How has AOL affected the stuff they have bought? Until a couple months ago, I was an avid Netscape user, but I noticed little difference after AOL bought them out. Can anyone tell me if AOL ruined Netscape? The same goes for ICQ. ICQ99 got kind of annoying with its plethora of options previously unavailable in ver98, but at least most of them could be optioned out so they don't clutter everything up. I'm only asking because I haven't yet noticed any adverse effects from AOL sticking its nose in these areas, but then again I might not be paying close enough attention. 2.) Has anyone noticed the 2-party trend? AOL M$ --- -- netscape ie winamp media player icq future m$ messenger
it seems like everything is getting swallowed up by either side, like the U.S. two-party gov't. Repubs:Dems::AOL:M$.
Agree? Disagree? A little help, please.
-- www.poak.net
Next stop RealNetwork
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
well, jotting down top 20 download, and weeding for internet/communication software that AOL hasn't own , two just stick out like a good candidate.
just think about it....
*real network (but stock is too high at this moment, this is a perfect candidate. It has network/community, it is widely recognize software, not to mention net broadasting software, just a matter of time before they got gobble up. and remember real network already peddle AOL IM)
*mIRC (this piece of gem is ready for the picking, specially if AOL is just buying name brand recognizion. in contrast to developing this relatively not so complex piece of software)
Re:I hope they know what they're getting into.
by
atomly
·
· Score: 1
Your naivete is kind of refreshing, but, at the same time, naive. It doesn't matter that WinAMP is a successfull product, they just bought it for, as you said, the name recognition. SHOUTCast and WinAMP give AOL a big name in the MP3 market, but that doesn't mean that they won't be murdered with a quickness. It's standard corporate fare; buy a superior product, milk it for a little while, and then turn it into crap.
And, as far as Spinner is concerned, I'd be amazed if they didn't turn into crap. AOL isn't seeking to do this, but it's the sort of thing that happens when a big company who fears its customers begins to run a radio station. It's just like the consolidation in the real radio market right now, it just leads to mediocrity. Why would they focus on Drum and Bass or Acid Jazz when 78% of their listeners prefer Britney Spears because all of their traffic will be surfing in from AOL? It's the Almighty Buck and AOL anything but ignores that. AOL isn't scared of "selling out" or anything to that effect, they're just in it for the quick dollar.
WinAMP will be turned into crap, SHOUTCast will probably remain good, and Spinner will slowly get shitty as some CEO realizes "I don't like that rap music, we need more 50's" or something to that effect.
And, well, as for Nullsoft being the little guy, they just gave up. If Justin Frankel is still at AOL in two years I'd be amazed. It's like Netscape selling out to AOL; sure, they revolutionized the world, but this is like admitting defeat. AOL will bring in their better trained, better brainwashed coders and Nullsoft will be worked out of the mix slowly. Or if not, the Nullsoft people will go nuts because they're unable to handle the corporate structure above them. I don't see how anybody could go from running their own startup to working at AOL; it'd be complete culture shock. I know that I, working at a startup, would quit the day that we sold out to a company like AOL.
Anyone notice how much AOL's logo looks like the infamous eye in the pyramid? Think about it.
--
"Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it."
It's really about AOL vs Microsoft
by
Michael+Snoswell
·
· Score: 1
It seems AOL is preparing to take on Microsoft.
I know that sounds like paranoia but consider this: AOL paid out major dollars for Netscape, then said "No we won't use it." Yeah, right, we believe you. They said they didn't want to hurt the relationship with Microsoft that gives them an icon on the Win98 desktop.
So they spend $800m(?) or something just to save little buddy Netscape and with no thought of business advantages - aside from the relicensing of Netscape server products to Sun, which has just recently announced dropping it's own Web server sw in favour of Netscape, which is owned by AOL with whom Sun took out their "I'll scratch my back you scratch mine" deal regarding hw in exchange for advertising. Who bought *that* story? Sun wanting to do some $400m of advertising directed exclusively to AOL clients? Ha ha ha ha [head falls off in embarassment]
So we can assume AOL *will* use Netscape. I recall reading something about the next version of the AOL client being "fully HTML compliant". Their deal with Microsoft would have expired by then no doubt anyway.
Then we have Microsoft's recent loud noises about a new audio standard "a bit like MP3" (Windows Media 4.0) that includes some kind of protection for artists and publishers. Go to the MS web site and click on the Public Enemy link and try to play it. I have the latest version of WinAmp and it loads but gives an error - the protocol is sufficiently different to not be MP3 compliant. With the MS stamp of corporate approval and their marketing, Windows Media format will sweep aside MP3 freeware encoders/players and become the defacto standard. It ships with IE5, Win98, Office2000,Win2000 - it will be on a *lot* of desks. I know that MP3 is wonderfull just the way it is, but MS don't see it that way as they don't control the standard.
So, AOL see this burgeoning market in streaming audio and audio formats as being a big up and coming money maker and MS has a 3-6 month jump on them. They *know* they're going to be changing to Netscape browsers RSN and their users won't be able to access MS's new sound format files easily. What to do. Well when you're as big as AOL you buy the competition to MS and use it as a weapon. I think AOL are on the up and up and this will be an offensive war (ie AOL doesn't look to be sitting back and defending it's territory, they're moving forward, bless their little socks. Personally I hate 'em because the number of friends that got sucked into non standards compliant browsers, emails clients etc whom I have to tailor my email for).
Oh, and don't AOL use Suns, SGI (mainly?) and BSD boxes? What does that tell you about their technical inclination towards what Microsoft would like the world's businesses to run on - NT??
I think we're starting to see some major battle lines being drawn. It's not NT vs Unix. It Microsoft vs Other Companies. Keep a watch on AOL. Oh, and something is going to happen over at IBM, I'm sure of it. I bet you thought they've been kind of quiet lately. I think with the IBM witness at the DOJ case coming up the gloves will start coming off IBM. They're looking very strong financially.
So this isn't NT vs Linux. That's kind of what seems to be the frontline for we Linuxites. But take a step back and see that the HP,DELL,SGI,IBM uptake of Linux is because Linux is a weapon against Microsoft. MS wields NT, Office, Win9x and some other "standards" that flow from that.
Sure each nose-to-nose battle is NT/Linux, ASP/PHP, DCOM/CORBA etc etc, but that's short sighted. This is why I think ppl in the Linux community argue over suits, corporate types and where RedHat is going. This war needs to be fought on all levels. People in the kernel or drivers or wm battle front shouldn't belittle the necessity of the people fighting by corporate alliances, packaging distributions, binary only applications etc. We are all on the same side.
A guess we have to consider why we are on this side and what the goal is. Is MS the enemy? I would tend to think that MS is the *current* enemy because it is the most obvious incarnation of what many people oppose: freedom to choose without bias in a competitive, non-prejudiced sales, marketing and technical "marketplace" (free sw/hw or otherwise).
MS is a bump in the road to this goal. Some people wil see the bump, some will shout out "Lookout!", some will drive around, some will go so far around they'll go off the road into a ditch, some will end up going cross country, some will ride straight over the top. However it happens, the bump will eventually be behind us and won't look so bad in the rear-vision mirror. There will always be more bumps and maybe the wreckage of some crashed cars:-) but remember, that we will never, ever, ever stop. We will always go forwards.
My 2.5c worth.
cheers Michael Snoswell
-- pithy comment
Re:AOL to buy WinZip? A bad thing?
by
levik
·
· Score: 1
You know, the more I think about it, the less I think of this as a neccessarily bad thing... I mean, OK, so AOL, the closest thing to an internet monopoly has bought a yet another program... But in this case, unlike with Netscape or ICQ, there is little leverage to be gained by doing so. The MP3 standard isn't likely to change because of the aquisition, and the company hardly has the power to erase all of those free copies of Winamp already spread on everyone's computers. If you don't like AOL (As I do), just don't get the next version... In my case, I stopped getting new versions of winamp as soon as they added that mini browser for Amazon.com... I'm just glad that the guys at Nullsoft finally got paid for their efforts. I mean face it, how many of you registered winamp after 14 days? This way, AOL picks up the tab. So what if they buy up Winzip too? Is the zip file format likely to change? I doubt it, and as long as it doesn't, nobody's forcing you to upgrade to the AOL branded version of the program. If they do decide to change the format, who's going to support it with so much of the software compatible with the old standard? Therefore, I think that the only way for AOL to make money on items such as Winamp or WinZip is to somehow sell ads to go right into the program, something that Nullsoft has already done by including the mini-browser...
See my posting. But the short of it is this: AOL is a slow, clunky, behemoth. Even after all of these years, my mother still needs a separate ISP to get reliable service on AOL because it kicks her off all of the time.
But, beyond that, AOL is becoming HUGE, as you noted. Too huge. It's time that we nipped these companies in the bud before we let them grow too large (MSFT) and become unmanageable (MSFT).
Nevermind. I stand spanked. AOL does in fact own Mirabilis, Inc.
-- --
Ryan
Re:Extrapolate from experence: Netscape
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
FRAMESET is part of the HTML 4.0 specification, which by any standard came out a hell of a lot later than the initial frame implementation in Netscape. At the time, HTML 3.0 was out on the table with its BANNER element that both supported the non-scrolling capabilities of frames and worked with older browsers. (It had other problems, but they were small compared to the problems with frames.) Its inclusion in 4.0 is a de facto standardization - FRAMESET is "standard" in the same way the Win32 API is, it just happened to be used so much that people found it easier to declare it a standard than to fight the tide.
When Netscape first brought out frames (a mistake that we're still all paying for), they were doing so instead of following the standard and implementing BANNER. In retrospect, neither FRAMESET nor BANNER offered anything good to most users, but my point stands: "release once a week, every week" was the motto during the days that Netscape was not only trying to decommoditize HTML, but succeeding. And I'd rather not have those days back.
Re:This *could* be good...
by
kriston
·
· Score: 1
Tik is a very good open-source project run by AOL that essentially makes it the be-all and end-all of instant messenger clients. You can add all sorts of things to it, including Slashdot stories. It's definitely Done Right with respect to the online community. I suspect the new media acquisitions today will also be Done Right, as have Netscape, ICQ, and CompuServe.
I think AOL has the upper hand in any competition with Microsoft. First of all, AOL is trouncing MSN in terms of user base. Secondly, if Microsoft sufficiently angers AOL, AOL can just threaten to replace the default MSIE that comes with the AOL software with Netscape.
A monopoly isn't only tight control over an industry, or even loose control over an industry. That's only one type of monopoly - a horizontal monopoly. The other kind of monopoly, vertical, is where you control everything required to make a product or products - from essential minerals (or just basic components) all the way through to the finished product which allows you to far undercut the prices of other vendors who have to buy their supplies regularly. For example, a corporation that owns oil rigs, oil boats, refineries, gas stations, tanker-truck outfits, and an advertising company can be said to have a vertical monopoly even if they don't own ALL of a certain kind of business.
So, how is AOL a monopoly? It doesn't own the majority of IP's, nor does it own a vertical monopoly as far as I can tell. Perhaps if they made their own modems and computers, or if AOL was used for nearly ninety percent of all internet data transfers (averaged by number of files, not bytes transferred).
As it stands, AOL is merely a company with it's fingers in a whole bunch of pies. Adobe, Corel, and Macromedia can all claim the same.
Of course, Microsoft is a different issue, because they control the OS, the hardware, and most of the major software packages - AND they don't play fair. As far as I have heard, nothing AOL has done truly deserves the stigma of "Monopoly". Yet. It is a disturbing trend here, but I'm waiting for the AOL-only games and AOL-Office suite of applications.
More than likely, Frankel, et al. are named as defendants in this case. Thus, they had to get lawyers. Probably what will happen is that Frankel&Co. will motion for removal of defense and replace his current lawyer(s) with AOL certified lawyers with AOL paying the bottom line. Then, it will be up to the old US system to figure out the verdict.
If it's against Nullsoft, more than likely they'll only pay pennies in comparison to AOL's worth, because it's arguable that this acquisition won't affect the ruling (shouldn't in a perfect world, but it does cause the eyes to go green). But, then again if it's in favor of Nullsoft, the costs for defense are covered by AOL.
One last thing worth mentioning. No one even knows if that above scenario was part of the acquisition. Might be that Frankel&Co. have to handle that themselves without the big boys involved.
What makes other players better is, of course, relative to your point of view and needs.
K-Jofol - Supposedly the fastest mp3 player for windows. Great skins, great looking, lots of options. Free.
Sonique - Also great looking, with fun analyzers, and very well visually designed, as well as having pitch control and such things.
SoundPlay(for BeOS) - Aint the prettiest thing around, but it uses WinAmp skins, and has the best pitch control of any player - it can play anywhere from 400% to -400%. With the CDDA FS add-on, you can directly alter the pitch of music from a CD. Has options for crossfading. Comes with effects processors. New beta even features the beginning of a vocal removal option. Costs 12 bucks, but very much worth it for me.
CL-AMP(for BeOS) - Almost a winamp clone, but with crossfading and pitch control (but won't play backwards:) Easy interface. Your basic well-done mp3 player for BeOS.
Sound quality isn't that much of an issue, and reliability only varies slightly, but performance can be a little more important.
It's not that WinAmp was bad, but we have to switch now, and there are more feature-packed players out there.
In my mind, this calls into question some rather large industry alliances. Where does AOL officially stand with regard to Micros~1? Possibly more important, where does AOL stand with relation to the RIAA? Anyone have semi-detailed information on either of these?
To my knowledge, Micros~1 is signed on with the SDMI, which would put them on the side of the RIAA.
Hmmmmm...
With the impending release of Micros~1's new mp3-capable Media Player, AOL now owns (at least) two large (in terms of users) pieces of software that directly compete with Micro$oft. I'm curious to see what Microsoft's reaction to this will be, and even more curious about their current relations with AOL.
Despite my personal distaste (slight understatement) for AOL, unless they're up to something really senaky, I can see some very good things coming from their ownership of the most popular mp3 player in the world. At a bare minimum, this should result in more people using the mp3 format, which will hopefully bury the SDMI before they can even release it.
Does AOL really have this much balls? Do they dare stand opposed to both Micros~1 and the RIAA?
I can't wait to see how this one plays out:)
--
"I think any time you expose vulnerabilities it's a good thing."
-Attorney General Janet Reno
It looks like the behemoth of AOL may be capable of taking on the OS monopoly of MS. The only question is where this'll leave the independents who don't team up with either AOL or MS.
Don't kid yourself
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
AOL will settel the lawsuit faster than you can say "secure digital music initiative". Expect the next version of WinAMP to have some new anti-piracy "features".
Well, I think some people are bashing AOL in a knee-jerk type fashion. It seems we're calling a different company "The Next Microsoft" every day.
On the other hand, I don't exactly have the warm fuzzies. AOL's been picking up high profile netgadgets lately (Netscape, Instant Messenger {was this ICQ?}, now Shoutcast and WinAMP). I would guess that they are trying to corner the market on hip cybertools, so as too attract even more users to their network service.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with wanting to be popular, but AOL's current software practices leave a lot to be desired in the area of privacy, and forced advertising. These new aquisitions might turn out to be harmless party favours promoting the AOL name, or they might turn into trogan-horse like demographic harvesters. It'll probably be a little of both. I personally hate adware (even though it allows "free" services, I know) and hope that people develop marketing-free alternatives. Maybe I'll even be able to help:)
I don't know how serious they are about promoting open software either. They do seem to have left a good part of netscape/mozilla intact, but I'm still not convinced they really want to give anything back to the net without strings attached.
What's wrong with that? The world certainly doesn't need 15 MP3 players. Two is plenty. The programming time would be better spent on something new, rather that people reinventing the wheel every week. Look at all the lame IRC clients out there?
--
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
Re:Hungry Hungry AOL :)
by
Tardigrade
·
· Score: 1
That's why alot of the mp3 ``players'' use the same audio rendering engine. The only difference is the interface (ui and api), and a few tweaks.
Re:Hungry Hungry AOL :)
by
Tardigrade
·
· Score: 1
How many programming skills have people developed by making YA App?
1. Monopolies must own a huge majority of the markets they control in order to truly be monopolies. As far as the Internet goes, I doubt very much that this is the case: while AOL may be one of the largest online services around, the sheer number of people on the internet, whether through large ISP's like GTE or BellSouth, or through local ISP's, keeps AOL from the Lion's share of marketshare. Also, since ISP's don't need to own most of the market to stay in business, I see little danger (at this point) of ISP's going belly up en masse and leaving us with only AOL and a few others.
I am not an MBA, but I know that there are two types of monopolies - vertical and horizontal.
Horizontal monopolies own all of one market (pre-breakup AT&T is a good example). Vertical monopolies own shares in many related markets, allowing them to be one stop shopping locations (IBM has at times been an example).
Each type type of monopoly has it own perils. AOL seems to be moving towards being a vertical monopoly, and that is something to worry about. Vertical monopolies can do nasty things to markets.
-- Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
Re:force feedback
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"The Community" is not relevant to the AOL - WinAmp deal. WinAmp is widely used among all sorts of people who use *Windows*, and I am not aware of a Linux version of WinAmp. Win - Amp, get it?
Who cares if a tiny handful of self-righteous geeks uses another mp3 player. If you are so pure, why are you using Windows?
This is not your revolution and it is for sale. WinAmp never was free, it's shareware. The developers of WinAmp have been threatened with a very costly lawsuit and a sale to AOL is a way for them to avoid a total loss and profit handsomely from the work they have done in offering a fine product at a very low cost. Yes, you can use WinAmp forever without paying the registration fee, but it still never was free.
Just stop using Windows and you won't have to worry about finding yourself another MP3 player because the player you use with Linux will work just fine.
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
Trepidity
·
· Score: 1
If you won't use Winamp because it's owned by AOL, I certainly hope you aren't using Netscape. We wouldn't want to be hypocritical now would we?
Well this is pretty shocking news. I guess when someone waves big money in front of your nose it's pretty hard to concentrate on the ideals of OSS. Mind you I don't know if one can realistically blame anyone...they created the software, and they can do with it as they see fit. It's just sad mostly. I hope shoutcast/winamp remain free for at least personal use.
Let's be perfectly clear here. WinAmp is (was?) not OSS, free software, GNU, or anything else. It is shareware. You have to pay to use it legally. No source is available. I suspect AOL will make it free. They do not charge for other software - they charge for service.
Jason Dufair "Those who know don't have the words to tell
--
Jason Dufair
"Those who know don't have the words to tell
and the ones with the words don't know too w
Thanks for the info. I haven't played with digital sound editing, but I am aware of the loss involved with pulling voice from music.
Conceivably though, if I could get to tinkering (which if I took the time to look at whether any of the linux *amp apps are gpled, or otherwise open), I could write something that would let me select the exact frequencies of the artist's voice to reduce the loss involved.
If WinAmp was OSS, I'd probably be able to split the music and voice frequencies into to mp3 files and use the voice samples I've been wanting to use with Acid DJ. I would just go in tinker with code, and press a play/record combo that lets me do that. Anyone actually know if there is something like this, btw?
Actually you can do it with Cool Edit Pro using a 30 band graphic EQ. However there is no way to seperate "voice" and "music" freqs in a file becuase the file is flat and if the voice is close to an instrumnet you'll pull both. So even if Winamp was OSS it wouldn't be able to do what you wanted it to. If you know much about sound editing you'd know that the so called kareoke machines that remove the vox make the rest of the song sound like crap because it messes with the mad range freqs. I love OSS but it doesn't necessatailly make everyhting better.
This is what pisses ESR off the most. Windoze users who think that open source == shareware.
If WinAmp was OSS, I'd probably be able to split the music and voice frequencies into to mp3 files and use the voice samples I've been wanting to use with Acid DJ. I would just go in tinker with code, and press a play/record combo that lets me do that. Anyone actually know if there is something like this, btw?
Anyhow, most every cool app for ms operating systems is not and never will be oss. They do it all for the money.
Most every cool development tool is oss, cause us geeks got smart and use a real os to do things with.
Anyhow, as a dual booter, I will say that I have felt no intrusion with my icq, and furthermore don't expect it from winamp. Aol may have all of the info that I choose to give them through icq, but they don't know everything about me. Same goes for winamp. Users will recall that since 2.08 or so, you've had to enter in vague details about you for demographic? purposes.
Who cares, you're as anonymous as you choose to be. There are tools out there. That's why I wish people would just quit bitching about all of this and sit back and say hmmm, and get back to hacking their l-boxes.
-- ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
Scratch another cool startup.
by
paulbort
·
· Score: 1
Damn. The one thing (besides the software) that I really liked about WinAMP was the one-time registration. I hate paying for bug fixes every year from Micro$oft. Oh Well. I guess I'll just have to live with version 2.22 until something better comes along.
My guess as to the 'why' of the whole thing is that they wanted ShoutCast, which is inherently cool. Maybe there's a place in the universe for an integrated IM/WinAMP/ShoutCast applet.
-- -- Spring: Forces, coiled again!
Re:Oh my god! They killed our freedom! YOU BASTARD
by
S.Herring
·
· Score: 1
Let's take a slightly calmer look at things
what happened?...they aquired Nullsoft...
while that may justifably make a few people nervous, it in itself is not a reason to hate AOL
it's what they may or may not do with it now that they have it
dont hate for hatred's sake
Now's your big chance
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'm sure there's going to be lots of tortured whining here about how AOL is becoming the new Microsoft because of this. Now's your big chance to put your code where your mouth is and do something.
Rather than discussing it to death, I'd *LOVE* to see the/. "community" do its own OSS clone of WinAMP.
Mozilla isn't the only AOL Free Software. The Linux version of the AOL IM client, written in tcl/tk, is a Free Software project actually initiated by AOL (not purchased, as Mozilla was).
AOL is big into trying to get @Home et al. to open up their networks, either willingly or unwillingly (legislatively or judicially).
As an @Home user, I don't care now, but if the UCITA stuff goes through, I'll be worrying aplenty.
ISP choice? Maybe cool for now, but what about if MCIWorldNet starts cracking down on their end of the pipeline on things, spurred by UCITA? Shit flows downhill.
Like it or not, in corporateview, we "consumers" are just mushrooms.
I mocked their commercials, but it appears that one way or another they intend to make the statement true...scary.
At first I thought this was a VERY late April 1 joke, but no such luck.
On the other hand, I've been saying that MP3 was "going mainstream" for the past 18 months or so, and here's proof of it.
ICQ (was:XAmp (or another app))
by
finkployd
·
· Score: 1
I use the windows ICQ at work and I haven't noticed any AOL poisoning.... What are you refering to?
FinkPloyd
Don't jump to conclusions about AOL
by
Delusion_
·
· Score: 1
As much as it pains me to say it, AOL is not evil. Not as a company, anway - their online service is of course pure evil. But even so, I recommend people use AOL if they're REALLY REALLY clueless and I don't want them hitting me up for internet advice every week.
I use three different programs created by companies that are now under the AOL umbrella - Netscape, ICQ, and now Winamp. Based on what's happened with Netscape and ICQ, I'm not worried about them screwing up Winamp. AOL has a habit of buying good companies and not breathing down their necks.
Microsoft, however, is another story. I purchased Nevod's NAT1000, a network address translator/proxy/firewall, etc. When Microsoft bought Nevod, NAT1000 was no longer available for purchase, and current customers like myself are left with no official upgrade path, though we may feel free to buy a bloated copy of Win2000 server which will have many NAT1000 features incorporated into it. Currently, my proxy is a 133 running NT4 and NAT1000, which while no powerhouse, is perfectly suited for the task. God forbid I have to "upgrade" to Win2000.
All in all, I wish AOL had bought Nevod rather than Microsoft.
Delusion http://www.r33t.org/
Re:Making both AOL and RIAA happy.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
the only problem with this theory is that imho one of the biggest sources for small warez such as copyrighted mp3's is the newsgroups. alt.binaries.sounds.mp3 on any given day might have 20,000 posts. as far as the unwashed masses of aol users, how many are really into the whole digital audio scene, own cd burners, etc etc. The biggest potential market for mp3 technology is the group that is so heavily into it already, and not your typical aol user who would never be able to stream anything but low bit rate crap anyways because aol's service sucks so bad.
Well, looks like that suit's settled: "Music software developer PlayMedia Systems has settled its $20 million lawsuit against Nullsoft, just one day after America Online bought the Net music technology firm. PlayMedia had accused Nullsoft of copyright infringement over its AMP code. PlayMedia also had added music news, download, and community site MP3.com to the lawsuit; that action also was settled, PlayMedia said."
Commence speculating about the precise chronology and terms of this settlement in light of yesterday's AOL announcement.
(The link above will probably be dead once news.com gets a real story up.)
Now's a good time to check out the alternatives, namely Icecast, a free project under very active development which provides a Shoutcast-compatible streaming MP3 server, encoding client, directory server, live interaction tools, and more. My experiences with Icecast have been very productive -- IMO, it provides a much greater level of flexibility than the proprietary flavors (surprise, surprise)
Now if someone would just roll out a decent MP3 streaming client for Mac so I can ditch all these Real servers...
The question I have is what will this do to the lawsuit against WinAMP? Would AOL be able to provide a protective shield, or would WinAMP's previous leads have to still defend themselves? IANAL..... of course....
Yeah, right on. The world also doesn't need any more word processors either. Word and Word Perfect are enough! And what's with all these different email clients? Everyone should just be content to just use Netscape Mail or Outlook! And we sure as hell don't need any more operating systems. Windows 95 and Windows NT. If you want games, go with 95, for serious work NT! Who needs more choice than that??
In case it isn't obvious, the above is sarcasm. I for one think a variety of different programs that do a similar function is a good thing. So what if there are 15 different IRC clients? I think that's a great thing. Find one that matches the features you want or need and use it!
The problem is when huge commercial powers own the two dominant products. Netscape used to be a fast, lean, fairly standards-compliant browser. Now it's a hog. Sure it does more, but much of the extra bloat is annoying eye-candy.
The big problem when two huge companies compete on a certain type of product is that it seems to always lead to featuritis, bloat, and products aimed at "joe average" who almost never wants what I want. I want a lot of choices in MP3 players, IRC clients, web browsers, instant messengers... I don't want to be forced to choose between a $40 AOL Instant Messenger Delucks and a $39 Microsoft MyMessenger Extra.
Well said, fb. In that case, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I do have a question though - even with Time Warner's enormous market cap, could AOL feasibly/realistically pull off a deal (possibly just a partnership instead of an actual merger?)
I ask that question becuase I'm seeking an answer to where AOL is going with all this. They need to make a move soon because even after a deal is signed there will be a delay of some sort until the two technologies are merged efficiently. Anyone offer some hints?
Look at the Top 6 downloads on download.com...
by
rodbegbie
·
· Score: 1
AOL now own half of them (ICQ, Winamp & Netscape).
Clearly, they're trying to make sure that, while they may not get all the ISP traffic, they can have their fingers in the proverbial pies of other net users.
Now if they can just buy Number 18 on the download.com list... (A Nightmare on Sesame Street:)
Ah, therein lies the rub. My own intuition says that AOL just wants to establish a beach head on everyone's computer, if they can, as a way of opening a gateway to a wider audience (i.e. captive market). Maybe they won't do anything manipulative or insidious with the product, or maybe they will, it's tough to say. A good example would be to chart the progress of ICQ since it was purchased by AOL (last year?)... They haven't started charging for it yet, but they have made some rumblings to that effect.
I really don't see how much damage they can do with WinAmp though. Sure, it's the best player around, but there are a ton of other programs only a step behind it, with all of the same functionality built in, so it'll be difficult to create a monopoly. I don't know much about the rest, but I imagine the situation is probably much the same...
Re:heard of X11AMP? allright, I take that back.
by
Lx
·
· Score: 1
Actually, upon further investigation, it is a problem with OSS, most likely. FreeBSD won't let a user process crash the box. Wish that FreeBSD would get its kernel sound drivers a little more up to date, I've had nothing but trouble since running OSS.
Anyhow, since switching to the current version of x11amp, I've had much better luck.
They bought Nullsoft outright. I wondered about that myself, but it did say in the article that AOL acquired the whole of Nullsoft (not just WinAmp and SHOUTcast).
--
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
It's not that WinAmp was bad, but we have to switch now, and there are more feature-packed players out there.
You have to switch, or are considering switching? I'm still using Netscape, and AOL bought them out as well, I see no *need*, just the consideration if, for example, they start embedding add spaces into the winamp window or stream adds through shoutcast at random times or something.
-AS
--
-AS
*Pikachu*
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
mmcde
·
· Score: 1
Kinda odd also, since its nothing more then an IE control.
Having a huge force like AOL behind an MP3 company could actually be a good thing as it throws major big bucks MP3. I would love to see RIAA and AOL battle it out. -- Deepak Saxena 1999 - Year of the Penguin
--
Deepak Saxena
1999 - Year of the Penguin
Linux Demo Day '99 - http://www.linuxdemo.org
I use (registered) Winamp on my gam...er...Windows box, but mpg123 where I do my real work. So from a personal standpoint, this has little interest for me.
But as a greater whole, this move puts AOL in conflict with the RIAA while Microsoft seems content to play both sides of the fence (signing on to support the encrypted vapor-format while retaining mp3 support in other software).
And it seems part of a larger trend. Computer companies have little fear of the RIAA and mp3 continues to grow as an audio standard (has anybody dropped support for mp3 in a product?).
With so many captive subscribers and newly-acquired Winamp, AOL seems in a perfect position to offer pay-to-download mp3s and add audio to its list of provided content.
Like it or not, AOL is trying to get a lock on fancy content to attract new users. But the real opponent in this move is the RIAA more than the average computer user.
Well... I hope for them that they're not UK residents... here about half of that would go to the taxman... fair enough, but wouldn't it be nice to know where it goes ?
Remember guys, this was all preordained...you're dealing with companies that sell software. Money is their first priority. Sell-outs like this are to be expected.
Truly open-source software apps (XAmp, FreeAmp, etc) will begin to prevail (as they should!). Also, Sonique, Kjofol, and others that come from the hacker community will still be around.
It only remains to be seen how AOL will poison this as they poisoned ICQ.
How has AOL poisoned ICQ? I don't really see any changes in the program as a whole. Well, ICQ really has been a bit of a poisoned chalice from the start. Have you seen the licencing terms - the owners of ICQ own the format, reserve the right to ban ICQ clients, only approved ICQ servers can be run... The problems were there from the start. All AOL need to do is make ICQ take off, and then they control the market.
Poisoned from the start? I really don't see any of those points as poisonous am much as quality control. They own the format - well that's just good business safety, reserve the right to ban ICQ clients - first off never seen it happen, but I'd want to keep comtrol there too, only approved ICQ servers - there's the quality control, you wouldn't want these wacked out servers being controlled by spammers, you think you get enough as it is just think if a spammer ran a ICQ server, eek.
matguy Net. Admin.
--
matguy(.com)
Re:XAmp (or another app)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How has AOL poisoned ICQ? I don't really see any changes in the program as a whole. It still is a piece of shit in terms of memory management but it's always been that way.
What is the world coming to ?
by
anewsome
·
· Score: 1
I don't even know what to think of this. Reminds me of an old saying,.. "Crazier things have and will continue to happen". What's next? Microsoft ports Office to Linux? Linus gives up Linux to start a horse breeding ranch? These are some crazy times.
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
SEWilco
·
· Score: 1
Well, feel free to try to make Mozilla better. Or you can try to make IE better...
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Phil+Mecklar
·
· Score: 1
I don't know what to think what's next...I always knowned that the world would go crazy someday but...I never thought it would get stupider than I ever dreamed...What as the world come to???
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Shadowcat
·
· Score: 1
This makes me wonder WHY a company their size seems to be buying up all these companies that develop FREE programs (i.e. Mirabilis, etc.) Are they planning on screwing us over any time soon by making them paid programs? I already had developped a distaste for AOL but this really reinforces my feelings that they're just money-grubbing morons. Snatch up the free and make the users pay... even $19.95 a month wasn't enough for them for their access.. they had to raise it. Don't their stupid little popup windows make enough for them on their service? Makes me glad I got a real ISP -- Shadowcat
--
kageneko@kageneko.net
"I can roleplay. I can frag. I can PK while you lag."
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I would download it and use it. MSIE 5 is such a better browser than Netscape 4.6.
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sorry guys don't have time to reg... Winamp was not free, I paid my 10 bucks... I felt a program was worthy enough. However, not I'm wishing I didn't... As much as other linux junkies hate MS I hate AOL... =) I actualy like MS in somethings...
Jdc
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A penguin breeding ranch, YM
Re:What is the world coming to ?
by
TwistedGreen
·
· Score: 0
oh man, i can't wait! as soon as it's released, i'm downloading it!!! (what do those drunks at microsoft think they're doing? do they actually think anyone will actually get it? People will most probably only download it and laugh at it's overall crappiness) ugh... microsoft and aol are like a disease...
I don't know how Nullsoft made their funding from 1997 till today. Does anyone know? But whoever gave them money in that period must be a very happy person right now...
-- -------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
This is a tax-free, stock-only deal. Also, the $400M price tag also included spinner.com. How much NullSoft got is anybody's guess. But I sure wouldn't mind sitting on a large heap of AOL stock, or any stock, for that matter.
While I have faith that AOL will continue to let Nullsoft and its existing staff make its own decisions about development of Winamp, I wonder if this was really a decision brought on by Playmedia's suit, or a sudden case of greed down in Sedona. Granted, it does seem like the RIAA for a while there was bullying Nullsoft around, and true, it would be convenient to have your share of $400 million to defend yourself with legally, but has anybody wondered if this is a business decision a long time in the making? Shoutcast isn't a technology necessarily designed to exclusively legitimize mp3. Shoutcast is just as capable of streaming news, commercials and other salable audio. IE 5.0 tries the same with it's silly 'Internet Radio' features, and god knows broadcast.com has been doing this for far too long. The winamp homepage, which has apparently yet to make news of this to anybody ('Oh by the way, our new version 2.2.3b21 features AOL's logo peppered here and there'), features screenshots of the minibrowser being used to sell CDs on Amazon.com. I imagine we would be rather dense to ignore this obvious marketing ploy. 'Hey investors! Winamp now has space for your advertisements! Give us money!' The Preferences dialog also has space for select links, and it's only a matter of time before companies start using THIS for ad space, too. Conclusion? Don't hastily assume that Nullsoft was so-suddenly gobbled up by a greedy ISP (even if it IS AOL). Justin Frankel is in this for the money, not because he wants to evangelize for the FSF. We can safely assume Nullsoft won't do to Winamp what was done to the latest version of RealPlayer (I hate a 12-meg download for a bloated piece of software with WAYYYY too many unnecessary features), but we must recognize that it was inevitable they do SOMETHING profitable with their technology. As for competing with Microsoft, I don't know. My musings don't lead my train of thought to see this as a direct assault on Redmond. MediaPlayer supports MP3 (badly), and Winamp supports.WMA (badly). So this doesn't necessarily break down to a EBM + MP3 vs. MS + WMA battle. Here's hoping, tho'.
$0.02
Re:AOL TERMS OF SERVICE AND WINAMP
by
rebrane
·
· Score: 1
Just like ICQ censors messages? Just like you can't look at porn with Netscape any more? Christ, people, start reading this stuff before you post it.
AOL is the next MSFT. Why no one has started a crusade against them, I'll never know. The department of Justice is surely on their heels.
AOL, right now, commands over 50% of Internet access in this country - and the next ISP behind them is at only a fraction of that (MSN, incidentally).
Note: I do not dislike AOL because they are a corporate behemoth, but rather that I don't trust AOL as a technology company. Like MSFT (and unlike another large company, such as IBM), they are basically a marketing machine. AOL Internet access is shoddy and unreliabe at best - a documented fact. However, millions of people sign on every day because it is so "easy" to use. They've been taken in by the commercials, the endless bombardment of CDs, and "You've got mail!"
AOL has committed 3 acts of hubris: 1) They bought Mirabilis 2) They bought Netscape 3) They bought Nullsoft
AOL controls chat software, two major portals on the Web, and now they are trying, as any wise Internet behemoth should, to be a major player in the online music space.
Although AOL has a tradition of keeping the companies it buys intact and producing good software (well, ICQ still has a few glitches), I, personally, will go home tonight and find an alternate mp3 player.
If you guys tout "free software," it's time for a GNU MP3 player. Any takers?
I look forward to hearing replies.
Best of luck, Markus
-- Invidia fortunum ovit.
This really really sucks
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I suppose one could argue that someone needs to get really really big so that they can fight off MS. But then they could be in league..and 1 Giant is better then two bullying the world.
Not to mention that ICQ and Netscape went crap when AOL got there hands on them...oh well another product going to hell. Damn I was really hoping nullsoft was going to go IPO.
The Furbies are engaged in battle against The Empire, an enormous megacorporation with a virtual stranglehold on the galaxy.
The battle seems to be favouring the Furbies, The Empire is buckling under the pressure of their relentless onslaught.
But, The Empire did not gain control of the galaxy through stupidity - there is, as there always has been, a plan brewing in the mind of their calculating leader, Darth Gates.
His plan is simple: to form another evil entity, an entity as vile and powerful as The Empire, to distract the good Furbies and allow The Empire to recoup and attack when it is least expected.
With the latest of its brutal takeovers nearly complete, this growing force of evil will soon be within striking distance of the Furby people.
The fearless Jedi knights must intervene quickly or all hope will surely be lost. They are the only ones who can stop the Furbies from becoming mindless drones of The Empire...
If only Superman was there when we need him ...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Every big m*********ing company has so much ramifications every where...
I understand John Orwel a lot more...
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
Phil+Mecklar
·
· Score: 1
Personaly I think it was stupid to sell winamp to theses Bastards...AOL SUX!!! And it's definitely not to be thrusted. Now winamp will probably be no longer a shareware and become a PAYWARE and this will definitely be BAD
ive felt really guilty over the last couple of years about not registering, especially since it looks like ill be moving my mp3s to linux. but now, i just feel glad.
but if you were nullsoft, and just had like two lawsuits thrown at you in recent history with many more probably on the way, wouldnt you want some... protection?
Wouldn't you want a parent who has enough money to fight off the entire music industry while you keep making your product in peace?
I think AOL will settle with the SDMI. But even that is better for Nullsoft than going it alone. How painful would that be, to try to fight off dogs-of-war lawyers while youre trying to code and make money off a shareware program?
Well I guess If Microsoft can get away with it AOL can to? What's next? Starbucks!
I know few off us care about Mp3 but this goes way beyond that. It's the principal. Where's the DOJ when you need it! Personaly I hate loath and really really hate AOL. Why? Don't know. [guees it's in the name] But this can't be good news. I like WinAmp why do they need to steal good programs. Fist ICQ now this! When does it stop
-- "Just once I would like someone to call me sir...
without adding 'your making a scene'"
More like AOL sucks the llama's ass...
by
Zoot.
·
· Score: 0
I think we all ought to boycott Winamp, reverse engineer SHOUTCast, and port X11Amp to Windows. Oh well. Remember boys and girls, "AOL sucks the llama's ass." = )
-- # Zoot
Re:More like AOL sucks the llama's ass...
by
jtn
·
· Score: 1
Uhh.. http://icecast.linuxpower.org/
Re:Extrapolate from experence: Netscape
by
Eric+Savage
·
· Score: 1
FYI: FRAMESET is a per-spec tag, the others are not.
--
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
Peter McKay:"AOL really whips the llama's @$$"
by
Rahga
·
· Score: 2
The community can kill two birds with one stone. Just find yourself a new MP3 player.
1) This will make small companies think twice about selling to a mindless corporation and, 2) This will make mindless corporations think twice about purchasing such a company if they think everyone will walk.
Why shouldn't someone sell a company if they so choose? If you build it up and put the work, then you have the right to benefit from it and to do what you see fit with your company. Another thing: if someone sells a company to a big corporation, why would the person care if people stop using the program? They just walked away with a nice bankroll, users or no users.
Re:force feedback
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
umm, are all you linux dweebies that lame ??? man its just a mp3 player, big fucken deal, get over it, and go home.
1. why not use kjofol 2. every windows98 box can play mp3s by default any way, What? you didnt know that, jeez, tahts what ms has been doing intheir mediaplayer. wakeup 3. Aol can do what it likes, big deal, if your pissed of make your own startup, im sure you wont bitch once you get bought out for $200m, you will be laffing all the way tothe bank. I know I couldnt resist $200m
Think Long Term, not short term
by
Cjoh
·
· Score: 1
You are never going to see AIM bundled with Winamp. You aren't going to be able to tune in to spinner radio through ICQ. This is a strategy which all has to do with one thing:
The Set Top Market.
AOL's acqusition of these companies, and its investments in the high speed bandwidth technologies from Bell Atlantic and others all point to AOL being your source for interactive couch potato entertainment.
Microsoft has a HUGE headstart when it comes to this sector with WebTV. AOL is just warming up for when it is time to tack on an extra $20 a month to be a cable provider too.
This is why AOL was rumored to be buying CBS a couple weeks ago. As cable companies are converging on the Internet as an extra service they can provide, AOL is converging upon Cable as an extra service it can provide.
In fact, I say after the DSS/USSB merger happens, AOL will seriously think about purchasing them. It just makes sense.
Then you can tune in to your AOLTV, to the songs that you want to hear, or the shows you want to see. Nonetheless, AOLTV has the entertainment you want to watch,hear or read all the time, 24 hours a day.
And that, my friends, is what AOL is doing.
My wife's 12-year-old cousin...
by
jtseng
·
· Score: 1
...thinks AOL and Winbloze are wonderful. He is only 12; he is young and time will make him see the errors of his ways.
Well, looks like I'll be booting back into windows to take the bitch out. There are, btw, far better Mp3 players for windows - K-Jofol and Sonique come to mind. You can find links and resources on them at Skinz. Most of my Mp3s I play in BeOS, though, because of the added filesystem attributes for Mp3, and Soundplay, the greatest mp3 player ever.
I've used winamp and have been satisfied with it, so there was never a reason to change...
Depending on what AOL has in store for winamp, I may have to. =(
Sound quality? Reliability? Performance?
Winamp sounds fine, I don't know what 'better' is supposed to sound like. It doesn't crash, it doesn't hose my system, it doesn't mess up the songs. And on average it takes like 8% of my CPU cycles, which is fine by me.
Well, KJofol has a function that is unique in my experience. If you click the _dock_ button it turns into a super-compact interface that attaches itself to the outside of the top-right corner of the active window. Now if only someone ported that to linux...
-- " There is a rational explanation for everything.
There is also an irrational one. "
it's not a practical need, it's an ideological need. I disagree with the business practices of AOL, and there is almost always a package available that can do the job as well or better. And I have switched, already. I don't like WinAmp that much to begin with.
Better in what way? The sound quality of Winamp v2.20 is fine with me (v2.21 and later seem to have strange clicking sounds though). I especially like the windowshade mode of Winamp and the attachable windowshade mode of the playlist, that lets me have a little tiny always-on-top thing listing what song is playing at the moment and how much time is left in that song. The keyboard-control of Winamp is nice as well.
Im sooo sick of sellouts.
by
gavinhall
·
· Score: 1
Posted by Bakeman:
This is a bunch of BS. I always felt like WinAmp was the sorta software that swayed away from the mainstream crap, but I guess everyone is out for the buck and integrity means nothing.
Re:Im sooo sick of sellouts.
by
Zenki
·
· Score: 1
It's a fact of life, especially in a capitalist economy.
Justin Frankel left college to further develop WinAMP, out of interest and the fact that he felt that he could earn enough money making useful software. Of course, with the US government and State government easily taking a third off of what he makes off WinAMP, one must take a step back and take an over all look at the situation.
He never sold out, simply the millions of people who downloaded WinAMP, and used it for such a long time never bothered to support this hard working person who spent time and effort to creating a decent, useful piece of software that is relatively inexpensive. (Ten fucking dollars. If you can't cough up $10 to pay for software that you actually use, then you have issues)
He never made Winamp crippled, like countless shareware programs. In fact, in my opinion, Winamp was never shareware, for the single reason that there is no distinction between registered and unregistered versions, thus making the registration fee more like a DONATION.
To call this a sellout is an insult.
Re:Microsoft at odds with RIAA
by
Black+Parrot
·
· Score: 1
AOL is trying to move from being an ISP to an ICP!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
in case you havent noticed, few ppl who get cable modems after having had aol for a while actually get rid of aol. they keep it because of all the features it provides that the cable company dosent. aol realizes this and they are moving twords an even more feature based service because they know that with the massive growth of cable and dsl there is no way they will be able to keep up. so they are moving twords primarily being an internet content provider instead of an internet service provider.
why would they get rid of Nitrane to replace it with that crappy decoder they use now unless they were scared?
