MediaGuardian.co.uk | New media | Signs of the times
Douglas Rushkoff writes in the Guardian:
[ . . . ] a company like AOL never had a future. AOL was a training ground: an introduction to the internet for people who didn’t know how to deal with FTP. None of us thought it could last, because once the technological barriers to entry for the internet had been lowered, no one would need AOL’s simplistic interface or it’s child-safe, digital content wading pools. People would want to get on the “real” internet, using real browsers and email programs.
I remember the early days of content programming at both TBS and CNN where ideas were shelved because AOL’s customers — a large segment of the market even then — couldn’t use them with AOL’s neutered interface. It got better/easier when they dumped one Spyclass-based browser for IE’s version.
If the union of AOL and TWX is annulled, it will be interesting to see what AOL has to offer. Can they offer a valuable dialup service and a viable content presence without the content TWX provides? The only upside I can think of has been the cost savings to the internet properties: CNN was a big stick to use on vendors when negotiating bandwidth pricing, and AOL/TWX is even more effective.