In article <[email protected]>,
Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Top-posting with context removing sign-off fixed
>
>On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:49:07 -0600, "Jeff P." <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>
>"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews...
>> Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>>
>>
>http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.html?tag=st_lh
>>
>
>
>>Man, that really is amazing. Leave it to AOL to decide what's good for you.
>>If they don't have control over it then you shouldn't have it.
>
>
> Looks like this may be in AOL's best interest, once again due to our
>overly litigious society and the fact that AOL is a target because of its
>perceived "deep pockets": From the cited article:
>
>"AOL's newsgroups have led to some trouble for the Internet provider.
>Earlier this year, AOL settled a lawsuit with writer Harlan Ellison, who
>sued the company for copyright infringement. Ellison claimed AOL violated
>copyright laws because his works appeared on newsgroups available through
>the service."
>
> IOW, because AOL had money, despite the fact they had no control over
>Usenet content (unless there is something missing in the above statement,
>such as if an AOLien posted the copyrighted works and AOL failed to respond
>to notification), they were still held liable for Usenet content because
>they offered access to Usenet.
NAH. It's because AOL's lawyers were *utterly* incompetent.
Apparently they never read 47 USC 230 (c) (1).
which can be found online at <http://www3.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html>
Harlan should have been laughed out of court.
Interesting, another article stated that "AOL's Usenet implementation
was non-standard from the start. The service doesn't allow members to
connect directly to its network news transfer protocol (NNTP) servers."
From
http://www.betanews.com/article/AOL_Pulls_Plug_on_Newsgroup_Service/1106664611
Out of 4 articles I read, only the CNet article made it sound like
someone could still use another reader. All the others stated that the
newsgroup service itself would be shut off.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/25/aol_cutsoff_newsgroups/
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1754373,00.asp
I would guess that CNet did not clearly represent that continued service
would require a third-party service.
Patriarch wrote:
> Shawn <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews:
>
>
>>Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>>
>>http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.ht
>>ml?tag=st_lh
>>
>
>
> Assuming the CNet author knew what they were reporting, it is the AOL
> proprietary interface to newsgroups for which they are discontinuing
> support. Newsgroups are purported to continue to be available to those who
> use a 'real newsgroup reader' (emphasis added.)
>
> Never having used the AOL interface, I cannot offer an opinion as to
> whether this represents a loss or not. The "Internet with training
> wheels" has never appealed to me. I am not every company's dream market
> focus segment, however.
>
> Patriarch
You techno geeks crack me up with all your AOHell and "internet with
training wheels" crap. Some of us really don't feel like spending our
lives on techie issues and use the internet for a little email, some
newsgroups and a little browsing. We really don't need to see how much
time we can spend talking to the 15 year old support kid at the ISP. I
have liked my Compuserve service and I find their newsreader the most
intuitive and easy to use (with zero set-up required). I have tried
Outlook Express, I have downloaded and installed Agent and I have used
a couple others on friends' machines. They all require too much setup,
are difficult to view and require too much time spent on the software -
not on the task at hand. I compare the techie attitude to those who
think the experience of driving a car should include personally
overhauling the engine every year or so. I want a car that I can get
in, start and drive away. Get gas now and then and stop at the oil
change place every few months but otherwise focus on the drive, not
screwing around with the car...and yes I like power brakes, power
steering and auto trannys, too.
Now for jetskis...you shouldn't ride 'em if you can't fix 'em and half
the fun is fiddling with 'em :)
>> Now for jetskis...you shouldn't ride 'em if you can't fix 'em and
half
>> the fun is fiddling with 'em :)
>I assume you know that there's irony in that statement in this
context.
Yeah, that's pretty much why I added that completely off topic aside to
my post. We all have hobbies where fooling with the equipment and
process is a major part of the fun. Most hobby woodworkers understand
that - and, in the context of woodworking, it probably bemuses many
professional woodworkers no end.
Top-posting with context removing sign-off fixed
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:49:07 -0600, "Jeff P." <[email protected]>
wrote:
"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews...
> Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>
>
http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.html?tag=st_lh
>
>Man, that really is amazing. Leave it to AOL to decide what's good for you.
>If they don't have control over it then you shouldn't have it.