I was wondering that as well. I still use Winamp 2.20, because v2.21 and later all have annoying clicking noises when I play mp3s. I asked on #nullsoft on EFNet and they didn't offer any help or explanation.
Oligopoly, yes it is!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Here is a simple example (AOL is becoming a vertical oligopoly, along with ms, ibm, ge and others):
Vertical Monopoly: Control everything from tree cutting to paper making and magazine publishing.
Horizontal Monopoly: Control every signle magazine.
Oligopoly: a cartel or small number of players in a certain market
Re:Oligopoly, yes it is!
by
memoryhole
·
· Score: 1
Oligopoly, as defined by Mirriam Webster is:" A market situation in which each of a few producers affects but does not control the market."
The few producers line indicates multiple owners, whereas AOL is a single entity. But in any case, even if Webster had said "each of a few products..." the term still wouldn't make sense when applied to this situation, since the products that AOL controls - Mozilla, ICQ, AIM, AOL's main network browser, and WinAmp - all are players in very different markets from each other. Therefore they cannot and do not "control" any of the markets that they are a part of any more than Slashdot can be said to have a monopoly over the nerd-news website market.
Realistically, the only market that AOL can be said to have a controlling interest in is in the independent chat clients - AIM and ICQ are the most widely used. Even there, ICQ has so many viable clones (if mostly for Linux environments) that they cannot be said to have a monopoly. Besides which, there are still products like Yahoo!'s pager, IRC clients, and Java-based chats that many people still use (which may be an Apple vs Microsoft type of argument) - but that monopoly, if you want to call it that, has existed for a while now.
If you are an idiot and the internet means Netcape and ICQ (which means the internet began in the mid 90s) then maybe you have a point. What the hell does the internet have to do with Winamp?
--
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
AOL certainly has been making big strides in acquiring the leading competitors in different areas of computing: Netscape, ICQ, Winamp, etc. To me, this is definitely AOL becoming another internet/media giant (Microsoft comes to mind quickly as an example). I don't really trust either company, or companies similar to them, and frankly, this scares the Windows-using part of me; the Linux part of me just laughs nervously over these acquisitions.
However, I see a large difference in how AOL and Microsoft are becoming giants. Microsoft just drives different companines out of business, providing only their crappy programs as alternatives. AOL, on the other hand, just buys out the companies and (hopefully) allows them run themselves without any AOL intervention in the coding process. That software remains out there, perhaps even promoted by AOL, and it remains a viable competitor to the crap Microsoft and other similar monopolies throw out at us.
I'm not saying AOL is a good guy for buying out these companies; these buyouts are in the interest of AOL, not the companies. I personally hate AOL's services. But at least AOL doesn't crush them out of existence. The great software is still there, it's just AOL owns it.
I'm probably wrong on some points, this is just how I see from my user-end vantage. Right now I have Netscape and ICQ open, and I'm having absolutely no problems with them (even the fact that AOL owns them). As long as the software AOL buys out remains the same, in the short-run I have no problem with them buying companies out. The long-run impact is something I'm still thinking about, and I see both good and bad in it. It all depends on how ethical AOL will be (yeah right).
*Raising shields for return fire* =) If you're going to flame, make it a respectable argument, please.
Jack
-- Demona's Law - "User data expands to exceed available bandwidth."
("User data" being pr0n, mp3's, vob's,
Re:Shareware---or not?
by
TeknoDragon
·
· Score: 1
there are so many free mp3 players and...
therefore players like NaD that are just a little bit under par (comparitively) would probably overshadow winamp if it were crippled...
sure, if I didn't have to pay my tuition (as I do) I probably would splurge for the $10 registration...
Wait till $10 doesn't look like an appetizing dinner for two and then I'll pay it...
and it will do you no good to whine about moral obligations... this is a morally relative world, especially when it comes to the marketplace...
Last time I checked, ICQ was just as slow and unreliable as it was before AOL bought it. The ICQ website is still a confusing, tangled mess, certainly no slicker than it was before AOL bought it. The ID numbers are as unweildy as ever, and the client software is still free of charge.
So what's poisoned about it? The fact that AOL bought it? Phooey.
AOL TERMS OF SERVICE AND WINAMP
by
i244
·
· Score: 0
Jesus christ aol aquires winamp1@#$?!@#?$ this is really really really bad. I can imagine listening to any mp3 using winamp that has "explicit lyrics" and winamp stopping and a popup window coming out of nowhere saying, we're sorry we cannot play this mp3, it violates AOL's Terms Of Service (TOS) and is deemed offenisive by our 31337 HaX0rz please stop or aol staff will come to your house and molest you.
I think i'm going back to useing winplay 3
Re:AOL TERMS OF SERVICE AND WINAMP
by
i244
·
· Score: 1
sorry for the typo's but i was pissed and busy at the time (at school in the middle of a class).
Yes, AOL is a HUGE conglomerate, and it seems that they are only doing this because mp3s are so big lately, but.. (you know there had to be one) they also have alot of money, and sway in the internet world. This could be a good thing. More money, better development, and if AOL starts advertising this could mean that many many more people would potentialy be exposed to mp3s, and give it the boost it needs.
AOL did not introduce the instant messenger, ICQ had been around a long time and was a great little program at the time. Then AOL bought it and turned it into the huge, screaming piece of bloatware it is today (BY DEFAULT IT SOUNDS LIKE A TYPEWRITER WHEN YOU TYPE!!!)
Just wait 1 year, and pressing the eject button in Winamp will lead you to an AOL page with songs for download (sporting a big fat banner add).
Luckily, I don't see myself ever booting to Windows in one year...
The question is what is AOL going to do with them. Does anyone know about AOL and RIAA relations? AOL vs. Real Networks (for streaming audio) could be fun.
A good example would be to chart the progress of ICQ since it was purchased by AOL (last year?)... They haven't started charging for it yet, but they have made some rumblings to that effect.
Even before the sale of ICQ to AOL, there was the constant threat of charging for it. It was never intended to remain free forever.
Its good in someways because the music companies are less likely to sue AOL who has bucks to defend MP3. Little indies don't have these resources and get bullied (look at the emulation makers..). MP3 has a strong corporate voice that can defend MP3 (and will after 400 million.)
AOL seems to be in a bit a strange position in terms of "Broadband"..
Cable modem users use cable ISPs (I doin't think they have choice")
DSL is just starting to become available, I don't know if you have ISP choice there. I know its connection less (ie you can't get a DSL connection dialled into anywhere, the line gets dropped at the phone company.)
I think the government is looking into equal access bills for ISPS, but thats another story.
If people want high speed access they may have to ditch AOL, so I think AOL is diversifying. They have the AOL.com site which is similar to Altavista/Yahoo/Netcenter. They also seem to paying big bucks for "Free or shareware" software to make sure they have a net precence.
Oh, look... I'm not happy, but not shocked.
by
RomulusNR
·
· Score: 1
I chuckled, not gaped when I heard this news. It may be that nothing shocks me anymore.
Have you noticed that none of the major Nullsoft developments over the past month or two have been announced over at Nullsoft or Winamp, not even via press release? Recently, it's been looking like Nullsoft has been _grooming_ themselves for just this kind of buyout. They are trying to maintain the underground mp3 community, but are acting like media whores, and pretending that anything bad (or distasteful) that goes on with them has never happened. (Remember the lawsuit last month? Oh yeah, that.)
Well, we can only expect that AT&T will encourage AOL to promote AAC, and help deprecate MP3, the same way that AOL owns Netscape but distributes IE. Then eventually, Nullsoft will fire themselves:), having no viable product, and turn winamp.com into a second-rate mp3.com (and free music portal site!!!11!).
As the Nullsoft homepage says:
Nullsoft is a small, innovative software company based in Sedona, AZ. Phear us.
Yah rite, d00d!
PS: Wonder if this means Winamp will become GPL someday soon.:)
Regards,
-- Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
WinAmp and Shoutcast make sense for AOL, but I'm not sure what they plan to do with spinner, unless they want to turn it into an member-only pseudo radio station.
In any case, it's a pretty safe bet they'll restrict the playlists and make it more like any bland mainstream radio station. Too bad. Spinner's Gothic channel isn't bad, but I can't imagine 'family-friendly' AOL supporting music that half the US thinks causes children to kill each other.
I hope they know what they're getting into.
by
atomly
·
· Score: 1
I really hope that Justin (Frankel) knows what he's getting himself and his company into. I really doubt that they'll be allowed any sort of control over their product from this point out. I wouldn't be shocked if WinAMP got taken off of the market completely or turned into some sort of AOL-only beast. At the very least, I'm guessing he (from the little bit that I talked to him on comp.os.msdos.djgpp) won't be able to handle the huge corporate structure.
I also hope that AOL knows what they're getting themselves into. I mean, I don't know the details of it fully, but Nullsoft is being sued by Play Media and from what I know they probably deserve it. I remember Justin ported AMP to DOS (DosAMP) and then ported that to Windows (WinAMP), so I find it hard to believe that he has all original code in there.
Plus I'm sure AOL's going to make Spinner.com into some sort of Top 40 crap station now, and I used to listen to their Drum and Bass channel a lot. Or at least they'll fill it full of advertisements and associated schlock.
Re:I hope they know what they're getting into.
by
Cyberfox
·
· Score: 1
Greetings, I for one am cheering. Nullsoft and Frankel are the little guys, and this is another instance where the little guys created a superior product, kicked some major ass with it, and got rewarded for it.
Everyone is complaining that AOL is going to harm WinAmp. That's nonsense... What it really means is that it's another piece of their 'toolkit' for new users. There's no percentage in them changing it at all, when they can just ship it. It's all about how comprehensive a service they provide. It's ShoutCast that they want, and Nullsoft's name behind it. This lets them do that.
As for Spinner.com, why in the world would they make it a top 40 station? Why would they make it ANYTHING but what has made it successful? Their goal (despite what it may seem like!) isn't to be purely mediocre. It's to make money. If Spinner.com's current formats are making money, then they won't change. Pardon me, but...DUH!
Advertising may appear, but I'll bet it'll be less intrusive than radio ads. Whoa, the free ride is over?!? What a concept... Once again, 'Duh'. You want top notch content, it has to get paid for somehow.
At the core, I'm proud of Nullsoft and I'm glad to see them getting rewarded for having produced a top notch application and GIVEN IT AWAY for all this time. Bravo.
>They obviously have people out there looking for >new good technology, ICQ anyone?
At least ICQ was flaky and full of security holes BEFORE they bought it. The features that were added later (like the "web server" which gave you global read to a BillyWare ICQ user's box) didn't come as much of a shock.
Winamp, on the other hand, works quite well, and isn't yet an unmitigated disaster to your hapless BillyWare box.
>good note they haven't f**ked with ICQ yet, so >maybe they know when to keep hands off.
See above:-) ICQ was a bunch of lemurs (who seemed to be unable to pay attention to bugtraq etc) from the getgo, it made perfect sense.
>subject line) so don't be surprised when they >adopt a yearly subscription fee for all AOL(tm) >software. Of course all that would do is >make more people look for free stuff, so JUST >KEEP CODING.
Interesting hypothesis. You could well be right, even if it does plunge us in to bad 80s sci-fi (Bruce Sterling, anyone?). Even more reason to learn to love debian, GNU and the like! An ex-colleague of mine worked for AOL in quite a senior executive position, and what he told me doesn't fill me with glee AT ALL.
I'm just glad that I don't spend much time in windows.. X11amp works just fine.
Not even close. Appearantly, you don't bother to keep track of the antitrust trial. Microsoft will be calling an AOL exec soon as a hostile witness to prove that in fact AOHell intended to use Netscape to compete with The Monopoly. The only reason AOL uses IE is because if they don't get they their software removed from the Online Services folder on the Windows desktop. It's that simple. Does that make them best friends? To top that off, however idiotic and lame (i.e., censorship) AOL's *service* may be, their software is exceedingly well-engineered. Take ICQ, AIM, or even AOL 4.0 for a test-drive and you'll see what I mean.
Albeit, AOL is quickly becoming almost as scary as The Monopoly, but one has to pick the lesser of two evils, as the quote goes.
What is this fuss all about ?
by
warmi
·
· Score: 3
I don't understand this "Ohs", jaws on the floor etc... I mean what's the big deal. AOL bought not WinAmp per se but its user base !!! It was the same with ICQ. I mean, come on , it would not be that hard for AOL to write their own MP3 player. It is users who are familiar with the product that count. And that's fine with me. WinAMP authors made lot of money - they deserved that. Everything works ok.
Extrapolate from experence: Netscape
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Look what happened to Netscape's web browser when AOL aquired it. I remember when they used to have updates for netscape on an almost weekly basis, now where lucky if they have an update once every 4 months.
Re:Extrapolate from experence: Netscape
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yeah, let's all go back to the happy days of BLINK, and LAYER, and FRAMESET.... If Navigator 4.6 and the Mozilla project are what happens when AOL buys a company, I want them to buy even more things.
Oh my god! They killed our freedom! YOU BASTARDS!
by
burnboy
·
· Score: 1
/me bends Microsoft and AOL over his knee and spanks them like dirty whores.
Is it just me or does anyone else hate Microsoft and AOL with a passion?
I mean these guys are goin' for a monopoly here.. sheesh
I'm sick of it!!!! grrrr!!
-- burnboy
Spook
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2
0_o
An AOL spokesman, today:
"AOL would like it known that we are now officially mocking the world at large. Especially all you Winamp and Shoutcast users. Hah, we told you we'd get you someho- er, I mean, no comment."
Re:Never heard of X11AMP?
by
Brian+Knotts
·
· Score: 1
Your "whole point" was wrong. X11AMP has been around for a while, is Open Source(tm) and can use WinAMP skins.
Hey fishbone, Fair enough. However, where so YOU think they will go next keeping in mind that an acquisition of those "types" of companies is an ideal next step?
You are very corect on the market cap issue, but I was merely trying to point out what type of company they should go after as well as offering some actual names.
What companies do you think will fall next? -rob
Re:Blah - this sucks (my mistake)
by
JB
·
· Score: 1
My mistake, I had never realized that Winamp was shareware and not OSS. That makes this whole deal somewhat less outrageous i think. I guess I'm as guilty as many other people fro not paying $10 for it's use.
-- Freedom begins when you tell Mrs Grundy to go fly a kite. _R.A.Heinlein
ICQ
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'd wait and see about the ICQ thing... As far as I know AOL doesn't really own ICQ yet, not till 2001 or something like that... And with all this stuff there buying and taking over ya never know what they might have planned!
For months and months (at least back when I used Windows on a regular basis) I told people: "You should really register Winamp, you know." And they laughed. I told them: "It's really hard to come across non-crippled, honest-to-god shareware (keep in mind: windows) any more. You should support it." And they laughed. And I told them: "It's really true---if people don't support quality shareware, then it will cease to exist." And they laughed.
Who's laughing now? If all 5 million (according to Yahoo) Winamp users had done what Nullsoft asked and paid them the paltry $10 for the hours and hours that most of then surely have used Winamp.. well, let's just say Nullsoft would certainly have been a lot less anxious to hop on the AOL train. But no, it's been proven: we live in a society where people refuse to accept their capitalistic responsibilities and then refuse to accept the consequences. Every one of you out there who used Winamp for more than 30 days without paying for it---this is YOUR FAULT. The blame rests squarely on your cheap-ass shoulders.
(Of course, this is why we love REAL free software so much 'round these parts.. the linux kernel is not for sale at any price. right?)
If that's your opinion, why not just steal food just like you're stealing software? The only reason you don't do it (i'm assuming you don't:) is because it's more difficult. And if you were to do so, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who'd say you were morally right to do so (assuming you're not starving to death.. if you can find some comparable need for an mp3 player, i'll let you off the hook).
Anyway, all I'm saying is that you, as a pirater of winamp, are in no position to complain about their buyout, because you're part of what drove them to that. A small part, but an undeniable one.
--neil
Re:Shareware---or not?
by
TeknoDragon
·
· Score: 1
If that's your opinion, why not just steal food just like you're stealing software?
A fallacy if I ever saw one...
let's see: food is not given away with an option to pay later... shareware is
Shareware is a completely different paradigm from the common market and there is little room for comparing the two.
at worst the exploitation of shareware is the classic "tragidy of the commons"
oh, but since you're so morally superior this matters not to you...
Doesn't it feel nice to pass out blame? I'll come asking you who to blame the next time Microsoft buys out a good product.
Re:Shareware---or not?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
>.. the linux kernel is not for sale at any price. right?)
Last I looked, some company http://store.redhat.com/commerce/ was hawking it for $80 bucks...
>>.. the linux kernel is not for sale at any price. right?) >Last I looked, some company http://store.redhat.com/commerce/ >was hawking it for $80 bucks...
Exactly. Just the opposite of what was said: it is for sale (by just about everyone), at any price they like.
Personality-less developers...
by
gavinhall
·
· Score: 1
Posted by Roynasser:
Must of these small somapnies, or at least ex-small companies, such as Nullsoft, and Mirabilis,
(Dustin, and the boys) are all personality less!!!
Surely i would probably sell my company for 200m dollars, but still, i would probably be like yahoo, and grow, and sell ads on my sites, and then buy off some other small-medium company...
I agree the major corporations are buying everything, but the mind-less developers are selling everything...
(I don't know who to balme... comapnies or developers... giants, or midgets?)
i mean, i don't really see why this is a problem. It isn't particularly surprising for AOL to want to own some mp3 code, or for that matter to own some mp3.
so AOL wants to run some mp3 distribution channels. so? keep in mind that AOL is, and has always been, more of a content provider than a software provider. this is a natural step.
now, when they bought netscape, that was something to be scared of. After all, with Winamp, or i guess with Spinner, you have a multitude of alternatives. With netscape you have very little alternatives. Also, if aol owns winamp, that doesn't change mp3 at large. mp3 is still the same. but Netscape has great political power, and what the support can make or break a file format. Owning netscape means AOL now has close to direct control (shared with MS, anyway) over the HTML file format..
so the fact that AOL has crashed the mp3 party means little to the rest of the party. never mind that AOL is fairly evil, and that they might try to do evil things to the rest of the mp3 market. they can't cause much hurt.
of course, since i've never been to spinner.com, and since i already use a free (mac-only) mp3 player called SoundApp, it doesn't really affect me directly. if i'd paid ten bucks to own winamp it would alarm me that AOL had control of the code now.:P
what would be interesting is if they integrate winamp into AOL, and people immediately start trading pirated mp3 over AOL like crazy. Since they're using AOL's system to transmit and store the illegal mp3s, could AOL be sued? i dunno if AOL knows what it's getting into here.
A lot of the messages responding to this (very strange) turn of events are basically saying "Oh, no, AOL is another monopoly." This, quite frankly, is NOT true. There are many, many things I dislike about AOL, and they are a very large company, but they are not a Monopoly, and while this turn of events is shocking, I don't consider it terribly dangerous. Here's why:
1. Monopolies must own a huge majority of the markets they control in order to truly be monopolies. As far as the Internet goes, I doubt very much that this is the case: while AOL may be one of the largest online services around, the sheer number of people on the internet, whether through large ISP's like GTE or BellSouth, or through local ISP's, keeps AOL from the Lion's share of marketshare. Also, since ISP's don't need to own most of the market to stay in business, I see little danger (at this point) of ISP's going belly up en masse and leaving us with only AOL and a few others.
2. WinAmp is a very popular MP3 player, but it's not the only one out there -- and if I recall correctly, it's currently being sued for illegally using a proprietary MP3 codec. There are plenty of MP3 players out there -- some freely available -- for people to use if AOL decides to hike up the price significantly.
3. IceCast is a free software implementation of AOL's purchase, so there seems little danger of that capability being denied from the world at large.
Because of those three points, it seems unlikely AOL's purchases will be any significant threat to their respective markets, so long as everyone is wary and keeps a close eye on AOL's future actions.
Besides that, they continued to support Mozilla after they bought Netscape, didn't they? That should be some encouragement...
-- Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
Re:AOL is not Microsoft
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The company that does everything does nothing well. Jack of all trades, master of none. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.
One thing you gotta give to AOL, they certainly have their finger on what many people are doing/liking/using online...but can they deliver in that regard? Past experience says NO.
And not to dis any of the companies aquired by AOL, but to me, preserving the integrity of my ideas is far more important than making bucks off of them. Of course, that's just me:)
punkle@SPAM-MY-SHORTSswbell.net
Just another part of the embedded application
by
Sloppy
·
· Score: 1
The entire concept of AOL owning everything on the Windows desktop (What do they need now, Winzip and GameSpy?) really creeps me out
Well somebody has to own all the apps on the Windoze desktop. Who cares who it is? Windoze is a dead-end closed proprietary platform, and users that buy into need to get used to the idea that they're getting into a single-sourced vertical market anyway. Who cares? It's only Windoze. This only effects users of the Windoze embedded application suite. It's insignificant in the general-purpose computing world, and I'm kinda surprised CmdrTaco felt it was newsworthy.
-- As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Good Christ! AOL must be stopped! It's the damned "AOL's so easy" sheep mentality that is allowing this kind of thing to happen! This is as bad as putting AOL on Linux-powered set-top boxes!! I'm all for getting Linux out into the limelight, but let's not get it associated with the sheep!!
Looks to me like AOL wants to bore their way even deeper into people's homes. In the short term they'll give their customers all sorts of propriatary streaming content (probably a bunch of crap, but that's what all their content is), then later on try to push their way into the software side of handheld computers & home networks.
It's interesting to think back just a few years ago. One of AOL's new features was an Internet Mail gateway, so you could send & receive mail with non-AOL members. I pretty much thought they'd fade into the background when the WWW took off, and now look at them -- they're riding the wave better than M$ is.
Not that I'd ever use their service, but they've got their business plan churning.
--Mid
Never heard of X11AMP?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
?
