aol and win2k

[zener]

I tried to install aol in win2k pro but cannot make it work. Anybody has success in running aol under win2k? If yes, please give me advice.

 

[Psychoholic]

AO-Hell and W2K

I hate to sound like a jerk by saying this but you're using W2K, why use AOL?? That's like buying a Ferrari and taking all the gears except for 1st out. If you have the choice at least look at other dial-up alternatives. Also look into cable/DSL, which may not be much more than you're paying now.

 

[jaywallen]

Hi, zener.

Besides the utter lack of snob appeal in running AOL 😱 alluded to by Psychoholic I have seen MANY postings on the CompuServe WINNT forum and other sites regarding the fact that the most recent versions of AOL are inimical to W2K. There is a beta version out for W2K, but I hear that it, too, has failed on several systems. The users I'm talking about are knowledgable folks who are associated with AOL these days because of the CompuServe buyout. (CompuServe sysops and wizops are trying to help AOLers who are new to CompuServe.) Please note: It's not unusual to hear or read about ANYTHING failing. The problem with AOL on W2K is that I haven't heard of a single instance (yet) of it working!

If you wish, I can look for the download URL for the beta that's SUPPOSED to work with W2K, assuming that's not you already have on your system. Do be careful. Some of the more adventerous souls who have worked extra hard to get AOL to run under W2K have wound up with unbootable drives and even inaccessible partitions. Ugh!

Regards,
Jim

 

[pshifrin]

There is a verion of AOL that works perfectly on Win2k. It's AOL 3.0 16bit for Windows 3.1. I'm serious, it works and I use it. You don't get every fancy feature of aol 5.0 however.

 

[jaywallen]

pshifrin,

Now THAT is interesting! Who woulda thunk it?

Regards,
Jim

 

[pshifrin]

I used it for years under NT 4.0. I don't even know if you can still download it. I can email you the exe if you want. It's 3.2mb.

--Peter

 

[jaywallen]

No, thank you. I don't have any real need to access AOL, but "zener" might have use for it.

Again, thanks for the information. I can pop up in a couple of places with this little tidbit to confound some of the CompuServe oldtimers.😉

Have a good one!

- Jim

 

[chansen]

jaywallen,

INIMICAL. Been so long since I heard that one that I had to look it up.

Thanks,
Craig

 

[philipc8]

uh, i just downloaded the newest aol5 and it worked fine; if it seems buggy to you, just type in the keyword 'beta' to download the win2k version; but, that version is most likely identical to the you already have; do not get the 16bit version because the 32bit works; when you say it doesn't work, what exactly is the problem?

 

[atom]

I can vouch for the 16 bit version working. It's what I use when I need to get on AOL in Win2k. Haven't gotten around to downloading the beta yet. The 16 bit version should be on any of the millions of AOL disks out there.

The reason I've been told the old AOL is flaky with Win2k and even Win ME is because their TCP/IP stacks are different than Win9x, and AOL doesn't want to cooperate with it.

 

[zener]

I highly appreciate your helps and comments. I did find the aol version 5.0 for win2k at their download site and seems to work fine. The reason I still use my 56k modem is that my home is too far from the central phone station and no dsl is available. Thanks again.

 

[jaywallen]

chansen,

I learned the meaning of "inimical" from my first wife. 😉

Regards,
Jim

(Didn't anyone get my "thunk" pun?) 😛

 

[burnedout]

Believe it or not, I downloaded and ran AOL 5.0 (latest version) on Win2K Professional without a problem. I accidentally discovered it works. AOL 4.0 does not work with Win2K. Long story as to why I did all of this ................

 

[Oyeve]

I'll be damned. 3.0 16 bit works.

 

[pylorns]

There is another Version of AOL 5.0 out just for win2k, you need to download and install that and it will work ok.