Originally posted by: TechnoPro
Some observations from the field:
[1] AOL is slower to connect than a standard Windows DUN connection. Meaning, the time it takes to double click the AOL shortcut to when you can read mail and/or surf is measurably longer than when using a conventional dial-up method. Is this is a big deal? To a user who is lamenting about a slow computing experience, yes.
[2] AOL is a form of adware. AOL will frequently present the user with ads to buy software (or even other types of products) like Cookie Cleaner or other add-ons. I wouldn't doubt that there is an easy way to disable this option (Keyword PREFFFERENCES?), but I don't know of too many commercial software packages that, as a default option, pitch other products every time the software is initialized. This is not ?nag ware?, and nor is it the same as a passive banner ad on a web page. This AOL advertising pop-up requires interaction in the form of clicking "No Thanks" or the equivalent to close the offer.
[3] The proprietary e-mail system is junk. The e-mail client displays the e-mail address of the sender, and not the "display name" that the user intended for them to see. As such, AOL users might not recognize an address of a legitimate sender and subsequently delete it as they rightfully will not open mail from unknown recipients. User error? Not at all. People readily remember and recognize human names, not e-mail addresses. We remember URLs, not IP addresses? That same principal is why caller ID is so useful.
[4] AOL forces updates. When someone signs off, the software may still remain connected to the internet in order to download software updates. While this is certainly one approach to software updates, there is no method provided to terminate this update sequence, shy of a Ctrl + Alt + Del then End Task or equivalent. Perhaps this has been rectified in later versions using some background updating protocol, but the "in your face" approach I describe was very much a nuisance for several years.
[5] AOL installs excessive background processes, secondary applications, and desktop shortcuts. Use a tool like MSCONFIG or
AutoRuns to take a before snapshot of what starts up when you boot your PC. Then install AOL. Compare the 2. Then start laughing as it is truly funny. Not only do I get a gateway to the internet, I get a spyware solution, a 1-touch computer system checker or whatever it's called, QuickTime is installed and now loaded at startup. When the AOL install disc is inserted, the end user is not asked if they would like these secondary programs to be installed. For that matter, they are not explicitly told either. From both a stability and security perspective, would you install software that, unknown to you, was also putting other programs on your PC? We have a name for this...
[6] I do not have specific RAM utilization figures handy, but AOL slows down even fast systems. Perhaps it is a memory hog, perhaps the core application is bloated and poorly programmed ? I do not know. It is definitely not an example of software that ?feels? fast.
[7] AOL's SPAM filters are problematic. Granted, SPAM is a major epidemic with no real elegant solution. I often hear of AOL users not receiving legitimate e-mails that were sent to them. True, this is anecdotal at best, but when I have the user change ISP or create a non-AOL e-mail account, the e-mails magically come through. Perhaps there are user-level settings that could correct this, but again, I have yet to speak with a user who tweaked something and reported the problem as solved.
[8] As a corollary to the above, many other ISPs will block e-mails originating from AOL accounts. Not a 100% block, mind you. Case in point: I have a client who directs athletic teams and events. When he sends out mass e-mails to his players, coaches, parents, etc. from the AOL account, many users will not receive it. So we did a simple test. We had him send the same e-mail from another non-AOL account. The number of recipients who did not receive them dropped dramatically. No, this is not the fault of AOL, nor the end-user. However, I cannot fathom why an individual would subscribe to a service that has known issues regarding both sending and receiving e-mails. And AOL pitches their service to small businesses? That is a good one.
[9] Strictly speaking, AOL is not an ISP. They provide the gateway o the internet, the web browser, the e-mail client, the chat client, and other programs that may or many not be of value and use to the end-user. These value-added services are inferior to other equivalent programs. Sure, other ISPs offer software suites that enhance and/or complement the ?online experience?. AOL reigns supreme in providing the largest variety of components and supplementary features. This is problematic for one simple reason: these components do not measure up against other widespread software packages.
[10] E-mails are automatically deleted. Unless they are saved to a Personal Filing Cabinet, or marked with a ?Keep as new? command. There is no obvious benefit to an end-user from having software automatically purge e-mails that the user may or may not have wanted to keep.
[11] AOL e-mail does not conform to the industry wide standards of POP3 or IMAP. Proprietary formats are great when said format provides exceptional usability ? in this case, the proprietary nature is cumbersome at best. AOL e-mail can be checked using an e-mail client like Outlook or Outlook Express only if third party software is installed and configured. Furthermore, the e-mail handling is not up to standards as it has consistently rendered e-mails wrong on the screen relative to how they are displayed on a variety of other e-mail clients.
[12] Has anyone received an e-mail with in an e-mail within and e-mail?? I haven?t the faintest idea how this is done, but I consistently see these erroneous messages stemming from AOL users. User error? Sure, given that the software apparently promotes a bad practice.
[13] AOL has been known to corrupt the TCP/IP stack or otherwise interfere with networking and/or modem settings.
[14] AOL is extremely easy to troubleshoot. In fact, there is no need for troubleshooting as there is only one way to fix it: RESINSTALL. Reinstallations and uninstallations have been known to be problematic; sometimes AOL cannot successfully be removed at all.
[15] AOL utilizes major components of the Internet Explorer browser but it is wrong to claim that that latest version of IE is the same browser in the latest version of AOL. There were years when many websites would have specific caveats about compatibility issues with AOL.
[17] Anecdotally, I have heard many experiences about people being billed repeatedly after they cancel their subscription to AOL. This is an unacceptable business practice. And if this is somehow not their accepted practice, then their billing department is not run properly at all.
[18] AOL produces an obscene amount of environmental waste with their shotgun approach to marketing by mailing out the plethora of CDs and including them in all of these PC related products. What?s great is when I buy a batch of new PCs for a business, all of them with come with an AOL CD. Business-class machines, mind you, that would never let AOL see the light of day.
[19] AOL, with presumably a fairly hefty marketing and advertising budget, has been unable to get one simple point across to its user base: AOL stands for America Online, not American Online. This is not user error, dammit! This is the marketing department?s inability to develop accurate branding of their product.
So do I think AOL sucks? Not at all. It is the best of the feature-rich, second-tier ISPs engineered for neophytes or unsophisticated home users. It is the best in that category as it is without rival, without peer.
AOL would tank if launched today; it lives on because of its existing user base. It has been losing members and will continue to lose business as broadband and more sophisticated technologies emerge. It was a pioneer who?s at the end of its lifespan.