Re:Never heard of X11AMP?
by
ShinGouki
·
· Score: 1
most of us whine when some idiot starts hollaring about how the opensource community should do something or other to save the world from the evil monopoly boys without even knowing, as us whiners do, that it's already done...and has been for quite some time.
the most interesting thing that i've found is that in my dual-boot system, all my mp3's sound markedly better in x11amp-linux than they do in winamp-windows (whether this is due to the sound subsystem in each system or the code in the different programs, i couldn't tell you) i've noticed none of that high-end frizzly crap in x11amp...yet winamp continues to sound like someone decided to apply a flanger to all the wav files before encoding them *shrug* just one of the many little everyday reasons why i use windows for games and linux for everydamnthing else =)
-- -dk
Dream with the feathers of angels stuffed beneath your head.
Re:Never heard of X11AMP?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Nope, I get by just fine with my CD collection. They work at home, work, in the car, and at non-geek friends' houses equally well. And my whole point was the/. "community" is long on whining and very, very short on doing anything.
The entire concept of AOL owning everything on the Windows desktop (What do they need now, Winzip and GameSpy?) really creeps me out, especially after the keynote the AOL employee gave at the Linux Expo. It sounded like a stock investor speech with "Oh yeah, Linux is good too! Embedded systems!" tacked on. He went over all the brands AOL owns and said, essentially, why AOL would be making money off of everything you do on the Net, and why you should like that. "AOL Anywhere" as opposed to "Microsoft Everywhere." On the other hand, they haven't done anything too terribly brutal to the companies they've acquired just yet. ICQ, as far as I know, has gone virtually unchanged, and so has Netscape, but I don't want to fire up WinAmp (I do have to use Windows from time to time -- gah) and see an ad for barnesandnoble.com in the browser window, and something tells me they wouldn't have a problem with selling companies an audience this way. In the short term, I think this will probably be good for MP3s in general -- AOL's a pretty wealthy company, the RIAA might just back off. But I'm not sure we're not gearing up for another massive corporation controlling all we see and do -- especially after that keynote, which had more to do with total domination than Linux.
--Slack
Anti-AOL sentiment
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
Heard on a television commercial this morning:
"AOL is the internet."
I have a hard time cheering for companies who practice deceptive advertising.
Also, I don't think I'm alone in my fear that the internet is becoming dominated by an ever-shrinking number of ever-growing corporations. Here's a fun scenario: Microsoft and AOL get together and decide "You know, TCP/IP and Unix was good in it's day. What we need NOW, though, is a high-speed protocol that takes advantage of the power of Windows 2000. You don't need to know the specifics of the protocol, just use Win2000 and we'll take care of the rest." Don't tell me they wouldn't do it if they thought they could.
Right now, everyone cheers AOL for backing mp3 because we want a Godzilla to fight the Moth-Ra of the RIAA. I wonder if we'll be so happy about it later.
AOL have a deal with Bell Atlantic to use their ADSL service, and the there's a bill being pushed by a Virginia (AOL home) congressman to force cable companies to sell service to allow other companies to act as cable ISPs. Look for much more broadband competition in the the Bell Atlantic region soon as they roll out their ADSL service, and the cable companies compete. I work for Bell Atlantic, and have been told this is seen as a critical first-to-market race.
Re: Macamp...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Not that I can tell, they didn't. MacAMP is owned by a completely different company ( @soft ), and their website has nothing regarding a buyout.
( www.macamp.com )
-Just Another Anonymous Coward
AOL to buy WinZip?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5
Anyone notice this little blurb on the Yahoo report?
"Nullsoft is the developer of Winamp, the leading branded MP3 player for Windows, and SHOUTcast, an MP3 streaming audio system. With 15 million total downloads, Winamp has an installed base of 5 million users and is the No. 2 most popular application on Download.com after ICQ, averaging more than 43,000 downloads daily."
From the desk of an AOL executive... Number 1: ICQ (acquired) Number 2: WinAmp (acquired) Number 3: WinZip Number 4: Netscape (acquired)
The results of last weeks top downloads at Download.com are listed above, in that order. Scary that AOL owns three of four, eh? I think so.... -"AOHell. The good old days"
Re:AOL to buy WinZip?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
If the quality goes down, people will switch in droves.
Your thesis breaks down when Microsoft products are considered.
You have just witnessed a paradigm shift
by
planet_hoth
·
· Score: 2
Old Commercial Software Paradigm:
Implement an innovative idea. Become wildly successful. Get bought out by Microsoft and retire at age 35.
*
New Commercial Software Paradigm:
Implement an innovative idea. Become wildly successful. Get bought out by AOL and retire at age 35.
only if you want to make money though. Before you flame, try to grow up a bit. They obviously have people out there looking for new good technology, ICQ anyone? They have tons of cash, thanks to the herds of AOLer's, and it looks like the savvy to pull it off. On a good note they haven't f**ked with ICQ yet, so maybe they know when to keep hands off. Of course, they are here to make money (see subject line) so don't be surprised when they adopt a yearly subscription fee for all AOL(tm) software. Of course all that would do is make more people look for free stuff, so JUST KEEP CODING.
Microsoft at odds with RIAA
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Actually, the RIAA is reported to be very upset that Microsoft's media player will play the mp3 format. They apparantly tried to get MS to remove that capability, but MS wouldn't play along.
AOL has a increasingly strong grip on many of the most useful utilities out there. It has one of the two best browsers, one of the two best instant messagers, and now the definitive leader in mp3 players.
What is next? Well, one reader suggested WinZip? Although funny, I'm not so sure that AOL will spend that type of money on WinZip.
However, I say that the next target is either Time Warner or Verio. This is where AOL hurts badly. They need this type of affiliation to succeed in the coming years. Perhaps, a government mandate prevents such a move from occuring now, but I definitely forsee this one in the future (say March 2000?).
And one last whine, please Winamp, no ads! Otherwise, I'll have to code my own (and that won't be pretty).
We'll probably see a lot of partnerships. They won't be buying any ISP's. Stockholders seem to think there is too much potential for growth and big ISP's will sell for a premium. That's why we've seen less of those types of acquisitions lately. I wish I had the answer to your question though, I'd be on the phone with my broker, rather than here:-)
-- -fb
Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Yeah, yeah, call me a doomsayer, but this all starts to sound like the world is truly coming to an end.
uhhhhhhh
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
what's wrong with you spazzy bastards? "i better find a new mp3 player?" WHY? there is nothing wrong with winamp.
you know why a company like nullsoft would sell to a company like aol?
LOTS OF MONEY
if you were struggling for cash, and someone came along and handed you a big check, you'd cash it. if you DIDN'T you'd probably be the dumbest bastard alive.
try THINKING about things... you may think everything is all wonderful because there are a couple of free operating systems... well, 95% of the world is not using them. you know why? because they're harder to use. this is where companies like microsoft and AOL come into the picture...
not everyone can use unix (or unix-like) operating systems. not everyone knows as much about computers as most of you... and OBVIOUSLY, you folks don't know the FIRST THING about business. if you did, you wouldn't be sitting here READING the news, you'd be MAKING it...
I consider WinAmp to be a well worth the $15 i opted to pay them last year. While i have neither recieved nor required support, they did wire me a nice little thank you letter.
-- Juln
Re:It's obvious...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 3
...that AOL is not only trying to make everyone believe that it is the internet, but with acquisitions of buzz-technology, it certainly is moving forward to own important parts of it.
I wonder how long until they are called a monopoly, albeit it's not much of a danger until they buy, let's say, sendmail.org.
Mirabilis did not call people on your contact list your "buddies". Need I say more?
The old versions will go away...
by
Insanity
·
· Score: 2
When you say that people can keep using the older versions of software that has gotten worse as a result of its aquisition by a large blood sucking corporation, you are forgetting that the copies eventually dfisappear. I don't think many people keep the archive wwith the installer files after they are done installing software.
After my old drive failed, i had to install all my old software all over again, which meant downloading all the installers again.
I could not find a single public site that had Icq98 on it. I hated the bloated Icq99 client and spent a lot of time in a futile attempt to locate the software. Luckily a friend had the file...
The point in all of this is that eventually we will lose the older, better softweare. Nothing lasts forever.
--
Nix absolutably seriousness.
Great...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Another place for them to put that annoying aol instant messager garbage... just what we need.. *sight*
Winamp is not free
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Winamp always was shareware, as I recall. $10 registration fee last time I checked.
I want a refund!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Now that it's true about AOL buying Nullsoft, I want a $10 refund from Nullsoft for registering WinAmp.
I registered it two years ago and I've never gotten any sort of support or thank you notes from that company. I was willing to let it slide just because they're small, but now that they're selling out -- I've had it with their outfit.
I want my $10 back right NOW! They have all the money they'll need now that they're sucking AOL's teet.
Good God!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Son of a Bit**! The DOJ needs to target AOL now. At least Micros~1 didn't get em. X11Amp is still there though!
Good Album!!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Maybe you've been brainwashed too.. .
Off topic, but that subject is the title of a great album by the New Radicals.
Ye. Gods.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
*goes off shaking head* every bloody program I use...
Sometimes news is better than fiction
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1
Who cares, we have x11amp. mpg123 and icecast. In a way I see this as a good thing because AOL may just be big enough to squash some of the mp3 naysayers.
Re:Maybe you've been brainwashed too...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> AOL is no longer bedfellows with Microsoft, and will help overturn them.
And how will this be better ? So, we have one megalomaniacal company in charge of the world instead of another. In case you're wondering, the common greeting between people today goes like this: "Do you have the Internet ? - Yes - What do you use, AOL or CompuServe ?" I have been asked this many times, in these exact words. So, AOL already has "mind-share" monopoly on ISPing. This frightens me a lot. Ans I am not too confident in the "open-source revolution"; so far, it seems that only people who like to write their own software from scratch can jump on that bandwagon, since there is virtually no other software available for Linux (or FreeBSD, or whatever). I mean, all I personally need is a graphics program, a C compiler, and some games, but I am a minority. No, AOL scares me. A lot.
nullsoft was desperate for money due to the suit filed by Playmedia. When AOL offered to buy nullsoft the small company, they must have seen this as an opportunity to prevent losing this case (even though playmedia had virtually no case against them).
Nullsoft Founder and President Justin Frankel said: ``Working with America Online will let us globally extend the use of our technologies through its Internet brands. In addition, having access to America Online's
tremendous resources and infrastructure will let focus our efforts on what's really important: Making cool software.''
tremendous resources to pay lawyers to get playmedia off our backs . . .
maybe i'm reading between the lines, but it does make sense.
why would they get rid of Nitrane to replace it with that crappy decoder they use now unless they were scared?
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
ncc74656
·
· Score: 1
...because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise. I just don't like AOL, and I don't trust them.
That's exactly why I took Winamp off my machine as soon as I read they had been bought out by AO-Hell. Now I'm stuck finding a comparable replacement...the playlist support in RealPlayer Plus G2 and Windows Media Player is minimal (RP+ has shuffle play, but doesn't preload ID3 information from files in the playlist; Media Player doesn't grok ID3 at all and doesn't do shuffle play).
-- 20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
Gary+C+King
·
· Score: 1
This is about as likely as ICQ becoming a commercial app due to AOL's purchase. If anything it will get rid of the $10 shareware fee on WinAMP, since Nullsoft is now backed by the huge pockets of America Online, rather than the 20 or so users that ever registered it.
Of course, if AOL decides to charge for WinAMP (this is about as likely as Microsoft open sourcing Windows), you could just continue to use 2.10, which works wonderfully. I only just upgraded from 2.05, and I really don't notice too much of a difference. I didn't want to use any AOL programs for a while, but they didn't pawn ICQ space to the highest bidder, and I doubt they'd do it to WinAMP. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see AOL license the Sorensen algorithms next... it looks from their previous purchases (real-time communication and conferencing, audio compression/decompression) that they are looking to become a net tech company. Video compression is the next step.
Surprised there hasn't been more discussion of Spinner... if you haven't checked it out, look at their format selection. Where else can you get a global, full-on, psychedelia station?
Perhaps it is that AOL is almost completely based on proprietary software? You can't even use AOL's Internet service without Windows. Obviously, the same is true of many of their other acquisitions.
AOL isn't just a crappy service provider any more. They own a very hefty chunk of the world's software Intellectual Property now, including some very neat companies they picked up with their acquisition of Netscape. Give them some credit. They're a different company now, or are at least trying to be.
Since when does owning things make you good? I always thought it was all about innovation and technical excellence, but you've obviously found other criteria for judging technology companies. I guess buying things up and screwing them over does make you cool aftetr all.
These are some very screwed priorities, my friend.
Free-amp is an open source mp3 player, and exists for a variety of platforms.
Anyone interested should check it out at www.freeamp.org.
-- Juln
Making both AOL and RIAA happy.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It seems to me that AOL and RIAA might see similar interests mutually met. AOL can spread the next winamp to AOL's dullard user base, with nifty built-in features for purchase of online music in mp3 format, with all the SDMI fixings, from AOL. AOL can set-up some exclusive service for online music sales and become the middle-man for mp3 sales. The RIAA has to endorse mp3s, but if they provide the big name musicians through their terms (SDMI), they still control a big part of sales. Sure, there will be the free mp3 players, but there are so many AOL (aka, untechnical, un-industry-caring) users, its easy to create such a gigantic user base for whatever new trendy standard AOL may introduce, such as SDMI. This is the only way a technology like SDMI could survive the free-spirited and/or warez-loving online music life of today. This, plus a crackdown on ISP's and campuses hosuing illegal mp3's, should be enough to throw the distribution of mp3s (all future music) back under the biz's control.
Argument 1: AOL is buying everything, all my favorite software!
They aren't destroying the software. Besides, there are alternatives: Sonique, WMP, all kinds of MP3 players out there. There's Opera, IE, and Mozilla if you refuse to use an AOL product (Mozilla is not owned by AOL)
Argument 2: Oh my bloody God, AOL will put IM in Winamp, and "You've got mail" in Netscape.
AOL acquired Netscape Communications Corporation back in January. So far, the effects have been almost completely transparent, its not called "AOL Communicator 4.6" is it?. Chill guys, they were mainly after Netcenter, and given its user-base, who wouldn't be after it? AOL has kept their instant messenger program out of ICQ, and God knows ICQ is far from perfect, but so far I see no ads, no flashing AOL logos, its more or less the same.
Argument 3: AOL will corrupt MP3, etc etc etc
AOL is a helluva powerful company. If they wanted to, they could REALLY expose shoutcast, Winamp, and crush that AMP lawsuit like a bug. This new merger will not kill Nullsoft, and anyone who knows Justin Frankel knows that he wouldn't sacrifice his company to oblivion. MP3 is a hot market now, AOL was SMART to take advantage of the opportunity first.
Better them than Microsoft.
--
----------
"They misunderestimated me." --George W Bush, Nov. 6, 2000
a world where your choices are MS windows (in whatever version), AOL-OS (you know it's next), or any flavor of *nix.. all using different standards, all running on different hardware..
maybe it's time to drive OSS standards and APIs and drive out the megacorps..
then again, maybe i've been watching too much anime/sci-fi stuff:)
-- ------
Poo-tee-weet?
clueless people never get any where...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You know, no one cares about comments about clueless people except it makes the cluefull people happy to know that thank god there's lots of clueless people to stand over and look mighty.
No point in helping you guys. I'll let you slide and I'll let my self rise.
Keep trolling along... go on,....
next sheep please. bZZT
Maybe you've been brainwashed too...
by
The_Jazzman
·
· Score: 1
Hey all,
What is this... firstly Microsoft and AOL are best friends... AOL buys Netscape... AOL buys WinAMP... could this be a ploy by Microsoft to force people to use their dire Media Player ?
Just makes you think... how long before the only ISP is AOL and the only browser is IE... need I go on ?
Re:Maybe you've been brainwashed too...
by
MindStalker
·
· Score: 2
Accually Microsoft and AOL are more ex friends. AOL is now testifying against Microsoft, and having the Netscape employees they bought redesign AOL under the Netscape browser. Rumor abound that soons AOL will stop using its propritary network protocol and use good ol TCP/IP via PPP. Talk about html/javaising thier interface and such. While I don't like AOL and never plan on using them, they are nolonger bedfellows with Microsoft, and quite possibly could help destroy them. By the way while Microsoft likes to talk about owning the internet they seem to be more interesting in owning your desktop. But AOL definatly seems to be interesting in owning the internet, and that scared me.. Not that I'm worried, the free/open source software revolution is taking off right in time.
Re:Maybe you've been brainwashed too...
by
The_Jazzman
·
· Score: 1
Flamebait... mmm I like that !
>1) It will be quite a while before AOL is the only ISP
Well, I've heard that that around half of the US are currently with them... in ummm under a decade... So, lets give it twenty years and see what happens.
>2) You are an overreacting idiot.
True, but prevention is the only cure.
Re:Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I was wondering what the whole purpose behind the Minibrowser was. Now I know.
This seems to be a very interesting move by AOL. I think that AOL is definitely trying to resurrect its "image," as being a real multiservice provider instead of always being associated with "lame AOL" as many people thought when they first started their graphical/user-friendly AOL client. This also lends more to the fact that AOL is bringing itself out of its secluded universe. A couple of years ago, they introduced the AOL instant messager for all internet users, which was conveinient for me since most of my friends at the time happened to be on AOL. But for everyone who is worried about the MP3 format shouldn't be. It has no impact on the format as a whole because neither of these companies "own" the MP3 format. It's just that AOL wants to build in MP3 support to its little Client program. Basically, they are trying to make their client program so that the user never has to leave, so everything is there at their fingertips.
Probably the greatest reason why we dispise AOL is that we are advanced computer/internet users. AOL is not targeted at us. It is more targeted at our parents/grandparents who maybe have never really even used the internet before. They don't have to worry about setting up dialing/PPP options etc.... It seems like the local ISP craze is dying down some, so AOL doesn't have to worry about anything really.
James M Lamanna CS Student--California Institute of Technology
Wow, I happen to know a number of people in the digital audio space, but this was not expected. I can tell you guys that there will be another absolutely jaw-dropping announcement in under a month, so brace yourself, because the industry is in for a ride.
The $400M seemed to be for both companies, no? I'm guessing that the vast majority of that went to Spinner.com, seeing as that A) Spinner was already traded and is a pretty considerably sized company and B) notice how Nullsoft is moving but nobody else is?
It's important to realize here that this does not mean that MP3s are going to become open. Everybody already knows about Icecast and FreeAmp, and AOL acquiring Nullsoft has (duh) nothing to do with the MP3 format as a whole. This is not about formats, it's about AOL acquiring media properties to be able to best serve its customers with a really neat, compelling multimedia experience. Go look at Wired Planet -- this is what I see AOL pulling off, but with a huge amount of music content.
I understand the anti-AOL sentiment. I, too, was there in the first part of this decade and felt the Internet shift when morons from Joe4422@AOL.COM started posting to sci.physics. But this may be part of an image shift, too. AOL isn't just a crappy service provider any more. They own a very hefty chunk of the world's software Intellectual Property now, including some very neat companies they picked up with their acquisition of Netscape. Give them some credit. They're a different company now, or are at least trying to be. And hey, I'd sure like to get bought out for a few million, vest, and then leave -- wouldn't you? David E. Weekly (dew, Think)
This *could* be good...
by
Anonymous+Cow
·
· Score: 2
Well, at least the WinAMP thing could be good. With somebody as big as AOL backing it, we might see MP3 become the de facto audio streaming standard. Of course, I'm pretty sure they'll want you to use "AOL WinAMP" (*shudder*), and they might put a few proprietary things in there. But consider tik... at least with that project, they were nice and friendly about keeping everything open, and making sure their service runs on just about every platform out there (instead of not acknowledging the clones out there, like ICQ did, which, among a few other reasons, is why basically everybody I know decided to move from ICQ to AIM). What they'll do with Spinner and ShoutCAST, I have no clue. I'm hoping they'll play nice and make them nice and open. But after all, this *is* AOL we're talking about, and there *is* a reason I left them so long ago, ditto for why I microwave all the CDs they send me (advice: NEVER try it for more than 3 seconds... especially if you live in a dorm or an appartment).
Of ICQ, AIM and AOL 4.0, I would have to say that ICQ is the best, and none the interface was designed by AOL, except for the new things in ICQ 99. I'm not sure, but actually I even think most of ICQ 99 was completed prior to ICQ being purchased by AOL. You can tell they havent completely AOLized ICQ yet because it doesn't force advertising on you as do AIM or any Aol website (netscape.com, aol.com or the ones on their online service).
I wonder what they shall do with their IE browser now that they own Netscape. While i would imagine that they could just pay MS to include them in the Online Services folder without using IE as the basis for their browser, it is important to MS to have AOL using IE because it tips the browser usage percents in MS's favor. Even though the AOL users who are using IE dont necessarily recognize it as the MS product, it still boosts their 'market share' by 20-30%.
-- Juln
AOL is the NEXT Microsoft!!!! :-(
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Ok, now who has the monopoly here?
The government should be sueing AOL now. Microsoft might have the OS market cornered, but AOL is cornering ALL of the rest of the markets.
I give them credit for doing a good job at it without making too many people complain, but PLEASE STOP before EVERYTHING has AOL pop-up ads on it!!!
I had to pick my jaw up as well. AOL is well on it's way to being another Micosoft. I wonder if they'll mess with winamp's price. Will they continue to charge a paltry $10 or make it free?
Fear a two party system
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sigh. AOL vs Microsoft. It resembles the US' current political state.. Two parties, both of which suck. Settle for the lesser evil?
Now I can't use Winamp anymore...
by
Wee
·
· Score: 2
...because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise. I just don't like AOL, and I don't trust them. The last thing they think about is the user. Which is why you'll probably start seeing ads in WinAmp, profiles of the user and use stored, etc.
But I could be wrong. They may just leave Justin and Co. alone to do what they do best. But somehow I don't think they will. I feel very sad.
BTW, did they get MacAmp as well?
-B
--
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
First Netscape, then ICQ, now Winamp...AOL is buying all those who have help shaped the internet...
I'm running out of alternatives for AOL-owned products. I refuse to support a company whose purpose is to exploit the internet (oh yeah, and to make money). It kind of pisses me off that all of my friends are supporting AOL and Microsoft by buying their stock...
Slashdot Mirror
This is very shocking news. It seems all that AOL touches turns to crap and I have a bad feeling about the winamp player. It would be just like AOL to put banner adds or something equally as annoying in winamp as they have with AOL IM. If this isn't motivation to switch to the penguin I don't know what is.
A real OS? Why would any Linux, Unix, *BSD, et al user run AOL? Why should they waste resources porting it to Linux when nobody would use it?
