Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : America On-Line: will it survive ...? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Robinett who wrote (6669)	1/7/1998 12:59:00 AM
From: Paul Houle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13594

Steve- The critical mass I was referring to was friends and family. AOL has a substantial word of mouth following, and has established an available pool of knowledge that eases a newbie's transition online. BTW I got the same disk stuffed into my Sunday L.A. Times, and I got one stuffed into my O.C. Register as well. Sometimes even I wonder. Anyway, the ascension from "newbie" to "oldbie" is not a given. To most users the computer is a tool, not an avocation. They learn (if they can, and AOL made that possible for many) how to do what they need or want to (send mail, get stock quotes, chat, etc) and no more. And then anything that is different is bad, just because it is different. More capable (which means more complicated) can also be bad. AOL purposefully limits the inclusion of raw "tech" into their client software. That's not what people want of the service. Their 4.0 software is an evolutionary, not revolutionary upgrade. The techno talk leaves me cold, I have to tell you. Video conferencing, HDTV, massive Java apps, xDSL, cable modems, ISDN (had to toss that in), etc. Like it's a given a demand will arise, assuming the financial and technical barriers can be surmounted to place these in the field? And even so, the time frame is always 3 years later till widespread adoption than everyone thinks -- there's always unforseen bumps in the road. Whether or not the convergence of TV's and computers is even a thing the masses WANT, let alone will buy, is uncertain. What was it, QUBE? And tele-text (or whatever those vertical-blanking info services that never took off were called). How many TV's did Zenith build with phones in them before they gave up? And does anyone remember the HomeMinder (X10 built into your TV)? There is a reason TV's are a passive device -- people seem to prefer them that way; also, in the manner people use TV's viewing textual/graphical (i.e., computer-based) information is problematic. They are for continuous tone, real world motion video. And don't think just because Microsoft says it's so it will happen -- if that were true we'd all be running OS2 now. Whew, I feel better now. That bit of ranting came out unedited. I'm sure it will be ripped apart on its merits, but I couldn't help it. Regards, Paul