Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 00:19:22 -0400 From: Steve Smith <sgs at aginc.net> To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> Subject: [WSFA] Net History (was Re: Quoting) Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org> MarkLFischer at aol.com wrote: > AOL was not, in the beginning, an ISP, it was a standalone online service, > and what content they provided was what you got. The protocols involved were > entirely proprietary. For one thing, the client side carries a much heavier > load than a regular ISP (this is the root of most of the problems people have > with AOL). Legacy issues, and some business choices largely having to do > with advertising, have kept AOL in its own insular orbit. Originally, ARPANet and later the Internet was just one more network. There were lots of others -- Compuserve, Tymenet, Genie, The Well, and, of course, AOL. Not to mention about a zillion PC BBSs. Each had its own standard for mail, news, and so forth. Problem was, they couldn't communicate with each other. They also had weird pricing, strange policies, and quite often didn't work very well. The Internet, which was designed as an inherently distributed system, tended to Just Plain Work. (There is dispute over the claim that it was designed to survive a nuclear war, but the design is certainly robust.) The others were all modeled on a central server that controlled everything. When they all started connecting to the Internet, of course there was a great deal of friction. AOL was a particular problem, as they had zillions of users who didn't really believe that anything outside AOL actually existed. It got tedious really fast watching a bunch of AOLers whining about the moderator not keeping the chat rooms to what they considered civilized standards. (The vast majority of USENET newsgroups are, of course, completely unmoderated.) It didn't seem to me that AOLers were any more clueless on average then any other bunch of newbies, it was just that there were so many of them. Ya want *really* clueless newbies, try WebTV. I suspect WebTV was really trying to hose the Internet (they're owned by Microsoft, after all.) Their introduction to USENET, for example, said that everybody used HTML, all the groups were moderated and perfectly fine for children, and that animated signatures were Really Cool. Bleah! > AOL is useful for beginners, and also users who have no interest in the geek > side of things, or "power user" features, and just want a single package > with decent utility that gives them what they need with a minimum of fuss. From > years of doing tech support for them, I find that the archetypal "dumb > AOLers" are just regular folks dealing with unfamiliar and vaguely scary > technology. This is an important point to keep in mind -- a lot of the things that "dumb users" get razzed about make perfect sense if you think about them from the user's point of view. My favorite example (probably apocryphal) happened just after the first Macintosh was introduced. The software and OS were seriously buggy and tended to crash a lot. When a program crashed, the Mac would put up an icon of a bomb (classical anarchist; round black ball with burning fuse). One manager saw this and assumed that the icon meant that the computer was going to explode, so he ordered the building evacuated. Hey, we've all seen computers explode on TV, right? -- Steve Smith sgs at aginc dot net Agincourt Computing http://www.aginc.net "Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense."