<< Meghan, I agree with you. The only reason that anyone might be tempted to sign up with AOL is because they might be new to the internet and afraid to get on by themselves. After there on line and get some confidence goodby, cheaper here I come.
Stan >>
Hey Stan,
I disagree, although I suspect most visitors to this site would agree with you. Think about it. This is probably not a good place to get unbiased opinions on the likes of AOL. Most people who frequent this site are probably reasonably net savvy, unlike the majority of AOL users. IMHO
My parents, for instance, use AOL and are amazed that they can email people anywhere in the world. However, they rarely check their email because it's a bit of a chore to turn the computer on, turn the monitor on, turn the modem on, wait for the computer to boot, dial in to the online service, etc. I doubt they exceed 10 hours a month, so wouldn't save much switching to an ISP. For them and many others like them, AOL is a better choice, largely due to its simplicity.
Ironically, I heard about this site while perusing the message boards in the Motley Fool on AOL. That brings up another point: there is content on AOL that is, arguably, superior to what can be found on the net (Motley Fool, Company Research, News Profiles, etc.). Also, you'll be hard pressed to find someone who can honestly say that IRC is superior to a chat room on one of the online services.
I think both ISPs and online services have their place. However, despite all the hype surrounding cyberspace, (I suppose "cyberhype" would be an appropriate term, since everybody's prefixing cyber- to any word these days. Ugh.) none of its purveyors seem to be doing all that well. I mean, the "cyberinfrastructure" builders (computer manufacturers, chipmakers, network peripheral suppliers, etc.) seem to be doing all right but not the content or access providers (AOL, Compuserve, Netcom, etc.).
Oh yeah, since this post is already too long, let me throw in another thought: is AOL a content provider, an access provider, or both?
If few content providers, i.e. people charging access to their web pages or receiving revenues from web advertising (which is a very questionable practice since you don't have to click on the ad, whereas you're fairly likely to sit through a commercial on t.v.) are making money and few access providers are making money, then where is all this cybermoney going to come from? Hmmm, as the web becomes a la carte, i.e. each site costing you a few bucks, isn't AOL going to seem awfully cheap?
-Rich
BTW, I don't currently own any AOL or any stock in an ISP. |
