We're Heading Straight For AOL 2.0

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
We’re heading straight for AOL 2.0? If that doesn't send a shiver down your spine, I don't know what will. ;)

If the current trend persists we’re heading straight for AOL 2.0, only now with a slick user interface, a couple more features and more users. I personally had higher hopes for the world wide web when it launched. Wouldn’t it be ironic if it turned out that the end-run the WWW did around AOL because it was the WWW was open and inclusive ended up with different players simply re-implementing the AOL we already had and that we got rid of because it was not the full internet.
 
I honestly don't think web standards have ever been as strong as they are now. All the major web browsers are developed around standards compliance and HTTP-based web services are very popular.
 
That summary sentence isn't even coherent... Must be a slow news day.
 
We already had AOL 2.0. I was for Windows 3.1 back in 1994.
 
Facebook, Google, and other companies want you to stay in their ecosystem and not let you out. That's what AOL was and that's where the internet is heading.

It's hard to find anything interesting on the internet anymore. The internet used to be serendipitous. Things were hard to find so you would click through 20 pages of links (all on different domains) and eventually find what you were looking for, or something even better because finding what you wanted was so hard.

Now, you search for something and if you don't find it immediately, then it must not exist on the internet.
 
Nice I can see that sweet dialup graphics dancing across my screen again!
 
I honestly don't think web standards have ever been...
Web standards are more about front-ends. This article is more about back-ends. It sounds like the author is just frustrated with twitter and other big names that purposefully make their protocols (access to back-end) difficult to develop for. I've only worked with Google and have no trouble there; it's easy to "step outside" of it. There's always a bit of an "ick" factor in dealing with it though, as you're never sure what evil may lurk beneath the surface, or how things may change rapidly in the future. That's the point I get from the article: don't become too married with any of these things, they may want to take you prisoner or completely disappear without warning.
 
You mean this?
Wouldn’t it be ironic if it turned out that the end-run the WWW did around AOL because it was the WWW was open and inclusive ended up with different players simply re-implementing the AOL we already had and that we got rid of because it was not the full internet.
Yeah, it's a bit messy, needs a question mark at the end, at least.
 
The more things change, the more they remain the same...
 
You mean this?

Yeah, it's a bit messy, needs a question mark at the end, at least.

Oh it needs so much more than that ;) I'll offer up this sentence as a replacement :D

Wouldn't it be ironic if the WWW's open and inclusive end run around AOL resulted in a different players re-implementing AOL?
 
Stupid no edit
Wouldn't it be ironic if the WWW's open and inclusive end run around AOL resulted in different players re-implementing AOL?
 
Hey! I found v3.0!
* AOL 3.0 FOR WINDOWS *

* Faster Art
Art delivery has been a common complaint among our members. With AOL
3.0,
say good-bye to the blue bar that reads, "Please wait while we add new
art."
Now when you come into a new area, you'll see the page "progressively
render," which means that you'll reach the page and view interim icons
which
will let you continue to move through the area as the images are
coming in --
or back out of the area at any time, if you change your mind. This is
a
major time-saving step we think you'll really love. Now you can try
out new
areas without having to wait for those darn art updates!

Too much more awesomeness to list here. ;)
Keyword: PREVIEW
 
Author really needs to make use of commas. Entire paragraphs read like huge run-in sentences.
 
Maybe Apple On Line?

Apple can restrict access to only Apple approved web sites (like the iTunes store), so the non-technical can have a safe web browsing environment.
 
Maybe Apple On Line?

Apple can restrict access to only Apple approved web sites (like the iTunes store), so the non-technical can have a safe web browsing environment.

That is what people want. The more decissions that are made for them, the happier they are. Especially the hard ones like, should I wear pants or not.
 
That is what people want. The more decissions that are made for them, the happier they are. Especially the hard ones like, should I wear pants or not.

Noooo! The answer to that question is ALWAYS, "Wear pants!"

In fact, I'd suggest not only wearing pants, but shorts under them too. You can never have too many layers between your stuff and the rest of the world.
 
I remember and used AOL 2.0. Some of the various AOL 3.X installs were better because they offered color web browsing but were still too old to be affected by most chat room scripts that plagued people with 4.0 or later.
 
Lynx anyone? Remember that speedy browser? Used to use that with the library free dial up access. Worked great for looking up game cheat codes!
 
Lynx anyone? Remember that speedy browser? Used to use that with the library free dial up access. Worked great for looking up game cheat codes!

It's still in active development and you can get version 2.8.8 (released in Feb 2014) from this linky:

http://lynx.isc.org/release/

I'm like a huuuuuge advocate of browsing the web with it since you can't see any porn when you use it unless its that creepy ASCII stuff.
 
Back
Top