Ever hear of Sonique?
www.sonique.com
gotten pretty nice lately
- silvein
I might even use it, if it was any good. Unfortunately, there are a lot of little things that make Nutscrape really annoying for me to use, Mozilla isn't stable enough yet, and Opera doesn't even appear to be trying. At least IE for Linux would give Netscape some competition and possibly get them to clean up the annoying bits. But I seriously doubt Microsoft will produce anything useable for Linux anyway. They're not going to make any money off it, so why bother? I just wish someone would produce a browser for Linux that I actually liked using. I'd even (gasp!) pay for it.
Ugh, I wish I proofread that post before I hit submit.
It would be nice to be able to edit your posts after the fact, but that would probably just open the door for abuse. *sigh*
BTW the title came into my mind from the old "Hungry Hungry Hippos" commercials.
-OT
What are you talking about? These weren't some hippy weirdos out to stick to the man. They wrote an .mp3 player and kept it up.
WinAMP ISN'T free. @ 43,000 downloads a day
and asking $10, they probably paid the bills
nicely while hoping for their break. Which they got. Good for them. I wish all programmers could be so lucky.
If someone drove a dump truck full of money up to your house, you'd quickly loose your 'sellout' attitude. Money is needed to survive. And lots of money makes a nice survival.
Did you ever read the Winamp credits? Right now they are full of stunt coordinators, llama wranglers, and assistants to Fifi. There's even someone credited as a "Big Biz Exploiter" - now that will cease to be a joke.
Needless to say, the next WinAmp will have zero personality, just like AOL itself. And that's if we're lucky. If we're not, it will have ads and require a lengthy login during which you disclose your yearly income and toaster preferences.
Bye, llama, we're sure gonna miss you.
I had a problem w/ OSS sound drivers. I'm definitely not buying their sound drivers. It was pretty much the only thing that brought down my FreeBSD system. Personally, I run mpg123 w/ cmp3 curses frontend, that way I can use it in the console too. But is there an open source prog that can do the SHOUTcast thing (not serving, but receiving SHOUTcast streams)?
My jaw fell through the floor her as well. It
is really insane that something like this would
happen. I guess if the money is right you can
buy anything.
But why oh why would they go and sell themselves
to AOL? AOL of all the companies that could have bought them? eek!
The big fish always eat the smaller fish. But I just want to see a horde of small vicious pirhana gut the big fish to the bone. Is that too much to ask?
"Explore... Dream... Discover..."
Damn, I shoulda suspected things were headed that way when they got into that whole mini-browser thing with Amazon.com content... But the funny thing is, that there is a really neat trend emerging here to doing business online... A bunch of computer wizzes have a cool idea to make a nice free program; Once the beta is out and everyone likes it, they try making money on it, but can't; They sell it to AOL without making any money on it. Now if I could only think of a good easy to develop utility that everyone will not mind down;oading for free, I could make myself a cool 300Mil...
Ñ'
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Nullsoft and MP3.com are defendants in a lawsuit brought by PlayMedia, alleging copyright infringement in the use of the AMP playback engine, according to CNET. I don't think this lawsuit involves the RIAA.
There are times when it is necessary to speak.
Bite the hand.
Here is the list of 25 most popular files on download.com. Can you spot any other potential AOL acquisitions on this list?
1 ICQ - Seek out friends and colleagues on the Internet
2 Winamp - Play MP3, MP2, CD, MOD, and WAV audio files
3 WinZip - Handle ZIP files with ease
4 Webshots Desktop - Put a new photo on your desktop every day of the year
5 DevPower FlatBttn (Visual Basic 5.0) - Add a flat-style button to forms or Web pages
6 Netscape Communicator - Browse the Web and more with the latest version of Communicator
7 Sonique popular - Enjoy MP3, CD, WAV, MOD, and WMA audio with impressive visuals
8 Microsoft Internet Explorer - Surf the Net with the latest version of this popular browser
9 ICQ (without MFC DLLs) - Seek out friends and colleagues on the Internet
10 CuteFTP - Transfer files with this FTP client
11 Go!Zilla - Manage your downloads and schedule them for convenient times
12 NetZIP Deluxe - Download, unzip, and install software automatically with a suite of file
compression utilities
13 AudioCD MP3 Studio - Make your own audio CDs out of MP3 files
14 NetSonic - Access your favorite sites more quickly when browsing the Web
15 WindowBlinds - Change the look and feel of Windows
16 Phantom Sonique - Try a Phantom Menace-themed MP3 player
17 DirectX Drivers - Install this 32-bit gaming requirement for Windows 95/98
18 A Nightmare on Sesame Street - Take Ernie and Bert on a violent rampage
19 PowerUp 98 Deluxe - Fine-tune your Windows configuration
20 RealPlayer - Enjoy streaming audio and video on the Web
21 Waterfalls - Relax in front of this photo-realistic waterfall screensaver
22 GetRight - Resume downloading a file after a disconnection
23 McAfee VirusScan - Protect your system with cutting-edge antivirus technology
24 ICQ Plus - Customize the appearance of ICQ
25 Adobe Acrobat Reader - Read Adobe PDF files from the Web
Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
Screw Microsoft. Kill AOL.
BTW, does anyone know of a Win32 MP3 player that supports the AMD K6-2 3DNow! instructions like Nitrane does(did)?
-Lx?
(This is biased, you have been warned)
.9 (.7 didnt like SMP boxes..), it has crashed (its still in dev, of couse its gonna crash), but for it to take down your entire system? sounds like a bug in OSS, or are you running x11amp as root?
ive been running x11amp since version
(if i really wanted to be an ass, i could blame it on a shitty OS that allows a user process to crash the box, but ive never ran *BSD, so im just gonna keep my mouth shut on it)
Just my
{off-topic}
Hmm, if Bell Atlantic is so concerned about getting DSL to paying customers, they could expand their service areas a little quicker... I'd like some sort of fast Net access, and I'd rather go with BA than Media General.
-Waiting for my DSL line outside of Falls Church-
"We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - Major Mike Shearer, UK
It's hard to believe, but remember what happened to HotMail - nobody believed that Microsoft would pay $400 million (see Wired story: HotMale).
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
I don't think AOL is taking any risk in compeating with Microsoft. Microsoft's biggest concern, with regards to AOL, is makeing sure that AOL does not make Netscape the default browser for their ~15 Million customers. So far AOL is keeping IE as the default browser. As long as IE stays put, MS will be happy.
And, as an investor in AOL, all I can say is this: Smart move. So far as I can tell, AOL is not stupid. I never really cared for them aquiring Netscape - that browser is becomming more dead every day. But AOL is very good at aquiring the best things out there... and so far they haven't screwed them up either. Take a look at the memory footprint of ICQ, and compare it to the older version. It has gotten a lot better, though I don't care for the ton of new bells and whistles. (reminds me of the ICQ home page.. ugh.) All the techies out there shouldn't be scared. They will always have their open source OS, and their favorite ISP's, etc. AOL provides a service that other's don't have, and for this, they are valuable.
..because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise.
so what has AOL done to ICQ?
have the gone lawsuit happy against all the free ICQ clones? have you seen any AOL spam via ICQ? (well there is spam from spoofed UIN's but that's more likely from the free ICQ clients!)
at first I was afraid that I'd see the mandatory AD-space in the next version of ICQ...
but hey, that doesn't make sense!
if AOL was smart... they'd leave all these free things alone... free web browser... free music player... free message sender...
everyone LOVES FREE STUFF!!! so if AOL is the sole owner of all the free stuff that everyone loves than they can make it happily play allong with their own proprietary software...
there are so many free mp3 players and ICQ and AIM clones and replacements out there (not to mention mozilla) that if AOL ever tried to convert any of this stuff to a proprietary product they'd have horrendous competition....
I may be a little too optimistic but it isn't totally inconcievable that AOL will free up the lisences of winamp and ICQ (after they plug the security holes)
let's see... buying netscape (mozilla)... getting ICQ... BSD rumors... next winamp....
every step AOL takes in the non-proprietary direction is a step closer to the mindshare that has traditionally found AOL abhorrent (and made it the laughing stock of the internet)
if AOL decides to take this path I think it can be good for all parties involved...
I love it...
AOL has all this money to buy other companies
and their technology, but they can't be bothered
to port their crappy software to Windows NT and
they don't want to do anything to filter out the
porno and get-rich-quick spam that's being splattered at their users, er, "members". (They're
certainly not "customers" in the traditional
sense, since they really don't get treated that way). Yep, they're out of control, all right.
Well, as long as I can rent a T1 and get Linux for free, there will be at least one ISP keeping it real ;)
[ed note. this one rambles a bit, but stick with me, it has a payoff]
/. and are the salve of one particular brand name, you are doomed to loose. If you are so weak as to let other people force you to use softs and apps not of your liking, and let yourself be trapped in a closed system hell, then you are doomed to loose.
...what have you done to make the net a better place?
The simple fact is this...Much of the value systems found in folk who care about the net is absent from the mainstream masses who are now the majority of the net.
But who the hell wants to be mainstream? If your looking at being a pseudo geek, some modern day wanabe who wears the right clothes, speaks the right speak and uses all the Hip Appz the you are doomed to loose. You will always be exposed for the utter lamer you are.
Things were a bit different when the implemntation of advancement was in the hands( wether by procalim,dictate, or by stealing them) of the people doing the grunt work of building the code. Back then you could be a vlaue to the growth or a bystander to it or a particpant in its day in day out evolution in one of a million ways.
Now its suits, roots for hire, and loots. Money talk and jihads are nice PR. People feel that by using the right appz they are "netSavy" or tht by being seen reading the right mags they will be "in". Dont worry that you cant understand, or even try to , 3/4 of the Linux Journal you walk around the office with. Dont worry that if push came to shove you wouldnt be able to get your rig back up and running without a whinny call to Tech Support.
Which lead us to the point, that being about Winamp being snatched up by AOL.
SO WHAT.
If you are on
When winamp came up it was heralded as the great saviour of the music distro sceen, and it was. It had its glory and is now moving to another phase. I say fucking great, congrats to the AZ boys and gals and I hope you save a little of the cash for your golden years.
To those that need to be on the bleedig edge of NonCorporate living its time to get a new mp3 player. BIG FUCKING DEAL. There are a whole slew of em and more comming out.
The folks at Nullsoft did thier thing, they got in the dirt and built something that was of use to the nets growth and use. Nothing can take that away from them. They did it, and if your gooing to belittle that fact, ask yourself
Mirror time folks. The Nullsofties and folks like them deserve to take their creations and do what they want with them. Nothing is stopping the folks at Kjofol or Sonique or Icecast from taking up the ball. Nothing at all.
Its the net, and its a big old tumble of fun. If you cant stand the chaos, go get an AOL disk and enjoy the massmarket version of it; beacuse honey, its gonna be a bumpy ride and I dont want to be dealing with your getting sick everytime we hit some turbulence.
Onward folks and keep your eyes on the prize
Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap! Poor little clams! Snap! Snap! Snap!
Just a misgiving here, but if AOL has NullSoft, they would also own the copyrights associated with the WinAmp player . . . right?
Given that X11Amp uses the exact same user interface as WA, it seems conceivable that AOL could order a "cease and desist" for use of their UI graphic design (whereas Justin/former_NullSoft would probably not have cared, given that Windoze is his territory)
If AOL is seeking exclusivity over the WinAMP brand name/image, that might be a likely Step 2 . . . .
iSKUNK!
Well considering the BLISTERING development pace that has occured with ICQ since its procurement...
Like someone else said, about the best thing about IE over Netscape is using IE to read Slashdot, because it "backs" up discussion threads as one would think it should be implemented.
And until it's done use the middle button.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Look, if AOL walked up to MY door with a sack full of money, I wouldn't turn 'em away. In my opinion, grousing about somebody else "selling out" is restricted to people who haven't been given the opportunity to sell out. If it gives the ppl at Nullsoft the financial scratch to go do something else cool, bully for them! I like Winamp a lot. It's feature rich, nicely modular, and well-supported. However, there are only so many features you can throw at an audio app before it becomes bloaty, and I think that Winamp might be nearing that cusp. Bully for them if they sold it and want to go do something new. (Like, say, sailing to Barbados or whatever...that's what I'd do!)
If it was Microsoft's sack full of money, on the other hand, I'd find a big dog to feed 'em to. A guy's got to have his standards! : )
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I originally saw an article on mp3.com about this today.. and there it was stated that the lawsuit was "settled out of court on May 28th"..
:)
So My guess? They took the cash (or atleast some) from the AOL deal (sell that stock baby!) and paid off Nitrane/and/crew....
Any problem will go away.. provided you have enough $$cash$$ to throw at it.
Icecast's MP3 "shout" client runs just fine on my Mac. Oh, by the way, it's running MacOS X. :)
So let's review here: AOL has "content solutions" via its software and WinAMP. Apple has "content solutions" via Quicktime (which plays MP3s, btw). Microsoft has "content solutions" via Windows Media Player (or whatever their latest attempt is called) and Microsoft Audio (which DOESN'T play MP3s). AOL has the Sun/Java platform behind it, Apple has MacOS/MacOS X behind it, and Microsoft has Windows behind it.
Looks like the convergence wars have 3 sides.
-Rafi Remove the Spanish to email me.
i have. Couple it with OSS, and you've got a product that'll take down your system faster than ever imagined possible. I'm sorry, but when an mp3 player can take down FreeBSD, it's total crap.
-lx
There'll be no battle. RIAA already accepts MP3, they just want it
copy protected (i.e. they want to remotely control your music
assets, REGARDLESS of format). Thus expect AOL to build RIAA
approved switches and triggers into their MP3 clients. If you
have no pirated MP3s, do not exchange music with friends and
do not rip CDs for personal use then you shouldn't care. I take that
back, you will almost certainly have your privacy violated by AOL
if you use their software, with or without RIAA involvement.
In short, if you love you DIVX player, you'll love the new AOL offering.
My take on this would be "He cares, but not *that* much". He's sold the company, not his soul - yes, there may be anti-competitive clauses about him not leaving and writing any other MP3 players for a bit, but he's still free to persue a life of religious fulfillment (or whatever), and he's also a considerable amount richer than before. I'd be happy :)
Who cares about WinAmp? Winamp is to mp3 like Redhat is to Linux. Besides, it has a crappy hard-to-read UI and only one good plugin (Cthugha) . The thing to be more concerned about is ShoutCast. The potential of this technology, along with it's current distribution model, makes it an awesome thing to behold. Will they leave it alone, start charging site licensing fees? Buy up the makers of mp3spy (and as a result, Gamespy 3D), and stick AIM in for the chat feature?
AOL's history with acquisitions so far is "don't touch a good thing" (and this is an actual quote from somewhere).
But isn't the purpose of the Doomsday machine lost if you keep it a secret!
P.S.: My jaw isn't coming back up for a while.
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
-- Give him Head? Be a Beacon? :P)
(If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't.
Who worries about MicroSUCK ruling the world? If they go on at this rate, AOL will *own* the world. Already three pieces of software I use every time I boot Windoze (and one I use in linux) are owned by them...
Just as everyone was getting bored of Bill Gates as Satan, here comes AOL.
" There is a rational explanation for everything. There is also an irrational one. "
I'd like one that is compatable with Icecast (shoutcast).
Your thesis breaks down when Microsoft products are considered.
That is really not the same thing. The quality of Micros~1 products has not gone down, since it has never been up. People had to buy crap from Micros~1 when that was the only you could get without spending too much money. So many simply accepted the fact that the OS was supposed to crash once every hour, and didn't know it could be any other way.
Now more and more are starting to use alternative systems such as Linux, but windows will live a while longer on people buying it out of habit.
Phobos - Greek word for fear or flight
True enough, but AIM's ads are relatively unintrusive. (Oh, dear me, look what I've become...tolerating ads...)
It's still well-designed.
MS doesn't want payment, they want IE.
And that's true, AOHell'rs don't realize that they're using IE.
I think that AOL has something like a 16% market share...The Monopoly wants the stats on IE, they don't want payment. If they want more money they can milk it from the OEMs with licensing fees.
It's not purely monopolization that we have to worry about. It's only natural to assume that some companies will try and merge with, or aquire, all the companies that they can. Granted, I still think Microsoft has it's head up it's..well..you know. But what worries me is...what do you think will happen when AOL gets it's hands on the most popular mp3 player? Is AOL going to buy into the whole anti-mp3 campain, are we going to have to pay for it? The acquisition of winamp and shoutcast by a conglomerate makes me shudder, because there's no end to what they can do to what has, up to now, been one of the joys of computing..free expression of music. Oh well..we'll just have to keep our fingers crossed.
Spank me if I'm wrong, but AOL doesn't own Mirabilis or anything ICQ-related. They make Instant Messenger, which I believe is in direct competition with ICQ for the ytalk GUI market.
-- Ryan
more money = better development ?
lets compare..
Windows=lots of money=not too stable
FreeBSD, Linux=free=very stable
so you're saying winders is better than FreeBSD/Linux, etc because they spent more on it ?
see where I'm coming from ?
-Jason
It seems ignorant and misguided.
Three other posts have already voiced pretty clearly my opinion. No one 'sold out'. WinAMP is a product, a service, and a neat gadget. It is fully within the ethical, moral, legal, and reasonable bounds for Justin and crew to sell WinAMP to AOL, or even to Sun, Microsoft, or Apple if they so chose. It is not in AOL's court to do something cool and productive with their handful of gadgets; maybe legitamize mp3s in a way the Rio cannot, but selling CDs, services, and other goods by offering free mp3 content from AOL music broadcast servers, or something equally innovative.
Or they do something stupid, and team Nullsoft gets a nice paycheck, and AOL loses a bunch of respect and money.
Good for team Nullsoft! Way to go!
-AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
does anyone have any information on what happened to mp3Studio (formerly available from mp3.nederland.net) I lost the tar-ball during a system re-install and trying to get it back
or better yet, does anyone have a link to a mirror?
(yeah I know this is a plea for sware and not a followup to the story, but damn when is AoL going to stop??? with the porting the new AoL 5.0 (incorporation IE5.x of course) to Linux??
oh yeah and I bet RedHat will be the first to jump on that boat..... hmm is that an iceberg I see in the distance?
Commence flames now !
-- Life: Hate the Game... Love the cereal
AOL is now getting to the point of being the phone company, television station, magazine publisher and radio station all rolled into one. the still don't even support NT much less any real OS.
I wonder what the consequences will be for the lawsuit against MP3.com and Nullsoft? AOL certainly has very deep pockets, lots of lawyers, and the willingness to use them.
The real Webmaven is user ID 27463. I don't rate an imposter, because my ID is such a lame-ass high number.
I am pretty confident that AOL can screw up anything...including winamp. fortunately for me I dont use winamp anymore...x11amp
Sonique...
Scary that AOL owns three of four, eh? I think so....
Why is that scary? There are plenty of instant messanger clients, MP3 players, UnZippers and Browsers in the world... who cares if AOL is buying the most popular ones. If the quality goes down, people will switch in droves.
If I were AOL it certainly makes a hell of a lot more sense to buy ICQ than say, Tribal Voice, or Netscape instead of Opera, or Nullsoft instead of whoever makes Sonique..
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
...probably about as many people who have downloaded IE for HP/UX and Sloaris.
Do I worry? No, because I have no plans to install it. Like someone else said, about the best thing about IE over Netscape is using IE to read Slashdot, because it "backs" up discussion threads as one would think it should be implemented.
But that's about it.
Darn.
And the only ONLY cool about the Winamp login, which will be sorely missed...Was the wonderful greeting...Winamp really whips the llamas ass. I can't wait until there's some stupid AOL idiot-fuck saying "Welcome to AOLAMP"
This is a sad day for cool programs.
Almost there. What about this little tidbit? Check out Katt's article on IE/Linux.
3 51,403830,00.html
http://www.zdnet.com/pcweek/stories/columns/0,4
"...Redmondians are staffing a development team to work on a new Linux version of Internet Explorer."
I don't know why, but AOL is annoying...
This brings a couple things to mind:
1.) What is AOL's track record with these buy-outs? How has AOL affected the stuff they have bought? Until a couple months ago, I was an avid Netscape user, but I noticed little difference after AOL bought them out. Can anyone tell me if AOL ruined Netscape? The same goes for ICQ. ICQ99 got kind of annoying with its plethora of options previously unavailable in ver98, but at least most of them could be optioned out so they don't clutter everything up. I'm only asking because I haven't yet noticed any adverse effects from AOL sticking its nose in these areas, but then again I might not be paying close enough attention.
2.) Has anyone noticed the 2-party trend?
AOL M$
--- --
netscape ie
winamp media player
icq future m$ messenger
it seems like everything is getting swallowed up by either side, like the U.S. two-party gov't. Repubs:Dems::AOL:M$.
Agree? Disagree? A little help, please.
www.poak.net
well, jotting down top 20 download, and weeding for internet/communication software that AOL hasn't own , two just stick out like a good candidate.
just think about it....
*real network (but stock is too high at this moment, this is a perfect candidate. It has network/community, it is widely recognize software, not to mention net broadasting software, just a matter of time before they got gobble up. and remember real network already peddle AOL IM)
*mIRC (this piece of gem is ready for the picking, specially if AOL is just buying name brand recognizion. in contrast to developing this relatively not so complex piece of software)
And, as far as Spinner is concerned, I'd be amazed if they didn't turn into crap. AOL isn't seeking to do this, but it's the sort of thing that happens when a big company who fears its customers begins to run a radio station. It's just like the consolidation in the real radio market right now, it just leads to mediocrity. Why would they focus on Drum and Bass or Acid Jazz when 78% of their listeners prefer Britney Spears because all of their traffic will be surfing in from AOL? It's the Almighty Buck and AOL anything but ignores that. AOL isn't scared of "selling out" or anything to that effect, they're just in it for the quick dollar.
WinAMP will be turned into crap, SHOUTCast will probably remain good, and Spinner will slowly get shitty as some CEO realizes "I don't like that rap music, we need more 50's" or something to that effect.
And, well, as for Nullsoft being the little guy, they just gave up. If Justin Frankel is still at AOL in two years I'd be amazed. It's like Netscape selling out to AOL; sure, they revolutionized the world, but this is like admitting defeat. AOL will bring in their better trained, better brainwashed coders and Nullsoft will be worked out of the mix slowly. Or if not, the Nullsoft people will go nuts because they're unable to handle the corporate structure above them. I don't see how anybody could go from running their own startup to working at AOL; it'd be complete culture shock. I know that I, working at a startup, would quit the day that we sold out to a company like AOL.