Looks like this may be in AOL's best interest, once again due to our
overly litigious society and the fact that AOL is a target because of its
perceived "deep pockets": From the cited article:
"AOL's newsgroups have led to some trouble for the Internet provider.
Earlier this year, AOL settled a lawsuit with writer Harlan Ellison, who
sued the company for copyright infringement. Ellison claimed AOL violated
copyright laws because his works appeared on newsgroups available through
the service."
IOW, because AOL had money, despite the fact they had no control over
Usenet content (unless there is something missing in the above statement,
such as if an AOLien posted the copyrighted works and AOL failed to respond
to notification), they were still held liable for Usenet content because
they offered access to Usenet.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety
Army General Richard Cody
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
gfretwell repeats:
>itisa
Huh? As a quick note on the header, I got another pop up message from AOL this
morning as I headed in this direction. No dates yet, but every time I hit my
Newsgroups button, zing, the note pops up. Later today, I'll switch ISPs.
In the meantime, AOL sits back and wonders WTF is happening, why their long
time (decade or longer in my case) customers are bailing out. When I change
later today, which will be a PITA, what with address book and bookmarks and
email that has been saved for business, they lose another. But as the price has
risen, the service has dropped, so I'll take the time to locate another ISP
(probably Verizon, so that I can go DSL here if they ever do bring it in).
Charlie Self
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
2000
Charlie Self wrote:
> Huh? As a quick note on the header, I got another pop up message from AOL this
> morning as I headed in this direction. No dates yet, but every time I hit my
> Newsgroups button, zing, the note pops up. Later today, I'll switch ISPs.
> In the meantime, AOL sits back and wonders WTF is happening, why their long
> time (decade or longer in my case) customers are bailing out. When I change
> later today, which will be a PITA, what with address book and bookmarks and
> email that has been saved for business, they lose another. But as the price has
> risen, the service has dropped, so I'll take the time to locate another ISP
> (probably Verizon, so that I can go DSL here if they ever do bring it in).
Good luck on the move. Be aware that AOL has a history of making
getting rid of them difficult. It may take some effort on your
part to get them to let go.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/
Gino wrote:
> Can you ever remove their software without editing your registry.
> I can't.
I edit my registry all the time, nothing removes cleanly, Norton
is infamous for that. I was thinking of the call-backs, and
reinstatement if anybody in the family wonders why they don't have
AOHell anymore issues. Or the arguing about whether you REALLY
want to stop your service when you tell them that. My Old Man
uses their garbage but he can't stand the browser, so I told him
to go ahead and connect, minimize their browser and start
Netscape, or any other browser and then use it. You'll still have
to find out wha ttheir NNTP host is or use another one, but
setting those up in Netscape/Mozilla/TBird is easy to do.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/
R. Wink wrote:
> When you phone to tell them that you're leaving, they try to "song and
> dance" you back into the fold. However, when you tell them it's you money
> and you're not going to pay their bill, you get their attention and they
> do get with the program. I was paying the bill with my credit card and I
> told them that as of such and such date, I was canceling AOHell and the
> card
> I was paying with. BUT, even after 2 years, I still get their coasters in
> the mail. R. Wink
I know people who don't even _have_ computers who get their coasters in the
mail.
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:20:10 -0800, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:28:14 GMT, Dave in Fairfax <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Gino wrote:
>>>> Can you ever remove their software without editing your registry.
>>>> I can't.
>>>
>>>I edit my registry all the time, nothing removes cleanly, Norton
>>>is infamous for that. I was thinking of the call-backs, and
>>>reinstatement if anybody in the family wonders why they don't have
>>>AOHell anymore issues. Or the arguing about whether you REALLY
>>>want to stop your service when you tell them that.
>>
>>Been there done that. I phoned them and told them their heavy handed
>>tactics were not in their best interest.
>>They have an answer for every reason you try to give them for quitting.
>>
>>> My Old Man
>>>uses their garbage but he can't stand the browser, so I told him
>>>to go ahead and connect, minimize their browser and start
>>>Netscape, or any other browser and then use it. You'll still have
>>>to find out wha ttheir NNTP host is or use another one, but
>>>setting those up in Netscape/Mozilla/TBird is easy to do.
>>>
>>>Dave in Fairfax
--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Charlie ...
<<In the meantime, AOL sits back and wonders WTF is happening, why their
long
time (decade or longer in my case) customers are bailing out. When I change
later today, which will be a PITA, what with address book and bookmarks and
email that has been saved for business, they lose another.>>
To save yourself the pain of migrating all that information, you may want to
take advantage of a not-very-widely-publicised AOL plan. You get a limited
number of hours (I think it's 5 but it might be only 3) per month --
normally for people like me who use the service only for e-mail and as
emergency backup -- for $3.95 a month.
Lee
--
To e-mail, replace "bucketofspam" with "dleegordon"
When you phone to tell them that you're leaving, they try to "song and dance" you back into the fold. However, when you tell
them it's you money and you're not going to pay their bill, you get their attention and they do get with the program.
I was paying the bill with my credit card and I told them that as of such and such date, I was canceling AOHell and the card
I was paying with. BUT, even after 2 years, I still get their coasters in the mail.
R. Wink
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:20:10 -0800, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:28:14 GMT, Dave in Fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Gino wrote:
>>> Can you ever remove their software without editing your registry.
>>> I can't.
>>
>>I edit my registry all the time, nothing removes cleanly, Norton
>>is infamous for that. I was thinking of the call-backs, and
>>reinstatement if anybody in the family wonders why they don't have
>>AOHell anymore issues. Or the arguing about whether you REALLY
>>want to stop your service when you tell them that.
>
>Been there done that. I phoned them and told them their heavy handed tactics
>were not in their best interest.
>They have an answer for every reason you try to give them for quitting.
>
>> My Old Man
>>uses their garbage but he can't stand the browser, so I told him
>>to go ahead and connect, minimize their browser and start
>>Netscape, or any other browser and then use it. You'll still have
>>to find out wha ttheir NNTP host is or use another one, but
>>setting those up in Netscape/Mozilla/TBird is easy to do.
>>
>>Dave in Fairfax
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 19:51:55 GMT, Dave in Fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
>Charlie Self wrote:
>> Huh? As a quick note on the header, I got another pop up message from AOL this
>> morning as I headed in this direction. No dates yet, but every time I hit my
>> Newsgroups button, zing, the note pops up. Later today, I'll switch ISPs.
>> In the meantime, AOL sits back and wonders WTF is happening, why their long
>> time (decade or longer in my case) customers are bailing out. When I change
>> later today, which will be a PITA, what with address book and bookmarks and
>> email that has been saved for business, they lose another. But as the price has
>> risen, the service has dropped, so I'll take the time to locate another ISP
>> (probably Verizon, so that I can go DSL here if they ever do bring it in).
>
>Good luck on the move. Be aware that AOL has a history of making
>getting rid of them difficult. It may take some effort on your
>part to get them to let go.
>
>Dave in Fairfax
Can you ever remove their software without editing your registry.
I can't.
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:28:14 GMT, Dave in Fairfax <[email protected]> wrote:
>Gino wrote:
>> Can you ever remove their software without editing your registry.
>> I can't.
>
>I edit my registry all the time, nothing removes cleanly, Norton
>is infamous for that. I was thinking of the call-backs, and
>reinstatement if anybody in the family wonders why they don't have
>AOHell anymore issues. Or the arguing about whether you REALLY
>want to stop your service when you tell them that.
Been there done that. I phoned them and told them their heavy handed tactics
were not in their best interest.
They have an answer for every reason you try to give them for quitting.
> My Old Man
>uses their garbage but he can't stand the browser, so I told him
>to go ahead and connect, minimize their browser and start
>Netscape, or any other browser and then use it. You'll still have
>to find out wha ttheir NNTP host is or use another one, but
>setting those up in Netscape/Mozilla/TBird is easy to do.
>
>Dave in Fairfax
On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:17:00 -0500, Dan White <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is a hoax that comes up occasionally, according to an AOL employee. It
> was mentioned on another newsgroup.
I don't know, I've seen the same thing come up from several respected
members of several groups I'm in. Either they all got the same virus
all at once or something, or it's legit this time.
Even still, news.individual.net should work for anyone with any
kind of network connectivity, unless AOL goes out of their way
to block that port. So, even if you keep AOL for dialup, you can
still get Usenet....and with a better user interface to boot.
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:49:07 -0600, Jeff P. <[email protected]> wrote:
> Man, that really is amazing. Leave it to AOL to decide what's good for you.
> If they don't have control over it then you shouldn't have it.
Actually, I see it as more of a "we know our interface sucks, here
use any of these other superior ones so we can stop supporting this crap
that doesn't work as well as other options". They're not forcing
anyone to stay with AOL, nor are they limiting their customers other
options.
The only people this will inconvenience substantially are those who
won't switch from AOL and who aren't computer savvy enough to
download any of the dozens of free newsreader clients out there,
or point a browser to groups.google.com.
Nothing to see here, folks...
On 26 Jan 2005 08:39:42 -0800, Dave Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
> You techno geeks crack me up with all your AOHell and "internet with
> training wheels" crap. Some of us really don't feel like spending our
> lives on techie issues and use the internet for a little email, some
> newsgroups and a little browsing.
Sounds like the 500 dollar Mac Mini is a perfect solution for you then.
It. Just. Works. I work on computers all day, and it's nice to come
home to something that isn't Windows and needing constant attention.
> Now for jetskis...you shouldn't ride 'em if you can't fix 'em and half
> the fun is fiddling with 'em :)
I assume you know that there's irony in that statement in this context.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:11:58 -0800, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 26 Jan 2005 16:52:27 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Sounds like the 500 dollar Mac Mini is a perfect solution for you then.
>>It. Just. Works. I work on computers all day, and it's nice to come
>>home to something that isn't Windows and needing constant attention.
>>
> Why does your Windows require constant attention?
Mine doesn't, as it's turned off. The "Friends and family support plan
from hell" systems that I deal with, do.
> I have two XP systems one Home, one Pro, both used almost 24/7.
> One is 5 years old the other 2 years old and I have not had a single problem
> Windows wise with either.
So, you are immune from spyware, inherently insecurely open ports,
viruses, and the BSOD? That's...incredible.
> I have a few maintance utilities that run during the night, every night.
> Nortons, Diskeeper, and a couple others and my systems run smooth.
I guess I'd call all of that an example of "needing constant attention".
> These are full load heavy use machines, 2 CD burners, 2 DVD burners, 600Gigs of
> harddrive between them.
> The newer machine see's constant almost daily installation of new utilities
> (even dangerous shareware and freeware) and games most of which are then removed
> soon after. I haven't needed to use rollback or my Ghost backups yet.
As long as you're happy with your definition of success, that's great, but
it seems like a lot of screwing around, which is my whole point.
> But I've always have been lucky with computers.
> At least 16 internal and 3 external harddrives in the last ten years and not a
> single one has failed. I have a buddy who had 3 fail last year costing his about
> 25 hours of lost work.
1. Better backups.
2. Clean power. He needs a UPS and a stack of CD-R's.
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 00:30:34 GMT, Jeff P. <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd hardly consider running a few safety programs "constant attention".
My point, top-posting Jeff, is that the archtecture of windows is such that
those 'safety programs' have to be run at all.
> If
> you were to use your car as often as you use your computer it wouldn't last
> a year.
I'm not sure I follow that statement?
> Let's not get into a windows vs PC war here.
Fair enough. Enjoy giving your machines constant attention, and I'll
enjoy my OS which still has zero viruses, due to it's inherent design
differences from Windows.
Shawn wrote:
> Interesting, another article stated that "AOL's Usenet implementation
> was non-standard from the start. The service doesn't allow members to
> connect directly to its network news transfer protocol (NNTP) servers."
It is intersting, but they've always known that they had a problem
that resulted in their e-mail being delayed and they've never been
willing to do anything about it. Yes, I asked long ago and far
away. If I was still on that lame*$$ service I think I'd do a DNS
look-up and try configuring a newsreader to test each of the
servers listed as theirs and figure out where their NNTP host
really was and see if I could connect to it directly. That would
allow me to connect with an external browser if they refused to
tell me what the Server was. Just a thought, not a suggestion.
The suggestion would be, ditch them and get a real ISP. YMMV.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/
"Huntinweim" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> OH YES IT IS!
>
> http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.html
My AOL "source" from the other ng who said this is a hoax just recanted!
Sounds like no big deal though.
dwhite
I meant to say...windows vs mac...DOH
--
Jeff P.
"A new study shows that licking the sweat off a frog
can cure depression. The down side is, the minute
you stop licking, the frog gets depressed again." - Jay Leno
Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com
"Jeff P." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I'd hardly consider running a few safety programs "constant attention".
If
> you were to use your car as often as you use your computer it wouldn't
last
> a year. Let's not get into a windows vs PC war here.
>
> --
> Jeff P.
>
> "A new study shows that licking the sweat off a frog
> can cure depression. The down side is, the minute
> you stop licking, the frog gets depressed again." - Jay Leno
>
>
> Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com
>
>
> "Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:11:58 -0800, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 26 Jan 2005 16:52:27 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>Sounds like the 500 dollar Mac Mini is a perfect solution for you
then.
> > >>It. Just. Works. I work on computers all day, and it's nice to come
> > >>home to something that isn't Windows and needing constant attention.
> > >>
> > > Why does your Windows require constant attention?
> >
> > Mine doesn't, as it's turned off. The "Friends and family support plan
> > from hell" systems that I deal with, do.
> >
> > > I have two XP systems one Home, one Pro, both used almost 24/7.
> > > One is 5 years old the other 2 years old and I have not had a single
> problem
> > > Windows wise with either.
> >
> > So, you are immune from spyware, inherently insecurely open ports,
> > viruses, and the BSOD? That's...incredible.
> >
> > > I have a few maintance utilities that run during the night, every
night.
> > > Nortons, Diskeeper, and a couple others and my systems run smooth.
> >
> > I guess I'd call all of that an example of "needing constant attention".
> >
> > > These are full load heavy use machines, 2 CD burners, 2 DVD burners,
> 600Gigs of
> > > harddrive between them.
> > > The newer machine see's constant almost daily installation of new
> utilities
> > > (even dangerous shareware and freeware) and games most of which are
then
> removed
> > > soon after. I haven't needed to use rollback or my Ghost backups yet.
> >
> > As long as you're happy with your definition of success, that's great,
but
> > it seems like a lot of screwing around, which is my whole point.
> >
> > > But I've always have been lucky with computers.
> > > At least 16 internal and 3 external harddrives in the last ten years
and
> not a
> > > single one has failed. I have a buddy who had 3 fail last year costing
> his about
> > > 25 hours of lost work.
> >
> > 1. Better backups.
> > 2. Clean power. He needs a UPS and a stack of CD-R's.
> >
>
>
In article <L%[email protected]>,
WD <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:32:15 -0800, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
>>accounts quite well.
>
>Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't crash
>like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
Maybe 'cuz "Thunderbird" is a dedicated e-mail client, and does e-mail *ONLY*.
It doesn't pretend to be anything else.
Some people prefer single-function applications.
Opera _is_ a *good* web-browser. But you have to pay money to get the version
*without* the intrusive advertising.
On a par with Firefox (from the Mozilla people).
For e-mail -- especially for virtually 'no-risk' handling of incoming mail,
"The Bat!", although a for-pay program, is *very* difficult to beat. It is
about the only program (I don't -know- of any others, but there may be some)
where you can tell it to _completely_ ignore any/all HTML in a message. *OR*
to ignore links and references while allowing HTML formatting to occur. And
it _won't_ pull in anything that isn't already part of the message. "web bugs",
and such, just "don't work" when mail is read with "The Bat!".
If I had to be reading mail on a PC, I'd be using it, myself. Since I read
all my mail on a UNIX box, my situation is different. The Bat! is the only
thing I recommend to my clients, however.
Robert Bonomi responds:
>>>I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
>>>accounts quite well.
>>
>>Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't
>crash
>>like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
>
>Maybe 'cuz "Thunderbird" is a dedicated e-mail client, and does e-mail
>*ONLY*.
>It doesn't pretend to be anything else.
>
>Some people prefer single-function applications.
>
>Opera _is_ a *good* web-browser. But you have to pay money to get the
>version
>*without* the intrusive advertising.
>
>On a par with Firefox (from the Mozilla people).
>
>
>For e-mail -- especially for virtually 'no-risk' handling of incoming mail,
>"The Bat!", although a for-pay program, is *very* difficult to beat. It is
>about the only program (I don't -know- of any others, but there may be some)
>where you can tell it to _completely_ ignore any/all HTML in a message. *OR*
>to ignore links and references while allowing HTML formatting to occur. And
>it _won't_ pull in anything that isn't already part of the message. "web
>bugs",
>and such, just "don't work" when mail is read with "The Bat!".
