That may be true, but it would be a fluke. The foreign servers started getting attention in January, at which point lots of people in the US tried them. They didn't work.
Look at the report before making comments. On Page 89 of the report, of those who do not have internet at home, 53% of those them "Don't Want It". 25% claimed "Too Expensive". Which comes down to about 12.5% of the US cannot afford the internet in their homes- 25% do not want it. That's a surprise to me.
Doesn't surprise me. I'd like to see a demographic breakdown. My 80-something grandparents could care less about being online. Same with everyone in their mobile home community.
In my promotions job, I recently walked around a night club talking digital photos of people for a web site. Two young women declined, saying that they didn't want to take their clothes off. I imagine they were joking somewhat, but they said that they didn't have computers and weren't online, and thought the only stuff available online was pr0n.
I've read plenty of horror stories about Verisign, and have no doubts of their veracity. But FWIW, I've had relative peace with them with my three domains (one.com and two.orgs).
A couple of months ago I accidentally paid for the same domain twice (long story). I immediately called them prior to them receiving the second payment, and asked them not to cash it. They promised they wouldn't. They did anyway.
I figured I'd be up for a big fight to get my $70 back. I called them up. Spoke to a rather clueless support person. Explained everything very slowly and completely. Finally they promised to get a refund check to me in 4-6 weeks...
Maybe this will get Microsoft to port IE to Linux.
Has AOL's contract for Internet Explorer with M$ expired? Last I heard it still had a while to run, but the terms might specify that if AOL has a client for a platform, it must be Microsoft Internet Explorer based.
Unfortunately, no one really knows the exact text of AOL's agreement with Microsoft. However, the Internet appliances will use Gecko, and I doubt that will change.
Does this browser plug-in thing mean BYOA will be a thing of the past? Doesn't seem to make much sense for AOL (who's not exactly known for there low low prices). Why give away something when you can make a cool $10 a month off it?
Who said anything about giving it away? You still have to have an account to access the service. Whether you access it from a computer or a TV or an Internet appliance or a PDA or a web browser while travelling is irrelevant. This is the AOL Anywhere strategy.
Unfortunately, with AOL, this is not true (and I'm not just talking out of my ass here -- another unfortunate thing is that I worked for AOL as a systems administrator for a few years). They've got some built-in scripting (a la VBScript in MS Outlook) that *can* be executed if a user does not open the attachment. The attachment is just there so the script has a file to install when it gets triggered.
Completely untrue. Exactly what kind of systems were you administrating at AOL?
Slashdot Mirror
That may be true, but it would be a fluke. The foreign servers started getting attention in January, at which point lots of people in the US tried them. They didn't work.
However, AOL has a somewhat unreliable SMTP proxy that sometimes intercepts port 25 connections and sends your message. Take a look at <http://members.aol.com/adamkb/aol/mailfaq/3rd-par ty.html#3rd-party-acct>.
IMAP/SMTP servers have existed in a number of AOL's foreign markets for some time.
They weren't available for AOL US users until April 5th.
Information about AOL's original switch to IE can be found at:
http://members.aol.com/adamkb/aol/whyie/
Doesn't surprise me. I'd like to see a demographic breakdown. My 80-something grandparents could care less about being online. Same with everyone in their mobile home community.
In my promotions job, I recently walked around a night club talking digital photos of people for a web site. Two young women declined, saying that they didn't want to take their clothes off. I imagine they were joking somewhat, but they said that they didn't have computers and weren't online, and thought the only stuff available online was pr0n.
I've read plenty of horror stories about Verisign, and have no doubts of their veracity. But FWIW, I've had relative peace with them with my three domains (one .com and two .orgs).
A couple of months ago I accidentally paid for the same domain twice (long story). I immediately called them prior to them receiving the second payment, and asked them not to cash it. They promised they wouldn't. They did anyway.
I figured I'd be up for a big fight to get my $70 back. I called them up. Spoke to a rather clueless support person. Explained everything very slowly and completely. Finally they promised to get a refund check to me in 4-6 weeks...
...and they did. I was stunned. Go figure.
Unfortunately, no one really knows the exact text of AOL's agreement with Microsoft. However, the Internet appliances will use Gecko, and I doubt that will change.