Ron,
No matter which way this whole info-hiway goes, you can be assured that AOL will be right in the middle. Don't forget when computers first came onto the "personal computer scene", there was a small company called IBM that had many problems and glitches with their technology. When the 386 came out everyone thought that we were so advanced into the techno-age.
You're in the right forest but barking up the wrong tree. The proper analogy is: AOL is to the Internet as Apple is to the PC.
The IBM PC is an open microcomputer architecture that IBM gave away (accidentally or intentionally), while the Apple platform is a closed hardware/OS system that is controlled exclusively by Apple. Anyone who wanted to participate in the PC market was able to, without taking direction or paying homage to anyone. This allowed the PC to quickly eclipse Apple (plus the fact that Apple's management, lacking foresight, allowed their assets to "rot on the vine").
Similarly, the Internet is a wide open system. Anyone who wants to set up a server, provide content, render services, advertise, or vend products may do so at the drop of a hat. Register your domain and go nuts. (It helps if you are already in the business you are trying to virtualize). Anyone, anywhere can access the bulk of the Internet free of charge. Internet content is constantly evolving and improving in both quality and quantity.
Conversely, AOL's on-line service is a closed system. As a vendor or advertiser, you cannot appear on AOL without getting permission and paying a fee. AOL is an exclusive, controlled, needlessly expensive environment hosted by a superfluous middleman. The quality of AOL's content will never be able to keep up with the Internet unless they severely limit their scope and specialize like mad. AOL appeals to the neophyte for the same reasons that Apple appeals to the neophyte. This short-term advantage quickly fades, as the ubiquitous competing technology soon either becomes simple enough for all, or the naivet‚ of the neophyte dissipates.
Unfortunately, the analogy falls apart when one considers AOL's quality, customer service, client loyalty, technological leadership, etc. One could make the case that AOL is a sort of future (fallen) Apple in the making, except with no chance of a monopoly brand and not a tenth as good in its heyday as Apple was in its. |