Jeez. Well, if Earthlink doesn't work--God knows, the invoice comes quickly
enough, even though the program won't load--it's upwards and onwards. Verizon.
I'll likely end up there anyway, because--so they say every six months--in six
months they'll be "giving" us DSL.
Charlie Self
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
2000
Ah, the joys of changing over. AOL recommends Mozilla for NGs. So I go for it,
download for nearly 45 minutes, install as per directions, and open the
program.
Yeah, right, as one of my granddaughters is wont to say. Mozilla loads with
some kind of ISP called PeoplePC which immediately informs me my first month is
free, but after that, $10.95. It then doesn't DO anything. Neither one do. I
can't reach the web sites, can't send mail, cannot do squat.
Back to the drawing board. Earthlink loaded most of the way, then got a Sys2099
error and stopped after I entered my phone number. That CD may be on its way. I
guess it is. I guess I care, but not much. Even $9.95 a month is too much for
that kind of nonsense.
I am recalling why I have stayed with AOL so long, and I am even more pissed at
them for dropping NGs. If only...if only Google's NG layout wasn't such a
frigging disaster.
Charlie Self
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
2000
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Ah, the joys of changing over. AOL recommends Mozilla for NGs. So I go for it,
> download for nearly 45 minutes, install as per directions, and open the
> program.
>
> Yeah, right, as one of my granddaughters is wont to say. Mozilla loads with
> some kind of ISP called PeoplePC which immediately informs me my first month is
> free, but after that, $10.95. It then doesn't DO anything. Neither one do. I
> can't reach the web sites, can't send mail, cannot do squat.
>
Charlie, just download FreeAgent or Gravity. They will read news ONLY.
They don't do web browsing or email. They are free. Most people prefer
FreeAgent but I've always liked Gravity better. I don't like either one
for newgroup binaries, I've kept an old copy of Netscape 3.x for that.
I don't know where you got Mozilla from. I downloaded it from the
Mozilla home site and I got none of the Peoplesoft junk. The only
reason I'm not using it is it's too slow on my old machine.
I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
accounts quite well.
--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
Larry Blanchard responds:
>> Ah, the joys of changing over. AOL recommends Mozilla for NGs. So I go for
>it,
>> download for nearly 45 minutes, install as per directions, and open the
>> program.
>>
>> Yeah, right, as one of my granddaughters is wont to say. Mozilla loads with
>> some kind of ISP called PeoplePC which immediately informs me my first
>month is
>> free, but after that, $10.95. It then doesn't DO anything. Neither one do.
>I
>> can't reach the web sites, can't send mail, cannot do squat.
>>
>Charlie, just download FreeAgent or Gravity. They will read news ONLY.
>They don't do web browsing or email. They are free. Most people prefer
>FreeAgent but I've always liked Gravity better. I don't like either one
>for newgroup binaries, I've kept an old copy of Netscape 3.x for that.
>
>I don't know where you got Mozilla from. I downloaded it from the
>Mozilla home site and I got none of the Peoplesoft junk. The only
>reason I'm not using it is it's too slow on my old machine.
>
I got mine from their site. It had the PeopleSoft crap on it the first time it
opened. I couldn't get PS to do anything, and Mozilla was even worse. Wasted
time.
Charlie Self
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
2000
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> > Most people prefer
> >FreeAgent but I've always liked Gravity better. I don't like either one
> >for newgroup binaries, I've kept an old copy of Netscape 3.x for that.
>
> Get the real version of Agent. It's cheap.
> Does Netscape 3 handle Yenc?
>
No, but that's mostly used on the porn groups.
--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
In article <L%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:32:15 -0800, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
> >accounts quite well.
>
> Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't crash
> like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
>
I tried Opera a while back. Didn't like it, although I don't remember
the reasons. I use Mozilla under Linux and Netscape 4 under Windows.
--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]
bonomi.com says...
> Opera _is_ a *good* web-browser. But you have to pay money to get the version
> *without* the intrusive advertising.
>
Ahah! THAT's why I didn't like it :-).