-- atomly
Anyone notice how much AOL's logo looks like the infamous eye in the pyramid? Think about it.
"Ford, you're turning into a penguin. Stop it."
It seems AOL is preparing to take on Microsoft.
:-) but remember, that we will never, ever, ever stop. We will always go forwards.
I know that sounds like paranoia but consider this: AOL paid out major dollars for Netscape, then said "No we won't use it." Yeah, right, we believe you. They said they didn't want to hurt the relationship with Microsoft that gives them an icon on the Win98 desktop.
So they spend $800m(?) or something just to save little buddy Netscape and with no thought of business advantages - aside from the relicensing of Netscape server products to Sun, which has just recently announced dropping it's own Web server sw in favour of Netscape, which is owned by AOL with whom Sun took out their "I'll scratch my back you scratch mine" deal regarding hw in exchange for advertising. Who bought *that* story? Sun wanting to do some $400m of advertising directed exclusively to AOL clients? Ha ha ha ha [head falls off in embarassment]
So we can assume AOL *will* use Netscape. I recall reading something about the next version of the AOL client being "fully HTML compliant". Their deal with Microsoft would have expired by then no doubt anyway.
Then we have Microsoft's recent loud noises about a new audio standard "a bit like MP3" (Windows Media 4.0) that includes some kind of protection for artists and publishers. Go to the MS web site and click on the Public Enemy link and try to play it. I have the latest version of WinAmp and it loads but gives an error - the protocol is sufficiently different to not be MP3 compliant. With the MS stamp of corporate approval and their marketing, Windows Media format will sweep aside MP3 freeware encoders/players and become the defacto standard. It ships with IE5, Win98, Office2000,Win2000 - it will be on a *lot* of desks. I know that MP3 is wonderfull just the way it is, but MS don't see it that way as they don't control the standard.
So, AOL see this burgeoning market in streaming audio and audio formats as being a big up and coming money maker and MS has a 3-6 month jump on them. They *know* they're going to be changing to Netscape browsers RSN and their users won't be able to access MS's new sound format files easily. What to do. Well when you're as big as AOL you buy the competition to MS and use it as a weapon. I think AOL are on the up and up and this will be an offensive war (ie AOL doesn't look to be sitting back and defending it's territory, they're moving forward, bless their little socks. Personally I hate 'em because the number of friends that got sucked into non standards compliant browsers, emails clients etc whom I have to tailor my email for).
Oh, and don't AOL use Suns, SGI (mainly?) and BSD boxes? What does that tell you about their technical inclination towards what Microsoft would like the world's businesses to run on - NT??
I think we're starting to see some major battle lines being drawn. It's not NT vs Unix. It Microsoft vs Other Companies. Keep a watch on AOL. Oh, and something is going to happen over at IBM, I'm sure of it. I bet you thought they've been kind of quiet lately. I think with the IBM witness at the DOJ case coming up the gloves will start coming off IBM. They're looking very strong financially.
So this isn't NT vs Linux. That's kind of what seems to be the frontline for we Linuxites. But take a step back and see that the HP,DELL,SGI,IBM uptake of Linux is because Linux is a weapon against Microsoft. MS wields NT, Office, Win9x and some other "standards" that flow from that.
Sure each nose-to-nose battle is NT/Linux, ASP/PHP, DCOM/CORBA etc etc, but that's short sighted. This is why I think ppl in the Linux community argue over suits, corporate types and where RedHat is going. This war needs to be fought on all levels. People in the kernel or drivers or wm battle front shouldn't belittle the necessity of the people fighting by corporate alliances, packaging distributions, binary only applications etc. We are all on the same side.
A guess we have to consider why we are on this side and what the goal is. Is MS the enemy? I would tend to think that MS is the *current* enemy because it is the most obvious incarnation of what many people oppose: freedom to choose without bias in a competitive, non-prejudiced sales, marketing and technical "marketplace" (free sw/hw or otherwise).
MS is a bump in the road to this goal. Some people wil see the bump, some will shout out "Lookout!", some will drive around, some will go so far around they'll go off the road into a ditch, some will end up going cross country, some will ride straight over the top. However it happens, the bump will eventually be behind us and won't look so bad in the rear-vision mirror. There will always be more bumps and maybe the wreckage of some crashed cars
My 2.5c worth.
cheers
Michael Snoswell
pithy comment
You know, the more I think about it, the less I think of this as a neccessarily bad thing... I mean, OK, so AOL, the closest thing to an internet monopoly has bought a yet another program... But in this case, unlike with Netscape or ICQ, there is little leverage to be gained by doing so.
The MP3 standard isn't likely to change because of the aquisition, and the company hardly has the power to erase all of those free copies of Winamp already spread on everyone's computers. If you don't like AOL (As I do), just don't get the next version... In my case, I stopped getting new versions of winamp as soon as they added that mini browser for Amazon.com...
I'm just glad that the guys at Nullsoft finally got paid for their efforts. I mean face it, how many of you registered winamp after 14 days? This way, AOL picks up the tab.
So what if they buy up Winzip too? Is the zip file format likely to change? I doubt it, and as long as it doesn't, nobody's forcing you to upgrade to the AOL branded version of the program. If they do decide to change the format, who's going to support it with so much of the software compatible with the old standard?
Therefore, I think that the only way for AOL to make money on items such as Winamp or WinZip is to somehow sell ads to go right into the program, something that Nullsoft has already done by including the mini-browser...
Ñ'
See my posting. But the short of it is this: AOL is a slow, clunky, behemoth. Even after all of these years, my mother still needs a separate ISP to get reliable service on AOL because it kicks her off all of the time.
But, beyond that, AOL is becoming HUGE, as you noted. Too huge. It's time that we nipped these companies in the bud before we let them grow too large (MSFT) and become unmanageable (MSFT).
BOYCOTT WINAMP!
~mnj
Invidia fortunum ovit.
Nevermind. I stand spanked. AOL does in fact own Mirabilis, Inc.
-- Ryan
When Netscape first brought out frames (a mistake that we're still all paying for), they were doing so instead of following the standard and implementing BANNER. In retrospect, neither FRAMESET nor BANNER offered anything good to most users, but my point stands: "release once a week, every week" was the motto during the days that Netscape was not only trying to decommoditize HTML, but succeeding. And I'd rather not have those days back.
Kris
Kriston J. Rehberg
http://kriston.net/
Kriston
I think AOL has the upper hand in any competition with Microsoft. First of all, AOL is trouncing MSN in terms of user base. Secondly, if Microsoft sufficiently angers AOL, AOL can just threaten to replace the default MSIE that comes with the AOL software with Netscape.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
A monopoly isn't only tight control over an industry, or even loose control over an industry. That's only one type of monopoly - a horizontal monopoly. The other kind of monopoly, vertical, is where you control everything required to make a product or products - from essential minerals (or just basic components) all the way through to the finished product which allows you to far undercut the prices of other vendors who have to buy their supplies regularly. For example, a corporation that owns oil rigs, oil boats, refineries, gas stations, tanker-truck outfits, and an advertising company can be said to have a vertical monopoly even if they don't own ALL of a certain kind of business.
So, how is AOL a monopoly? It doesn't own the majority of IP's, nor does it own a vertical monopoly as far as I can tell. Perhaps if they made their own modems and computers, or if AOL was used for nearly ninety percent of all internet data transfers (averaged by number of files, not bytes transferred).
As it stands, AOL is merely a company with it's fingers in a whole bunch of pies. Adobe, Corel, and Macromedia can all claim the same.
Of course, Microsoft is a different issue, because they control the OS, the hardware, and most of the major software packages - AND they don't play fair. As far as I have heard, nothing AOL has done truly deserves the stigma of "Monopoly". Yet. It is a disturbing trend here, but I'm waiting for the AOL-only games and AOL-Office suite of applications.
More than likely, Frankel, et al. are named as defendants in this case. Thus, they had to get lawyers. Probably what will happen is that Frankel&Co. will motion for removal of defense and replace his current lawyer(s) with AOL certified lawyers with AOL paying the bottom line. Then, it will be up to the old US system to figure out the verdict.
If it's against Nullsoft, more than likely they'll only pay pennies in comparison to AOL's worth, because it's arguable that this acquisition won't affect the ruling (shouldn't in a perfect world, but it does cause the eyes to go green). But, then again if it's in favor of Nullsoft, the costs for defense are covered by AOL.
One last thing worth mentioning. No one even knows if that above scenario was part of the acquisition. Might be that Frankel&Co. have to handle that themselves without the big boys involved.
ALL HAIL BRAK!!!
What makes other players better is, of course, relative to your point of view and needs.
:) Easy interface. Your basic well-done mp3 player for BeOS.
K-Jofol - Supposedly the fastest mp3 player for windows. Great skins, great looking, lots of options. Free.
Sonique - Also great looking, with fun analyzers, and very well visually designed, as well as having pitch control and such things.
SoundPlay(for BeOS) - Aint the prettiest thing around, but it uses WinAmp skins, and has the best pitch control of any player - it can play anywhere from 400% to -400%. With the CDDA FS add-on, you can directly alter the pitch of music from a CD. Has options for crossfading. Comes with effects processors. New beta even features the beginning of a vocal removal option. Costs 12 bucks, but very much worth it for me.
CL-AMP(for BeOS) - Almost a winamp clone, but with crossfading and pitch control (but won't play backwards
Sound quality isn't that much of an issue, and reliability only varies slightly, but performance can be a little more important.
It's not that WinAmp was bad, but we have to switch now, and there are more feature-packed players out there.
-lx
This is very interesting.
:)
In my mind, this calls into question some rather large industry alliances. Where does AOL officially stand with regard to Micros~1? Possibly more important, where does AOL stand with relation to the RIAA? Anyone have semi-detailed information on either of these?
To my knowledge, Micros~1 is signed on with the SDMI, which would put them on the side of the RIAA.
Hmmmmm...
With the impending release of Micros~1's new mp3-capable Media Player, AOL now owns (at least) two large (in terms of users) pieces of software that directly compete with Micro$oft. I'm curious to see what Microsoft's reaction to this will be, and even more curious about their current relations with AOL.
Despite my personal distaste (slight understatement) for AOL, unless they're up to something really senaky, I can see some very good things coming from their ownership of the most popular mp3 player in the world. At a bare minimum, this should result in more people using the mp3 format, which will hopefully bury the SDMI before they can even release it.
Does AOL really have this much balls? Do they dare stand opposed to both Micros~1 and the RIAA?
I can't wait to see how this one plays out
"I think any time you expose vulnerabilities it's a good thing." -Attorney General Janet Reno
AOL will settel the lawsuit faster than you can say "secure digital music initiative". Expect the next version of WinAMP to have some new anti-piracy "features".
Well, I think some people are bashing AOL in a knee-jerk type fashion. It seems we're calling a different company "The Next Microsoft" every day.
:)
On the other hand, I don't exactly have the warm fuzzies. AOL's been picking up high profile netgadgets lately (Netscape, Instant Messenger {was this ICQ?}, now Shoutcast and WinAMP). I would guess that they are trying to corner the market on hip cybertools, so as too attract even more users to their network service.
There's nothing intrinsically wrong with wanting to be popular, but AOL's current software practices leave a lot to be desired in the area of privacy, and forced advertising. These new aquisitions might turn out to be harmless party favours promoting the AOL name, or they might turn into trogan-horse like demographic harvesters. It'll probably be a little of both. I personally hate adware (even though it allows "free" services, I know) and hope that people develop marketing-free alternatives. Maybe I'll even be able to help
I don't know how serious they are about promoting open software either. They do seem to have left a good part of netscape/mozilla intact, but I'm still not convinced they really want to give anything back to the net without strings attached.
I am not an MBA, but I know that there are two types of monopolies - vertical and horizontal.
Horizontal monopolies own all of one market (pre-breakup AT&T is a good example). Vertical monopolies own shares in many related markets, allowing them to be one stop shopping locations (IBM has at times been an example).
Each type type of monopoly has it own perils. AOL seems to be moving towards being a vertical monopoly, and that is something to worry about. Vertical monopolies can do nasty things to markets.
Preventive War is like committing suicide for fear of death. - Otto Von Bismarck
"The Community" is not relevant to the AOL - WinAmp deal. WinAmp is widely used among all sorts of people who use *Windows*, and I am not aware of a Linux version of WinAmp. Win - Amp, get it?
Who cares if a tiny handful of self-righteous geeks uses another mp3 player. If you are so pure, why are you using Windows?
This is not your revolution and it is for sale. WinAmp never was free, it's shareware. The developers of WinAmp have been threatened with a very costly lawsuit and a sale to AOL is a way for them to avoid a total loss and profit handsomely from the work they have done in offering a fine product at a very low cost. Yes, you can use WinAmp forever without paying the registration fee, but it still never was free.
Just stop using Windows and you won't have to worry about finding yourself another MP3 player because the player you use with Linux will work just fine.
If you won't use Winamp because it's owned by AOL, I certainly hope you aren't using Netscape. We wouldn't want to be hypocritical now would we?
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Well this is pretty shocking news. I guess when someone waves big money in front of your nose it's pretty hard to concentrate on the ideals of OSS. Mind you I don't know if one can realistically blame anyone...they created the software, and they can do with it as they see fit. It's just sad mostly. I hope shoutcast/winamp remain free for at least personal use.
Damn. The one thing (besides the software) that I really liked about WinAMP was the one-time registration. I hate paying for bug fixes every year from Micro$oft. Oh Well. I guess I'll just have to live with version 2.22 until something better comes along.
My guess as to the 'why' of the whole thing is that they wanted ShoutCast, which is inherently cool. Maybe there's a place in the universe for an integrated IM/WinAMP/ShoutCast applet.
-- Spring: Forces, coiled again!
Let's take a slightly calmer look at things
what happened?...they aquired Nullsoft...
while that may justifably make a few people nervous, it in itself is not a reason to hate AOL
it's what they may or may not do with it now that they have it
dont hate for hatred's sake
I'm sure there's going to be lots of tortured whining here about how AOL is becoming the new Microsoft because of this. Now's your big chance to put your code where your mouth is and do something.
/. "community" do its own OSS clone of WinAMP.
Rather than discussing it to death, I'd *LOVE* to see the
Are you guys up to it?
Mozilla isn't the only AOL Free Software. The Linux version of the AOL IM client, written in tcl/tk, is a Free Software project actually initiated by AOL (not purchased, as Mozilla was).
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
AOL is big into trying to get @Home et al. to open up their networks, either willingly or unwillingly (legislatively or judicially).
As an @Home user, I don't care now, but if the UCITA stuff goes through, I'll be worrying aplenty.
ISP choice? Maybe cool for now, but what about if MCIWorldNet starts cracking down on their end of the pipeline on things, spurred by UCITA? Shit flows downhill.
Like it or not, in corporateview, we "consumers" are just mushrooms.
Hhmmm... so I guess that the next version of WinAmp will start up with that infamous voice... "Welcome!"
In Soviet Russia, Jesus asks: "What Would You Do?"
I mocked their commercials, but it appears that one way or another they intend to make the statement true...scary.
At first I thought this was a VERY late April 1 joke, but no such luck.
On the other hand, I've been saying that MP3 was "going mainstream" for the past 18 months or so, and here's proof of it.
I use the windows ICQ at work and I haven't noticed any AOL poisoning....
What are you refering to?
FinkPloyd
I use three different programs created by companies that are now under the AOL umbrella - Netscape, ICQ, and now Winamp. Based on what's happened with Netscape and ICQ, I'm not worried about them screwing up Winamp. AOL has a habit of buying good companies and not breathing down their necks.
Microsoft, however, is another story. I purchased Nevod's NAT1000, a network address translator/proxy/firewall, etc. When Microsoft bought Nevod, NAT1000 was no longer available for purchase, and current customers like myself are left with no official upgrade path, though we may feel free to buy a bloated copy of Win2000 server which will have many NAT1000 features incorporated into it. Currently, my proxy is a 133 running NT4 and NAT1000, which while no powerhouse, is perfectly suited for the task. God forbid I have to "upgrade" to Win2000.
All in all, I wish AOL had bought Nevod rather than Microsoft.
Delusion http://www.r33t.org/
the only problem with this theory is that imho one of the biggest sources for small warez such as copyrighted mp3's is the newsgroups. alt.binaries.sounds.mp3 on any given day might have 20,000 posts. as far as the unwashed masses of aol users, how many are really into the whole digital audio scene, own cd burners, etc etc. The biggest potential market for mp3 technology is the group that is so heavily into it already, and not your typical aol user who would never be able to stream anything but low bit rate crap anyways because aol's service sucks so bad.
Well, looks like that suit's settled: "Music software developer PlayMedia Systems has settled its $20 million lawsuit against Nullsoft, just one day after America Online bought the Net music technology firm. PlayMedia had accused Nullsoft of copyright infringement over its AMP code. PlayMedia also had added music news, download, and community site MP3.com to the lawsuit; that action also was settled, PlayMedia said."
Commence speculating about the precise chronology and terms of this settlement in light of yesterday's AOL announcement.
(The link above will probably be dead once news.com gets a real story up.)
Wow, $10 for software for two years. You really got hosed on that one. Maybe you should call the DA or something...
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
all hail AOL, the masters of buying every successful program they can manage to find!
makes me retch just thinking about it!
--Computation Renegade_ag@hotmail.com "Morning is what you get when you wake up too early =)"
Now if someone would just roll out a decent MP3 streaming client for Mac so I can ditch all these Real servers...
The question I have is what will this do to the lawsuit against WinAMP? Would AOL be able to provide a protective shield, or would WinAMP's previous leads have to still defend themselves? IANAL..... of course....
Karnal
Wrong answer. AOL developed Instant Messenger independently of Mirabilis' ICQ system, but AOL recently bought Mirabilis. That's all.
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
Lets just hope AOL doesn't screw up a good thing (winamp).
Yeah, right on. The world also doesn't need any more word processors either. Word and Word Perfect are enough! And what's with all these different email clients? Everyone should just be content to just use Netscape Mail or Outlook! And we sure as hell don't need any more operating systems. Windows 95 and Windows NT. If you want games, go with 95, for serious work NT! Who needs more choice than that??
In case it isn't obvious, the above is sarcasm. I for one think a variety of different programs that do a similar function is a good thing. So what if there are 15 different IRC clients? I think that's a great thing. Find one that matches the features you want or need and use it!
The problem is when huge commercial powers own the two dominant products. Netscape used to be a fast, lean, fairly standards-compliant browser. Now it's a hog. Sure it does more, but much of the extra bloat is annoying eye-candy.
The big problem when two huge companies compete on a certain type of product is that it seems to always lead to featuritis, bloat, and products aimed at "joe average" who almost never wants what I want. I want a lot of choices in MP3 players, IRC clients, web browsers, instant messengers... I don't want to be forced to choose between a $40 AOL Instant Messenger Delucks and a $39 Microsoft MyMessenger Extra.
Well said, fb. In that case, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I do have a question though - even with Time Warner's enormous market cap, could AOL feasibly/realistically pull off a deal (possibly just a partnership instead of an actual merger?)
I ask that question becuase I'm seeking an answer to where AOL is going with all this. They need to make a move soon because even after a deal is signed there will be a delay of some sort until the two technologies are merged efficiently. Anyone offer some hints?
AOL now own half of them (ICQ, Winamp & Netscape).
:)
Clearly, they're trying to make sure that, while they may not get all the ISP traffic, they can have their fingers in the proverbial pies of other net users.
Now if they can just buy Number 18 on the download.com list... (A Nightmare on Sesame Street
--
Rod Begbie done this, and he's not
Ah, therein lies the rub. My own intuition says that AOL just wants to establish a beach head on everyone's computer, if they can, as a way of opening a gateway to a wider audience (i.e. captive market). Maybe they won't do anything manipulative or insidious with the product, or maybe they will, it's tough to say. A good example would be to chart the progress of ICQ since it was purchased by AOL (last year?)... They haven't started charging for it yet, but they have made some rumblings to that effect.
I really don't see how much damage they can do with WinAmp though. Sure, it's the best player around, but there are a ton of other programs only a step behind it, with all of the same functionality built in, so it'll be difficult to create a monopoly. I don't know much about the rest, but I imagine the situation is probably much the same...
Actually, upon further investigation, it is a problem with OSS, most likely. FreeBSD won't let a user process crash the box. Wish that FreeBSD would get its kernel sound drivers a little more up to date, I've had nothing but trouble since running OSS.
Anyhow, since switching to the current version of x11amp, I've had much better luck.
-lx
Did AOL acquire the products Winamp and Shoutcast, or the company Nullsoft?
--Sam Stephenson
Sam
Keep the latest and greatest version, just in case.
It's not that WinAmp was bad, but we have to switch now, and there are more feature-packed players out there.
You have to switch, or are considering switching? I'm still using Netscape, and AOL bought them out as well, I see no *need*, just the consideration if, for example, they start embedding add spaces into the winamp window or stream adds through shoutcast at random times or something.
-AS
-AS
*Pikachu*
Kinda odd also, since its nothing more then an IE control.
Maybe WinAMP will be a cool New Netscape Plugin.
Having a huge force like AOL behind an MP3 company could actually be a good thing as it throws major big bucks MP3. I would love to see RIAA and AOL battle it out.
--
Deepak Saxena
1999 - Year of the Penguin
Deepak Saxena
1999 - Year of the Penguin
Linux Demo Day '99 - http://www.linuxdemo.org
But as a greater whole, this move puts AOL in conflict with the RIAA while Microsoft seems content to play both sides of the fence (signing on to support the encrypted vapor-format while retaining mp3 support in other software).
And it seems part of a larger trend. Computer companies have little fear of the RIAA and mp3 continues to grow as an audio standard (has anybody dropped support for mp3 in a product?).
With so many captive subscribers and newly-acquired Winamp, AOL seems in a perfect position to offer pay-to-download mp3s and add audio to its list of provided content.
Like it or not, AOL is trying to get a lock on fancy content to attract new users. But the real opponent in this move is the RIAA more than the average computer user.
Ita erat quando hic adveni.
Well... I hope for them that they're not UK residents... here about half of that would go to the taxman... fair enough, but wouldn't it be nice to know where it goes ?
