Carlfish wrote:

> On Wed, 30 May 2001 20:48:26 -0400, Bill Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>      somehow managed to type:


In response to the Win32 platform comments:
How many AOL users are there?  Do you know that all AOL users appear as 
MSIE users to web servers?  So if the current market is 68% 18% IE to 
Netscape (I just saw those yesterday on ZDTV), imagine the impact of a 
few million AOL users now reporting as Netscape instead of IE


> So what's left? Why does AOL continue to put money into this? My guess is:
> 
> 1) It allows them to say to Microsoft "If you don't keep advertising our
> service on your desktop, we'll switch to a gecko-based browser." If AOL
> did not have this leverage, Microsoft could have said "We're not renewing
> our deal to keep you on our desktop, but you have to keep using IE anyway,
> because what else is there?
> 
> AOL gets far more tangible benefit from being on the Windows desktop than
> it would from switching to using Mozilla on its Windows client, but it
> still needs a ready alternative in case Microsoft decide to change the
> rules.


AOL already said no to their renewal.  They said something to the affect 
of "We don't need your adverising".  Which they don't.  They have, what, 
9.2 ^ 10 users or something?  Why advertise anymore?


> 
> 2) It gives AOL a platform for providing services on devices that do
> not run Windows. 
> 
> Since pundits have been saying "Next year is the year of the web appliance
> and the death of the PC!" for at least the last five years, it's always
> good to be in a position to capitalise on that if they turn out to be
> right. Having something that runs on a free OS becomes important in this
> arena, since when you start looking at the sort of price at which people
> would _buy_ a web appliance rather than a PC, having to buy Windows
> licenses would take a substantial chunk out of what you could spend on
> hardware for each box.


AOL wants to put a Gecko based browser in AOL because A) AOL for 
Linux/BeOS/FreeBSD/Anything.  B) AOL owns Netscape, why would they 
continue to use their competitor's product in their service?





Reply via email to