--
Homo sapiens is a goal, not a description
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:32:15 -0800, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]> wrote:
>I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
>accounts quite well.
Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't crash
like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
WD responds:
>
>On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 10:32:15 -0800, Larry Blanchard <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>I do use Mozilla Thunderbird for email because it handles multiple
>>accounts quite well.
>
>Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't crash
>like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
Looks great, but without a mention of what I need, Nesgroup access.
Charlie Self
"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
2000
On 28 Jan 2005 18:44:39 GMT, [email protected] (Charlie Self) wrote:
>>Why not try Opera 8. It's free, very fast and stable browser. It don't crash
>>like Netscrap or IE. http://www.opera.com/products/
To access ng, get Free Agent. To surf the net get Opera... Both FREE and GREAT.
Too many praises given to Firefox, "to be fair and balance" you should try
Opera.
>Looks great, but without a mention of what I need, Nesgroup access.
>
>Charlie Self
>"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some
>kind of federal program." George W. Bush, St. Charles, Missouri, November 2,
>2000
I'd hardly consider running a few safety programs "constant attention". If
you were to use your car as often as you use your computer it wouldn't last
a year. Let's not get into a windows vs PC war here.
--
Jeff P.
"A new study shows that licking the sweat off a frog
can cure depression. The down side is, the minute
you stop licking, the frog gets depressed again." - Jay Leno
Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com
"Dave Hinz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 09:11:58 -0800, Gino <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 26 Jan 2005 16:52:27 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>Sounds like the 500 dollar Mac Mini is a perfect solution for you then.
> >>It. Just. Works. I work on computers all day, and it's nice to come
> >>home to something that isn't Windows and needing constant attention.
> >>
> > Why does your Windows require constant attention?
>
> Mine doesn't, as it's turned off. The "Friends and family support plan
> from hell" systems that I deal with, do.
>
> > I have two XP systems one Home, one Pro, both used almost 24/7.
> > One is 5 years old the other 2 years old and I have not had a single
problem
> > Windows wise with either.
>
> So, you are immune from spyware, inherently insecurely open ports,
> viruses, and the BSOD? That's...incredible.
>
> > I have a few maintance utilities that run during the night, every night.
> > Nortons, Diskeeper, and a couple others and my systems run smooth.
>
> I guess I'd call all of that an example of "needing constant attention".
>
> > These are full load heavy use machines, 2 CD burners, 2 DVD burners,
600Gigs of
> > harddrive between them.
> > The newer machine see's constant almost daily installation of new
utilities
> > (even dangerous shareware and freeware) and games most of which are then
removed
> > soon after. I haven't needed to use rollback or my Ghost backups yet.
>
> As long as you're happy with your definition of success, that's great, but
> it seems like a lot of screwing around, which is my whole point.
>
> > But I've always have been lucky with computers.
> > At least 16 internal and 3 external harddrives in the last ten years and
not a
> > single one has failed. I have a buddy who had 3 fail last year costing
his about
> > 25 hours of lost work.
>
> 1. Better backups.
> 2. Clean power. He needs a UPS and a stack of CD-R's.
>
Shawn <[email protected]> wrote in
news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews:
> Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>
> http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.ht
> ml?tag=st_lh
>
Assuming the CNet author knew what they were reporting, it is the AOL
proprietary interface to newsgroups for which they are discontinuing
support. Newsgroups are purported to continue to be available to those who
use a 'real newsgroup reader' (emphasis added.)
Never having used the AOL interface, I cannot offer an opinion as to
whether this represents a loss or not. The "Internet with training
wheels" has never appealed to me. I am not every company's dream market
focus segment, however.
Patriarch
On 25 Jan 2005 17:22:33 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:17:00 -0500, Dan White <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This is a hoax that comes up occasionally, according to an AOL employee. It
>> was mentioned on another newsgroup.
>
>I don't know, I've seen the same thing come up from several respected
>members of several groups I'm in. Either they all got the same virus
>all at once or something, or it's legit this time.
>
>Even still, news.individual.net should work for anyone with any
>kind of network connectivity, unless AOL goes out of their way
>to block that port. So, even if you keep AOL for dialup, you can
>still get Usenet....and with a better user interface to boot.
Did AOL carry the binary woodworking group?