Remember guys, this was all preordained...you're dealing with companies that sell software. Money is their first priority. Sell-outs like this are to be expected.
Truly open-source software apps (XAmp, FreeAmp, etc) will begin to prevail (as they should!). Also, Sonique, Kjofol, and others that come from the hacker community will still be around.
It only remains to be seen how AOL will poison this as they poisoned ICQ.
I don't even know what to think of this. Reminds me of an old saying, .. "Crazier things have and will continue to happen". What's next? Microsoft ports Office to Linux? Linus gives up Linux to start a horse breeding ranch? These are some crazy times.
Surely this can't be true! Can it?
I don't know how Nullsoft made their funding from 1997 till today. Does anyone know? But whoever gave them money in that period must be a very happy person right now...
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
While I have faith that AOL will continue to let Nullsoft and its existing staff make its own decisions about development of Winamp, I wonder if this was really a decision brought on by Playmedia's suit, or a sudden case of greed down in Sedona. Granted, it does seem like the RIAA for a while there was bullying Nullsoft around, and true, it would be convenient to have your share of $400 million to defend yourself with legally, but has anybody wondered if this is a business decision a long time in the making? Shoutcast isn't a technology necessarily designed to exclusively legitimize mp3. Shoutcast is just as capable of streaming news, commercials and other salable audio. IE 5.0 tries the same with it's silly 'Internet Radio' features, and god knows broadcast.com has been doing this for far too long. The winamp homepage, which has apparently yet to make news of this to anybody ('Oh by the way, our new version 2.2.3b21 features AOL's logo peppered here and there'), features screenshots of the minibrowser being used to sell CDs on Amazon.com. I imagine we would be rather dense to ignore this obvious marketing ploy. 'Hey investors! Winamp now has space for your advertisements! Give us money!' The Preferences dialog also has space for select links, and it's only a matter of time before companies start using THIS for ad space, too. Conclusion? Don't hastily assume that Nullsoft was so-suddenly gobbled up by a greedy ISP (even if it IS AOL). Justin Frankel is in this for the money, not because he wants to evangelize for the FSF. We can safely assume Nullsoft won't do to Winamp what was done to the latest version of RealPlayer (I hate a 12-meg download for a bloated piece of software with WAYYYY too many unnecessary features), but we must recognize that it was inevitable they do SOMETHING profitable with their technology. .WMA (badly). So this doesn't necessarily break down to a EBM + MP3 vs. MS + WMA battle. Here's hoping, tho'.
As for competing with Microsoft, I don't know. My musings don't lead my train of thought to see this as a direct assault on Redmond. MediaPlayer supports MP3 (badly), and Winamp supports
$0.02
--neil
I'll trade muh buddy list of MP3z for yer Buddy list!
BOYCOTT WINAMP
AOL is the next MSFT. Why no one has started a crusade against them, I'll never know. The department of Justice is surely on their heels.
AOL, right now, commands over 50% of Internet access in this country - and the next ISP behind them is at only a fraction of that (MSN, incidentally).
Note: I do not dislike AOL because they are a corporate behemoth, but rather that I don't trust AOL as a technology company. Like MSFT (and unlike another large company, such as IBM), they are basically a marketing machine. AOL Internet access is shoddy and unreliabe at best - a documented fact. However, millions of people sign on every day because it is so "easy" to use. They've been taken in by the commercials, the endless bombardment of CDs, and "You've got mail!"
AOL has committed 3 acts of hubris:
1) They bought Mirabilis
2) They bought Netscape
3) They bought Nullsoft
AOL controls chat software, two major portals on the Web, and now they are trying, as any wise Internet behemoth should, to be a major player in the online music space.
Although AOL has a tradition of keeping the companies it buys intact and producing good software (well, ICQ still has a few glitches), I, personally, will go home tonight and find an alternate mp3 player.
If you guys tout "free software," it's time for a GNU MP3 player. Any takers?
I look forward to hearing replies.
Best of luck,
Markus
Invidia fortunum ovit.
I suppose one could argue that someone needs to get really really big so that they can fight off MS. But then they could be in league..and 1 Giant is better then two bullying the world.
Not to mention that ICQ and Netscape went crap when AOL got there hands on them...oh well another product going to hell. Damn I was really hoping nullsoft was going to go IPO.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...
... ...
... SOFT
... WARS
Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back
The Furbies are engaged in battle against The Empire, an enormous megacorporation with a virtual stranglehold on the galaxy.
The battle seems to be favouring the Furbies, The Empire is buckling under the pressure of their relentless onslaught.
But, The Empire did not gain control of the galaxy through stupidity - there is, as there always has been, a plan brewing in the mind of their calculating leader, Darth Gates.
His plan is simple: to form another evil entity, an entity as vile and powerful as The Empire, to distract the good Furbies and allow The Empire to recoup and attack when it is least expected.
With the latest of its brutal takeovers nearly complete, this growing force of evil will soon be within striking distance of the Furby people.
The fearless Jedi knights must intervene quickly or all hope will surely be lost. They are the only ones who can stop the Furbies from becoming mindless drones of The Empire...
I understand John Orwel a lot more...
Personaly I think it was stupid to sell winamp to theses Bastards...AOL SUX!!! And it's definitely not to be thrusted. Now winamp will probably be no longer a shareware and become a PAYWARE and this will definitely be BAD
ive felt really guilty over the last couple of years about not registering, especially since it looks like ill be moving my mp3s to linux. but now, i just feel glad.
but if you were nullsoft, and just had like two lawsuits thrown at you in recent history with many more probably on the way, wouldnt you want some... protection?
Wouldn't you want a parent who has enough money to fight off the entire music industry while you keep making your product in peace?
I think AOL will settle with the SDMI. But even that is better for Nullsoft than going it alone. How painful would that be, to try to fight off dogs-of-war lawyers while youre trying to code and make money off a shareware program?
It would suck. Lots.
unc_
Well I guess If Microsoft can get away with it AOL can to? What's next? Starbucks!
I know few off us care about Mp3 but this goes way beyond that. It's the principal. Where's the DOJ when you need it! Personaly I hate loath and really really hate AOL. Why? Don't know. [guees it's in the name] But this can't be good news. I like WinAmp why do they need to steal good programs. Fist ICQ now this! When does it stop
"Just once I would like someone to call me sir... without adding 'your making a scene'"
I think we all ought to boycott Winamp, reverse engineer SHOUTCast, and port X11Amp to Windows. Oh well. Remember boys and girls, "AOL sucks the llama's ass." = )
# Zoot
FYI: FRAMESET is a per-spec tag, the others are not.
This is not the greatest sig in the world, this is just a tribute.
sorry, couldn't resist :)
"However, I say that the next target is either Time Warner or Verio. "
Time Warner? With the market cap of $77 Billion?
AOL would have to pay such a premium. It won't
be happening soon, with AOL at 122B and falling.
Verio, on the other hand, at the paltry 1.8B market cap, would be a trivial acquisition for somebody like that.
I don't see how you can put those two companies in the same sentence, in an acquisition/merger context.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
The community can kill two birds with one stone. Just find yourself a new MP3 player.
1) This will make small companies think twice about selling to a mindless corporation and,
2) This will make mindless corporations think twice about purchasing such a company if they think everyone will walk.
This is our revolution and it's not for sale.
Quux26
My
Quux26
www.crashspace.net
You are never going to see AIM bundled with Winamp. You aren't going to be able to tune in to spinner radio through ICQ. This is a strategy which all has to do with one thing:
The Set Top Market.
AOL's acqusition of these companies, and its investments in the high speed bandwidth technologies from Bell Atlantic and others all point to AOL being your source for interactive couch potato entertainment.
Microsoft has a HUGE headstart when it comes to this sector with WebTV. AOL is just warming up for when it is time to tack on an extra $20 a month to be a cable provider too.
This is why AOL was rumored to be buying CBS a couple weeks ago. As cable companies are converging on the Internet as an extra service they can provide, AOL is converging upon Cable as an extra service it can provide.
In fact, I say after the DSS/USSB merger happens, AOL will seriously think about purchasing them. It just makes sense.
Then you can tune in to your AOLTV, to the songs that you want to hear, or the shows you want to see. Nonetheless, AOLTV has the entertainment you want to watch,hear or read all the time, 24 hours a day.
And that, my friends, is what AOL is doing.
May the source be with him. :)
Today's English Lesson: Oxymorons
Sanity.html - Error 404 not found
Well, looks like I'll be booting back into windows to take the bitch out. There are, btw, far better Mp3 players for windows - K-Jofol and Sonique come to mind. You can find links and resources on them at Skinz. Most of my Mp3s I play in BeOS, though, because of the added filesystem attributes for Mp3, and Soundplay, the greatest mp3 player ever.
So long, Winamp, and thanks for all the skins...
-lx
Posted by Bakeman:
This is a bunch of BS. I always felt like WinAmp was the sorta software that swayed away from the mainstream crap, but I guess everyone is out for the buck and integrity means nothing.
> ...but MS wouldn't play along
No pun intended, right?
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Hey, let's not give them any ideas!
-------
Bill Gates Is My Evil Twin.
in case you havent noticed, few ppl who get cable modems after having had aol for a while actually get rid of aol. they keep it because of all the features it provides that the cable company dosent. aol realizes this and they are moving twords an even more feature based service because they know that with the massive growth of cable and dsl there is no way they will be able to keep up. so they are moving twords primarily being an internet content provider instead of an internet service provider.
why would they get rid of Nitrane to replace it with that crappy decoder they use now unless they were scared?
I was wondering that as well. I still use Winamp 2.20, because v2.21 and later all have annoying clicking noises when I play mp3s. I asked on #nullsoft on EFNet and they didn't offer any help or explanation.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Here is a simple example (AOL is becoming a vertical oligopoly, along with ms, ibm, ge and others):
Vertical Monopoly: Control everything from tree cutting to paper making and magazine publishing.
Horizontal Monopoly: Control every signle magazine.
Oligopoly: a cartel or small number of players in a certain market
If you are an idiot and the internet means Netcape and ICQ (which means the internet began in the mid 90s) then maybe you have a point. What the hell does the internet have to do with Winamp?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
AOL certainly has been making big strides in acquiring the leading competitors in different areas of computing: Netscape, ICQ, Winamp, etc. To me, this is definitely AOL becoming another internet/media giant (Microsoft comes to mind quickly as an example). I don't really trust either company, or companies similar to them, and frankly, this scares the Windows-using part of me; the Linux part of me just laughs nervously over these acquisitions.
However, I see a large difference in how AOL and Microsoft are becoming giants. Microsoft just drives different companines out of business, providing only their crappy programs as alternatives. AOL, on the other hand, just buys out the companies and (hopefully) allows them run themselves without any AOL intervention in the coding process. That software remains out there, perhaps even promoted by AOL, and it remains a viable competitor to the crap Microsoft and other similar monopolies throw out at us.
I'm not saying AOL is a good guy for buying out these companies; these buyouts are in the interest of AOL, not the companies. I personally hate AOL's services. But at least AOL doesn't crush them out of existence. The great software is still there, it's just AOL owns it.
I'm probably wrong on some points, this is just how I see from my user-end vantage. Right now I have Netscape and ICQ open, and I'm having absolutely no problems with them (even the fact that AOL owns them). As long as the software AOL buys out remains the same, in the short-run I have no problem with them buying companies out. The long-run impact is something I'm still thinking about, and I see both good and bad in it. It all depends on how ethical AOL will be (yeah right).
*Raising shields for return fire* =) If you're going to flame, make it a respectable argument, please.
Jack
Demona's Law - "User data expands to exceed available bandwidth." ("User data" being pr0n, mp3's, vob's,
there are so many free mp3 players and...
therefore players like NaD that are just a little bit under par (comparitively) would probably overshadow winamp if it were crippled...
sure, if I didn't have to pay my tuition (as I do) I probably would splurge for the $10 registration...
Wait till $10 doesn't look like an appetizing dinner for two and then I'll pay it...
and it will do you no good to whine about moral obligations... this is a morally relative world, especially when it comes to the marketplace...
Last time I checked, ICQ was just as slow and unreliable as it was before AOL bought it. The ICQ website is still a confusing, tangled mess, certainly no slicker than it was before AOL bought it. The ID numbers are as unweildy as ever, and the client software is still free of charge.
So what's poisoned about it? The fact that AOL bought it? Phooey.
Jesus christ aol aquires winamp1@#$?!@#?$ this is really really really bad. I can imagine listening to any mp3 using winamp that has "explicit lyrics" and winamp stopping and a popup window coming out of nowhere saying, we're sorry we cannot play this mp3, it violates AOL's Terms Of Service (TOS) and is deemed offenisive by our 31337 HaX0rz please stop or aol staff will come to your house and molest you.
I think i'm going back to useing winplay 3
This is not necesarily a bad thing...
Yes, AOL is a HUGE conglomerate, and it seems that they are only doing this because mp3s are so big lately, but.. (you know there had to be one) they also have alot of money, and sway in the internet world. This could be a good thing. More money, better development, and if AOL starts advertising this could mean that many many more people would potentialy be exposed to mp3s, and give it the boost it needs.
think about it.
--neil
AOL did not introduce the instant messenger, ICQ had been around a long time and was a great little program at the time. Then AOL bought it and turned it into the huge, screaming piece of bloatware it is today (BY DEFAULT IT SOUNDS LIKE A TYPEWRITER WHEN YOU TYPE!!!)
Just wait 1 year, and pressing the eject button in Winamp will lead you to an AOL page with songs for download (sporting a big fat banner add).
Luckily, I don't see myself ever booting to Windows in one year...
I once thought that the WinAmp page
was at http://www.winamp.com.
Did they take it down or did they move
it and I just did not hear of it?
010110000010110101010100011110010111000001100101
The question is what is AOL going to do with them. Does anyone know about AOL and RIAA relations? AOL vs. Real Networks (for streaming audio) could be fun.
I never would have guessed I would be hoping for AOL to win. =)
-- The intelligence on this planet is a constant, but the population is growing. --
Its good in someways because the music companies are less likely to sue AOL who has bucks to defend MP3. Little indies don't have these resources and get bullied (look at the emulation makers..). MP3 has a strong corporate voice that can defend MP3 (and will after 400 million.)
AOL seems to be in a bit a strange position in terms of "Broadband"..
Cable modem users use cable ISPs (I doin't think they have choice")
DSL is just starting to become available, I don't know if you have ISP choice there. I know its connection less (ie you can't get a DSL connection dialled into anywhere, the line gets dropped at the phone company.)
I think the government is looking into equal access bills for ISPS, but thats another story.
If people want high speed access they may have to ditch AOL, so I think AOL is diversifying. They have the AOL.com site which is similar to Altavista/Yahoo/Netcenter. They also seem to paying big bucks for "Free or shareware" software to make sure they have a net precence.
Have you noticed that none of the major Nullsoft developments over the past month or two have been announced over at Nullsoft or Winamp, not even via press release? Recently, it's been looking like Nullsoft has been _grooming_ themselves for just this kind of buyout. They are trying to maintain the underground mp3 community, but are acting like media whores, and pretending that anything bad (or distasteful) that goes on with them has never happened. (Remember the lawsuit last month? Oh yeah, that.)
Well, we can only expect that AT&T will encourage AOL to promote AAC, and help deprecate MP3, the same way that AOL owns Netscape but distributes IE. Then eventually, Nullsoft will fire themselves
As the Nullsoft homepage says:
Nullsoft is a small, innovative software company based in Sedona, AZ. Phear us.
Yah rite, d00d!
PS: Wonder if this means Winamp will become GPL someday soon.
Regards,
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
In any case, it's a pretty safe bet they'll restrict the playlists and make it more like any bland mainstream radio station. Too bad. Spinner's Gothic channel isn't bad, but I can't imagine 'family-friendly' AOL supporting music that half the US thinks causes children to kill each other.
I also hope that AOL knows what they're getting themselves into. I mean, I don't know the details of it fully, but Nullsoft is being sued by Play Media and from what I know they probably deserve it. I remember Justin ported AMP to DOS (DosAMP) and then ported that to Windows (WinAMP), so I find it hard to believe that he has all original code in there.
Plus I'm sure AOL's going to make Spinner.com into some sort of Top 40 crap station now, and I used to listen to their Drum and Bass channel a lot. Or at least they'll fill it full of advertisements and associated schlock.
-- atomly
>They obviously have people out there looking for >new good technology, ICQ anyone?
:-) ICQ was a bunch of lemurs (who seemed to be unable to pay attention to bugtraq etc) from the getgo, it made perfect sense.
At least ICQ was flaky and full of security holes BEFORE they bought it. The features that were added later (like the "web server" which gave you global read to a BillyWare ICQ user's box) didn't come as much of a shock.
Winamp, on the other hand, works quite well, and isn't yet an unmitigated disaster to your hapless BillyWare box.
>good note they haven't f**ked with ICQ yet, so
>maybe they know when to keep hands off.
See above
>subject line) so don't be surprised when they
>adopt a yearly subscription fee for all AOL(tm)
>software. Of course all that would do is
>make more people look for free stuff, so JUST >KEEP CODING.
Interesting hypothesis. You could well be right, even if it does plunge us in to bad 80s sci-fi (Bruce Sterling, anyone?). Even more reason to learn to love debian, GNU and the like! An ex-colleague of mine worked for AOL in quite a senior executive position, and what he told me doesn't fill me with glee AT ALL.
I'm just glad that I don't spend much time in windows.. X11amp works just fine.
Not even close. Appearantly, you don't bother to keep track of the antitrust trial. Microsoft will be calling an AOL exec soon as a hostile witness to prove that in fact AOHell intended to use Netscape to compete with The Monopoly.
The only reason AOL uses IE is because if they don't get they their software removed from the Online Services folder on the Windows desktop. It's that simple.
Does that make them best friends?
To top that off, however idiotic and lame (i.e., censorship) AOL's *service* may be, their software is exceedingly well-engineered. Take ICQ, AIM, or even AOL 4.0 for a test-drive and you'll see what I mean.
Albeit, AOL is quickly becoming almost as scary as The Monopoly, but one has to pick the lesser of two evils, as the quote goes.
I don't understand this "Ohs", jaws on the floor etc
Everything works ok.
Look what happened to Netscape's web browser when
AOL aquired it. I remember when they used to have updates for netscape on an almost weekly basis, now where lucky if they have an update once every 4 months.
/me bends Microsoft and AOL over his knee and spanks them like dirty whores.
Is it just me or does anyone else hate Microsoft and AOL with a passion?
I mean these guys are goin' for a monopoly here..
sheesh
I'm sick of it!!!! grrrr!!
burnboy
0_o
An AOL spokesman, today:
"AOL would like it known that we are now officially mocking the world at large. Especially all you Winamp and Shoutcast users. Hah, we told you we'd get you someho- er, I mean, no comment."
Your "whole point" was wrong. X11AMP has been around for a while, is Open Source(tm) and can use WinAMP skins.
--
Get your fresh, hot kernels right here!
Hey fishbone, Fair enough. However, where so YOU think they will go next keeping in mind that an acquisition of those "types" of companies is an ideal next step?
You are very corect on the market cap issue, but I was merely trying to point out what type of company they should go after as well as offering some actual names.
What companies do you think will fall next? -rob
My mistake, I had never realized that Winamp was shareware and not OSS. That makes this whole deal somewhat less outrageous i think. I guess I'm as guilty as many other people fro not paying $10 for it's use.
This can only bode of evil to come.
Freedom begins when you tell Mrs Grundy to go fly a kite. _R.A.Heinlein
I'd wait and see about the ICQ thing...
As far as I know AOL doesn't really own ICQ yet, not till 2001 or something like that...
And with all this stuff there buying and taking over ya never know what they might have planned!
-Rob L
GQMPEG/mpg123 FOREVER.
Who's laughing now? If all 5 million (according to Yahoo) Winamp users had done what Nullsoft asked and paid them the paltry $10 for the hours and hours that most of then surely have used Winamp.. well, let's just say Nullsoft would certainly have been a lot less anxious to hop on the AOL train. But no, it's been proven: we live in a society where people refuse to accept their capitalistic responsibilities and then refuse to accept the consequences. Every one of you out there who used Winamp for more than 30 days without paying for it---this is YOUR FAULT. The blame rests squarely on your cheap-ass shoulders.
(Of course, this is why we love REAL free software so much 'round these parts.. the linux kernel is not for sale at any price. right?)
--neil
Posted by Roynasser:
Must of these small somapnies, or at least ex-small companies, such as Nullsoft, and Mirabilis,
(Dustin, and the boys) are all personality less!!!
Surely i would probably sell my company for 200m dollars, but still, i would probably be like yahoo, and grow, and sell ads on my sites, and then buy off some other small-medium company...
I agree the major corporations are buying everything, but the mind-less developers are selling everything...
(I don't know who to balme... comapnies or developers... giants, or midgets?)
Anyways... there goes my comment!
i mean, i don't really see why this is a problem. It isn't particularly surprising for AOL to want to own some mp3 code, or for that matter to own some mp3.
:P
so AOL wants to run some mp3 distribution channels. so? keep in mind that AOL is, and has always been, more of a content provider than a software provider. this is a natural step.
now, when they bought netscape, that was something to be scared of. After all, with Winamp, or i guess with Spinner, you have a multitude of alternatives. With netscape you have very little alternatives. Also, if aol owns winamp, that doesn't change mp3 at large. mp3 is still the same. but Netscape has great political power, and what the support can make or break a file format. Owning netscape means AOL now has close to direct control (shared with MS, anyway) over the HTML file format..
so the fact that AOL has crashed the mp3 party means little to the rest of the party. never mind that AOL is fairly evil, and that they might try to do evil things to the rest of the mp3 market. they can't cause much hurt.
of course, since i've never been to spinner.com, and since i already use a free (mac-only) mp3 player called SoundApp, it doesn't really affect me directly. if i'd paid ten bucks to own winamp it would alarm me that AOL had control of the code now.
what would be interesting is if they integrate winamp into AOL, and people immediately start trading pirated mp3 over AOL like crazy. Since they're using AOL's system to transmit and store the illegal mp3s, could AOL be sued? i dunno if AOL knows what it's getting into here.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
No, no, no:
.sig quotes myself, but if anyone else feels like it, feel free.
"AOL is Al Gore."
I don't do
That probably where I got the title from. I believe that it sums up our current state of affairs perfectly.
yeah like they could do with netscape.
but, I'll have faith first and complain if things go wrong (or start doing so).