Individual.net does not.
But Forte will sell you 5 gigs a month of Supernews for 3 bucks a month.
Doesn't much matter. Intelligent people dump AOL.
"Dan White" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This is a hoax that comes up occasionally, according to an AOL employee.
It
> was mentioned on another newsgroup.
>
> dwhite
>
>
Shhhhhh!! Anything that can get people to dump AOL is a good thing.
--
Jeff P.
"A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The
crew are believed to be marooned."
Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com
"Dan White" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This is a hoax that comes up occasionally, according to an AOL employee.
It
> was mentioned on another newsgroup.
>
> dwhite
>
>
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:29:17 -0700, Mark & Juanita <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Top-posting with context removing sign-off fixed
>
>On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:49:07 -0600, "Jeff P." <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>
>"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews...
>> Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>>
>>
>http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.html?tag=st_lh
>>
>
>
>>Man, that really is amazing. Leave it to AOL to decide what's good for you.
>>If they don't have control over it then you shouldn't have it.
>
>
> Looks like this may be in AOL's best interest, once again due to our
>overly litigious society and the fact that AOL is a target because of its
>perceived "deep pockets": From the cited article:
>
>"AOL's newsgroups have led to some trouble for the Internet provider.
>Earlier this year, AOL settled a lawsuit with writer Harlan Ellison, who
>sued the company for copyright infringement. Ellison claimed AOL violated
>copyright laws because his works appeared on newsgroups available through
>the service."
>
Ellison also sued Supernews and won nothing. I doubt he got any more from AOL.
> IOW, because AOL had money, despite the fact they had no control over
>Usenet content (unless there is something missing in the above statement,
>such as if an AOLien posted the copyrighted works and AOL failed to respond
>to notification), they were still held liable for Usenet content because
>they offered access to Usenet.
>
>
>
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> The absence of accidents does not mean the presence of safety
>
> Army General Richard Cody
>
>+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
On 26 Jan 2005 16:52:27 GMT, Dave Hinz <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 26 Jan 2005 08:39:42 -0800, Dave Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You techno geeks crack me up with all your AOHell and "internet with
>> training wheels" crap. Some of us really don't feel like spending our
>> lives on techie issues and use the internet for a little email, some
>> newsgroups and a little browsing.
>
>Sounds like the 500 dollar Mac Mini is a perfect solution for you then.
>It. Just. Works. I work on computers all day, and it's nice to come
>home to something that isn't Windows and needing constant attention.
>
Why does your Windows require constant attention?
I have two XP systems one Home, one Pro, both used almost 24/7.
One is 5 years old the other 2 years old and I have not had a single problem
Windows wise with either.
I have a few maintance utilities that run during the night, every night.
Nortons, Diskeeper, and a couple others and my systems run smooth.
These are full load heavy use machines, 2 CD burners, 2 DVD burners, 600Gigs of
harddrive between them.
The newer machine see's constant almost daily installation of new utilities
(even dangerous shareware and freeware) and games most of which are then removed
soon after. I haven't needed to use rollback or my Ghost backups yet.
But I've always have been lucky with computers.
At least 16 internal and 3 external harddrives in the last ten years and not a
single one has failed. I have a buddy who had 3 fail last year costing his about
25 hours of lost work.
I'm not a great geek, I hate the hardware end of things but do it to keep my
costs down.
>> Now for jetskis...you shouldn't ride 'em if you can't fix 'em and half
>> the fun is fiddling with 'em :)
>
>I assume you know that there's irony in that statement in this context.
Man, that really is amazing. Leave it to AOL to decide what's good for you.
If they don't have control over it then you shouldn't have it.
--
Jeff P.
"A ship carrying blue paint collided with a ship carrying red paint. The
crew are believed to be marooned."
Check out my woodshop at: www.sawdustcentral.com
"Shawn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:1106690652.763b30117bf733fbd25b7bebc69c2f52@teranews...
> Would an actual news article be more convincing?
>
>
http://news.com.com/AOL+shutting+down+newsgroups/2100-1032_3-5550036.html?tag=st_lh
>
>
> Dan White wrote:
> > This is a hoax that comes up occasionally, according to an AOL employee.
It
> > was mentioned on another newsgroup.
> >
> > dwhite
> >
> >