New things are always on the horizon
A lot of the messages responding to this (very strange) turn of events are basically saying "Oh, no, AOL is another monopoly." This, quite frankly, is NOT true. There are many, many things I dislike about AOL, and they are a very large company, but they are not a Monopoly, and while this turn of events is shocking, I don't consider it terribly dangerous. Here's why:
1. Monopolies must own a huge majority of the markets they control in order to truly be monopolies. As far as the Internet goes, I doubt very much that this is the case: while AOL may be one of the largest online services around, the sheer number of people on the internet, whether through large ISP's like GTE or BellSouth, or through local ISP's, keeps AOL from the Lion's share of marketshare. Also, since ISP's don't need to own most of the market to stay in business, I see little danger (at this point) of ISP's going belly up en masse and leaving us with only AOL and a few others.
2. WinAmp is a very popular MP3 player, but it's not the only one out there -- and if I recall correctly, it's currently being sued for illegally using a proprietary MP3 codec. There are plenty of MP3 players out there -- some freely available -- for people to use if AOL decides to hike up the price significantly.
3. IceCast is a free software implementation of AOL's purchase, so there seems little danger of that capability being denied from the world at large.
Because of those three points, it seems unlikely AOL's purchases will be any significant threat to their respective markets, so long as everyone is wary and keeps a close eye on AOL's future actions.
Besides that, they continued to support Mozilla after they bought Netscape, didn't they? That should be some encouragement...
Eviscerati.Org: All Hail the Eviscerati
Well somebody has to own all the apps on the Windoze desktop. Who cares who it is? Windoze is a dead-end closed proprietary platform, and users that buy into need to get used to the idea that they're getting into a single-sourced vertical market anyway. Who cares? It's only Windoze. This only effects users of the Windoze embedded application suite. It's insignificant in the general-purpose computing world, and I'm kinda surprised CmdrTaco felt it was newsworthy.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Good Christ! AOL must be stopped! It's the damned "AOL's so easy" sheep mentality that is allowing this kind of thing to happen! This is as bad as putting AOL on Linux-powered set-top boxes!! I'm all for getting Linux out into the limelight, but let's not get it associated with the sheep!!
Windows Media Player has played MP3 for years.
The new version plays WMA.
Jesus! is the most accurate word I can think of to describe this.
Who says that only M$ are trying to own the internet?
Looks to me like AOL wants to bore their way even deeper into people's homes. In the short term they'll give their customers all sorts of propriatary streaming content (probably a bunch of crap, but that's what all their content is), then later on try to push their way into the software side of handheld computers & home networks.
It's interesting to think back just a few years ago. One of AOL's new features was an Internet Mail gateway, so you could send & receive mail with non-AOL members. I pretty much thought they'd fade into the background when the WWW took off, and now look at them -- they're riding the wave better than M$ is.
Not that I'd ever use their service, but they've got their business plan churning.
--Mid
?
The entire concept of AOL owning everything on the Windows desktop (What do they need now, Winzip and GameSpy?) really creeps me out, especially after the keynote the AOL employee gave at the Linux Expo. It sounded like a stock investor speech with "Oh yeah, Linux is good too! Embedded systems!" tacked on. He went over all the brands AOL owns and said, essentially, why AOL would be making money off of everything you do on the Net, and why you should like that. "AOL Anywhere" as opposed to "Microsoft Everywhere."
On the other hand, they haven't done anything too terribly brutal to the companies they've acquired just yet. ICQ, as far as I know, has gone virtually unchanged, and so has Netscape, but I don't want to fire up WinAmp (I do have to use Windows from time to time -- gah) and see an ad for barnesandnoble.com in the browser window, and something tells me they wouldn't have a problem with selling companies an audience this way.
In the short term, I think this will probably be good for MP3s in general -- AOL's a pretty wealthy company, the RIAA might just back off. But I'm not sure we're not gearing up for another massive corporation controlling all we see and do -- especially after that keynote, which had more to do with total domination than Linux.
--Slack
Heard on a television commercial this morning:
"AOL is the internet."
I have a hard time cheering for companies who practice deceptive advertising.
Also, I don't think I'm alone in my fear that the internet is becoming dominated by an ever-shrinking number of ever-growing corporations. Here's a fun scenario: Microsoft and AOL get together and decide "You know, TCP/IP and Unix was good in it's day. What we need NOW, though, is a high-speed protocol that takes advantage of the power of Windows 2000. You don't need to know the specifics of the protocol, just use Win2000 and we'll take care of the rest." Don't tell me they wouldn't do it if they thought they could.
Right now, everyone cheers AOL for backing mp3 because we want a Godzilla to fight the Moth-Ra of the RIAA. I wonder if we'll be so happy about it later.
Smart move if your hypothesis is true...
AOL have a deal with Bell Atlantic to use their ADSL service, and the there's a bill being pushed by a Virginia (AOL home) congressman to force cable companies to sell service to allow other companies to act as cable ISPs. Look for much more broadband competition in the the Bell Atlantic region soon as they roll out their ADSL service, and the cable companies compete. I work for Bell Atlantic, and have been told this is seen as a critical first-to-market race.
Not that I can tell, they didn't.
MacAMP is owned by a completely different
company ( @soft ), and their website
has nothing regarding a buyout.
( www.macamp.com )
-Just Another Anonymous Coward
Anyone notice this little blurb on the Yahoo report?
"Nullsoft is the developer of Winamp, the leading branded MP3 player for Windows, and SHOUTcast, an MP3 streaming audio system. With 15 million total downloads, Winamp has an installed base of 5 million users and is the No. 2 most popular application on Download.com after ICQ, averaging more than 43,000 downloads daily."
From the desk of an AOL executive...
Number 1: ICQ (acquired)
Number 2: WinAmp (acquired)
Number 3: WinZip
Number 4: Netscape (acquired)
The results of last weeks top downloads at Download.com are listed above, in that order.
Scary that AOL owns three of four, eh? I think so....
-"AOHell. The good old days"
Old Commercial Software Paradigm:
Implement an innovative idea. Become wildly successful. Get bought out by Microsoft and retire at age 35.
*
New Commercial Software Paradigm:
Implement an innovative idea. Become wildly successful. Get bought out by AOL and retire at age 35.
only if you want to make money though. Before you flame, try to grow up a bit. They obviously have people out there looking for new good technology, ICQ anyone? They have tons of cash, thanks to the herds of AOLer's, and it looks like the savvy to pull it off. On a good note they haven't f**ked with ICQ yet, so maybe they know when to keep hands off. Of course, they are here to make money (see subject line) so don't be surprised when they adopt a yearly subscription fee for all AOL(tm) software. Of course all that would do is make more people look for free stuff, so JUST KEEP CODING.
+&x
Actually, the RIAA is reported to be very upset that Microsoft's media player will play the mp3 format. They apparantly tried to get MS to remove that capability, but MS wouldn't play along.
AOL has a increasingly strong grip on many of the most useful utilities out there. It has one of the two best browsers, one of the two best instant messagers, and now the definitive leader in mp3 players.
What is next? Well, one reader suggested WinZip? Although funny, I'm not so sure that AOL will spend that type of money on WinZip.
However, I say that the next target is either Time Warner or Verio. This is where AOL hurts badly. They need this type of affiliation to succeed in the coming years. Perhaps, a government mandate prevents such a move from occuring now, but I definitely forsee this one in the future (say March 2000?).
And one last whine, please Winamp, no ads! Otherwise, I'll have to code my own (and that won't be pretty).
Yeah, yeah, call me a doomsayer, but this all starts to sound like the world is truly coming to an end.
what's wrong with you spazzy bastards? "i better find a new mp3 player?" WHY? there is nothing wrong with winamp.
you know why a company like nullsoft would sell to a company like aol?
LOTS OF MONEY
if you were struggling for cash, and someone came along and handed you a big check, you'd cash it. if you DIDN'T you'd probably be the dumbest bastard alive.
try THINKING about things... you may think everything is all wonderful because there are a couple of free operating systems... well, 95% of the world is not using them. you know why? because they're harder to use. this is where companies like microsoft and AOL come into the picture...
not everyone can use unix (or unix-like) operating systems. not everyone knows as much about computers as most of you... and OBVIOUSLY, you folks don't know the FIRST THING about business. if you did, you wouldn't be sitting here READING the news, you'd be MAKING it...
I consider WinAmp to be a well worth the $15 i opted to pay them last year. While i have neither recieved nor required support, they did wire me a nice little thank you letter.
Juln
...that AOL is not only trying to make everyone believe that it is the internet, but with acquisitions of buzz-technology, it certainly is moving forward to own important parts of it.
I wonder how long until they are called a monopoly, albeit it's not much of a danger until they buy, let's say, sendmail.org.
Harry
Mirabilis did not call people on your contact list your "buddies". Need I say more?
When you say that people can keep using the older versions of software that has gotten worse as a result of its aquisition by a large blood sucking corporation, you are forgetting that the copies eventually dfisappear. I don't think many people keep the archive wwith the installer files after they are done installing software.
After my old drive failed, i had to install all my old software all over again, which meant downloading all the installers again.
I could not find a single public site that had Icq98 on it. I hated the bloated Icq99 client and spent a lot of time in a futile attempt to locate the software. Luckily a friend had the file...
The point in all of this is that eventually we will lose the older, better softweare. Nothing lasts forever.
Nix absolutably seriousness.
Another place for them to put that annoying aol instant messager garbage... just what we need .. *sight*
Winamp always was shareware, as I recall. $10 registration fee last time I checked.
Now that it's true about AOL buying Nullsoft, I want a $10 refund from Nullsoft for registering WinAmp.
I registered it two years ago and I've never gotten any sort of support or thank you notes from that company. I was willing to let it slide just because they're small, but now that they're selling out -- I've had it with their outfit.
I want my $10 back right NOW! They have all the money they'll need now that they're sucking AOL's teet.
Son of a Bit**! The DOJ needs to target AOL now. At least Micros~1 didn't get em. X11Amp is still there though!
Maybe you've been brainwashed too.. .
Off topic, but that subject is the title of a great album by the New Radicals.
*goes off shaking head* every bloody program I use...
Who cares, we have x11amp. mpg123 and icecast.
In a way I see this as a good thing because AOL may just be big enough to squash some of the mp3 naysayers.
> AOL is no longer bedfellows with Microsoft, and will help overturn them.
And how will this be better ? So, we have one megalomaniacal company in charge of the world instead of another. In case you're wondering, the common greeting between people today goes like this: "Do you have the Internet ? - Yes - What do you use, AOL or CompuServe ?" I have been asked this many times, in these exact words. So, AOL already has "mind-share" monopoly on ISPing. This frightens me a lot. Ans I am not too confident in the "open-source revolution"; so far, it seems that only people who like to write their own software from scratch can jump on that bandwagon, since there is virtually no other software available for Linux (or FreeBSD, or whatever). I mean, all I personally need is a graphics program, a C compiler, and some games, but I am a minority.
No, AOL scares me. A lot.
well i think we all know why.
nullsoft was desperate for money due to the suit filed by Playmedia. When AOL offered to buy nullsoft the small company, they must have seen this as an opportunity to prevent losing this case (even though playmedia had virtually no case against them).
tremendous resources to pay lawyers to get playmedia off our backs . . .
maybe i'm reading between the lines, but it does make sense.
why would they get rid of Nitrane to replace it with that crappy decoder they use now unless they were scared?
That's exactly why I took Winamp off my machine as soon as I read they had been bought out by AO-Hell. Now I'm stuck finding a comparable replacement...the playlist support in RealPlayer Plus G2 and Windows Media Player is minimal (RP+ has shuffle play, but doesn't preload ID3 information from files in the playlist; Media Player doesn't grok ID3 at all and doesn't do shuffle play).
20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
This is about as likely as ICQ becoming a commercial app due to AOL's purchase. If anything it will get rid of the $10 shareware fee on WinAMP, since Nullsoft is now backed by the huge pockets of America Online, rather than the 20 or so users that ever registered it.
Of course, if AOL decides to charge for WinAMP (this is about as likely as Microsoft open sourcing Windows), you could just continue to use 2.10, which works wonderfully. I only just upgraded from 2.05, and I really don't notice too much of a difference. I didn't want to use any AOL programs for a while, but they didn't pawn ICQ space to the highest bidder, and I doubt they'd do it to WinAMP. I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see AOL license the Sorensen algorithms next... it looks from their previous purchases (real-time communication and conferencing, audio compression/decompression) that they are looking to become a net tech company. Video compression is the next step.
anyone...anyone... bueller?
Surprised there hasn't been more discussion of Spinner... if you haven't checked it out, look at their format selection. Where else can you get a global, full-on, psychedelia station?
Perhaps it is that AOL is almost completely based on proprietary software? You can't even use AOL's Internet service without Windows. Obviously, the same is true of many of their other acquisitions.
AOL isn't just a crappy service provider any more. They own a very hefty chunk of the world's software Intellectual Property now, including some very neat companies they picked up with their acquisition of Netscape. Give them some credit. They're a different company now, or are at least trying to be.
Since when does owning things make you good? I always thought it was all about innovation and technical excellence, but you've obviously found other criteria for judging technology companies. I guess buying things up and screwing them over does make you cool aftetr all.
These are some very screwed priorities, my friend.
Free-amp is an open source mp3 player, and exists for a variety of platforms.
Anyone interested should check it out at www.freeamp.org.
Juln
It seems to me that AOL and RIAA might see similar interests mutually met. AOL can spread the next winamp to AOL's dullard user base, with nifty built-in features for purchase of online music in mp3 format, with all the SDMI fixings, from AOL. AOL can set-up some exclusive service for online music sales and become the middle-man for mp3 sales. The RIAA has to endorse mp3s, but if they provide the big name musicians through their terms (SDMI), they still control a big part of sales. Sure, there will be the free mp3 players, but there are so many AOL (aka, untechnical, un-industry-caring) users, its easy to create such a gigantic user base for whatever new trendy standard AOL may introduce, such as SDMI. This is the only way a technology like SDMI could survive the free-spirited and/or warez-loving online music life of today. This, plus a crackdown on ISP's and campuses hosuing illegal mp3's, should be enough to throw the distribution of mp3s (all future music) back under the biz's control.
Argument 1: AOL is buying everything, all my favorite software!
They aren't destroying the software. Besides, there are alternatives: Sonique, WMP, all kinds of MP3 players out there. There's Opera, IE, and Mozilla if you refuse to use an AOL product (Mozilla is not owned by AOL)
Argument 2: Oh my bloody God, AOL will put IM in Winamp, and "You've got mail" in Netscape.
AOL acquired Netscape Communications Corporation back in January. So far, the effects have been almost completely transparent, its not called "AOL Communicator 4.6" is it?. Chill guys, they were mainly after Netcenter, and given its user-base, who wouldn't be after it?
AOL has kept their instant messenger program out of ICQ, and God knows ICQ is far from perfect, but so far I see no ads, no flashing AOL logos, its more or less the same.
Argument 3: AOL will corrupt MP3, etc etc etc
AOL is a helluva powerful company. If they wanted to, they could REALLY expose shoutcast, Winamp, and crush that AMP lawsuit like a bug. This new merger will not kill Nullsoft, and anyone who knows Justin Frankel knows that he wouldn't sacrifice his company to oblivion. MP3 is a hot market now, AOL was SMART to take advantage of the opportunity first.
Better them than Microsoft.
----------
"They misunderestimated me." --George W Bush, Nov. 6, 2000
a world where your choices are MS windows (in whatever version), AOL-OS (you know it's next), or any flavor of *nix.. all using different standards, all running on different hardware..
:)
maybe it's time to drive OSS standards and APIs and drive out the megacorps..
then again, maybe i've been watching too much anime/sci-fi stuff
------ Poo-tee-weet?
You know, no one cares about comments about
....
clueless people except it makes the cluefull people happy to know that thank god there's lots of clueless people to stand over and look mighty.
No point in helping you guys. I'll let you slide and I'll let my self rise.
Keep trolling along... go on,
next sheep please. bZZT
Hey all,
What is this... firstly Microsoft and AOL are best friends... AOL buys Netscape... AOL buys WinAMP... could this be a ploy by Microsoft to force people to use their dire Media Player ?
Just makes you think... how long before the only ISP is AOL and the only browser is IE... need I go on ?
I was wondering what the whole purpose behind the Minibrowser was. Now I know.
That's the first question to come to my mind... What on EARTH would AOL want with WinAMP, other than to combat Microsoft...
Well, that makes a little sense..
Tom, Justin, and the boys are on the stairway to
heaven. All their hard work paid off...
This is without question a fight against "FREE"
Microsoft software and Not so free RealAudio.
2 cents.
Rich
This seems to be a very interesting move by AOL.
I think that AOL is definitely trying to resurrect its "image," as being a real multiservice provider instead of always being associated with "lame AOL" as many people thought when they first started their graphical/user-friendly AOL client.
This also lends more to the fact that AOL is bringing itself out of its secluded universe. A couple of years ago, they introduced the AOL instant messager for all internet users, which was conveinient for me since most of my friends at the time happened to be on AOL.
But for everyone who is worried about the MP3 format shouldn't be. It has no impact on the format as a whole because neither of these companies "own" the MP3 format. It's just that AOL wants to build in MP3 support to its little Client program. Basically, they are trying to make their client program so that the user never has to leave, so everything is there at their fingertips.
Probably the greatest reason why we dispise AOL is that we are advanced computer/internet users. AOL is not targeted at us. It is more targeted at our parents/grandparents who maybe have never really even used the internet before. They don't have to worry about setting up dialing/PPP options etc....
It seems like the local ISP craze is dying down some, so AOL doesn't have to worry about anything really.
James M Lamanna
CS Student--California Institute of Technology
holy shit!
hope marca is behind this one...he's the only person I trust at aol.
The $400M seemed to be for both companies, no? I'm guessing that the vast majority of that went to Spinner.com, seeing as that A) Spinner was already traded and is a pretty considerably sized company and B) notice how Nullsoft is moving but nobody else is?
It's important to realize here that this does not mean that MP3s are going to become open. Everybody already knows about Icecast and FreeAmp, and AOL acquiring Nullsoft has (duh) nothing to do with the MP3 format as a whole. This is not about formats, it's about AOL acquiring media properties to be able to best serve its customers with a really neat, compelling multimedia experience. Go look at Wired Planet -- this is what I see AOL pulling off, but with a huge amount of music content.
I understand the anti-AOL sentiment. I, too, was there in the first part of this decade and felt the Internet shift when morons from Joe4422@AOL.COM started posting to sci.physics. But this may be part of an image shift, too. AOL isn't just a crappy service provider any more. They own a very hefty chunk of the world's software Intellectual Property now, including some very neat companies they picked up with their acquisition of Netscape. Give them some credit. They're a different company now, or are at least trying to be. And hey, I'd sure like to get bought out for a few million, vest, and then leave -- wouldn't you?
David E. Weekly (dew, Think)
David E. Weekly
Code / Think / Teach / Learn
h4x0r for
Well, at least the WinAMP thing could be good. With somebody as big as AOL backing it, we might see MP3 become the de facto audio streaming standard. Of course, I'm pretty sure they'll want you to use "AOL WinAMP" (*shudder*), and they might put a few proprietary things in there. But consider tik... at least with that project, they were nice and friendly about keeping everything open, and making sure their service runs on just about every platform out there (instead of not acknowledging the clones out there, like ICQ did, which, among a few other reasons, is why basically everybody I know decided to move from ICQ to AIM). What they'll do with Spinner and ShoutCAST, I have no clue. I'm hoping they'll play nice and make them nice and open. But after all, this *is* AOL we're talking about, and there *is* a reason I left them so long ago, ditto for why I microwave all the CDs they send me (advice: NEVER try it for more than 3 seconds... especially if you live in a dorm or an appartment).
Of ICQ, AIM and AOL 4.0, I would have to say that ICQ is the best, and none the interface was designed by AOL, except for the new things in ICQ 99. I'm not sure, but actually I even think most of ICQ 99 was completed prior to ICQ being purchased by AOL. You can tell they havent completely AOLized ICQ yet because it doesn't force advertising on you as do AIM or any Aol website (netscape.com, aol.com or the ones on their online service).
I wonder what they shall do with their IE browser now that they own Netscape. While i would imagine that they could just pay MS to include them in the Online Services folder without using IE as the basis for their browser, it is important to MS to have AOL using IE because it tips the browser usage percents in MS's favor. Even though the AOL users who are using IE dont necessarily recognize it as the MS product, it still boosts their 'market share' by 20-30%.
Juln
Ok, now who has the monopoly here?
The government should be sueing AOL now. Microsoft might have the OS market cornered, but AOL is cornering ALL of the rest of the markets.
I give them credit for doing a good job at it without making too many people complain, but PLEASE STOP before EVERYTHING has AOL pop-up ads on it!!!
the correct age is now 25 ;)
-- your knees hurt, don't they?
I had to pick my jaw up as well. AOL is well on it's way to being another Micosoft.
I wonder if they'll mess with winamp's price.
Will they continue to charge a paltry $10 or make it free?
Sigh. AOL vs Microsoft. It resembles the US' current political state.. Two parties, both of which suck. Settle for the lesser evil?
...because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise. I just don't like AOL, and I don't trust them. The last thing they think about is the user. Which is why you'll probably start seeing ads in WinAmp, profiles of the user and use stored, etc.
But I could be wrong. They may just leave Justin and Co. alone to do what they do best. But somehow I don't think they will. I feel very sad.
BTW, did they get MacAmp as well?
-B
Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.
First Netscape, then ICQ, now Winamp...AOL is buying all those who have help shaped the internet...
I'm running out of alternatives for AOL-owned products. I refuse to support a company whose purpose is to exploit the internet (oh yeah, and to make money). It kind of pisses me off that all of my friends are supporting AOL and Microsoft by buying their stock...
Too bad they can't buy Linux...hahahaha
We all know what is REALLY going on!
Microsoft secretly owns AOL, and they are using
them to monopolize the Internet!
We MUST stop them before its TOO LATE!!!!
OHNO! Its already too late, we are all DOOMED!! AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGG
Mr Bill: "HAHA those fools! we will tie up the DOJ in court while we conqer the WORLD bwa-hahaha"
"Paramount, WB, and Lucasfilm are next!"
sign... what will i tell my kids...
Cybie! aka Ralph Bonnell