New AOL for OSX?

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Anyone here have AOL for OSX? It just came out so I want to see how good it is. The beta sucked, but I hear the new release uses Gecko as the embedded browser, not IE anymore. Any reports?......................



[ 08-13-2002: Message edited by: steve666 ]</p>
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    Actually, the beta wasn't bad at all. All of the AOL for OS X version 2 betas haven't had IE.
  • Reply 2 of 24
    Not bad at all. But now they need to get a new IMer out...setting away messages crashes it every time on 10.2 GM.
  • Reply 3 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:

    <strong>Not bad at all. But now they need to get a new IMer out...setting away messages crashes it every time on 10.2 GM.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    If you're using 10.2 why not use iChat?
  • Reply 4 of 24
    I have used it. And, no, the last edition of it used IE 5. I knew this because you could drag the text around just like in IE. Now you can't. It is fast, though. It could always be faster, but I can't complain even on my Wallstreet 233. If you HAVE to use AOL (which I have had to this Summer, living with my aunt), then it is a must have. It takes a little longer to start up, and IMs come up a little slower, but other than that, it's been great*.



    *-at least for an AOL product!!!



    DXP
  • Reply 5 of 24
    donnydonny Posts: 231member
    Considering AOL's previous support of the Mac platform, this release is astonding. Before, the support was sad indeed. This release brings AOL on OS X up to par with the Windows versions. It still lacks a bit in a few areas, but it is a solid product and considerable improvement.



    Considering my biggest beef with it is the oversize toolbar, I think AOL is taking the Mac seriously now. Of course, Apple and AOL working together has a lot to do with the fast progress. The software adheres, more so, to Apple's GUI guidlines now. Things are grouped under the proper menu's, etc, etc. The buttons and such are still off a lot, but it is a lot better.



    I have tested the beta of this new 10.2 version of AOL since day one, and it has grown into its own. Be wary though, I am still talking about AOL, and it is still AOL. I'm just saying this version of the AOL software is great in comparison to any previous version in the past.



    We are still beta testing to ellimiate bugs that are known for Jaguar. So the buddy list and away message bugs on Jaguar are known problems, and they are being addressed by AOL.
  • Reply 6 of 24
    will using the new AOL for X (not IM) to chat with OS 10.2 cause any problems? i use AOL for mail and then leave it on to chat as well.



    i used iChat on my friend's mac this past weekend, and i couldnt figure out how to set up more than one account on it. it was a bit confusing.
  • Reply 7 of 24
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    Sounds good. I'm happy to hear that AOL is finally taking us seriously. Iim still using my PM 8100 with OS9 because I was hoping Apple was going to price the new lowend PowerMac more reasonably(obviously that didn't happen), but I may buy used, or the discontinued 800 mhz PowerMac, or wait till the dual 867's come down when they release the next model. Or, I may just keep this dinasaur for another year and then my thread topic will be moot to me. ...................
  • Reply 8 of 24
    [quote]Originally posted by steve666:

    <strong>Sounds good. I'm happy to hear that AOL is finally taking us seriously. Iim still using my PM 8100 with OS9 because I was hoping Apple was going to price the new lowend PowerMac more reasonably(obviously that didn't happen), but I may buy used, or the discontinued 800 mhz PowerMac, or wait till the dual 867's come down when they release the next model. Or, I may just keep this dinasaur for another year and then my thread topic will be moot to me. ...................</strong><hr></blockquote>





    There is no reason leaving it on will hurt. You can use icq, yahoo, and aol at the same time. The only problem is if you use the same screenname with both, the IM's might just go to one or the other (or even both!). It's kind of strange. I would recommend using different names then, or just IM.
  • Reply 9 of 24
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    [quote]Originally posted by dxp4acu:

    <strong>



    The only problem is if you use the same screenname with both, the IM's might just go to one or the other (or even both!). It's kind of strange. I would recommend using different names then, or just IM.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yeah. When you have both AIm and AOL on at the same time with the same screen name the IM just goes to AOL.
  • Reply 10 of 24
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    [quote]Originally posted by steve666:

    <strong>...I was hoping Apple was going to price the new lowend PowerMac more reasonably(obviously that didn't happen)...or wait till the dual 867's come down when they release the next model...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    What are you talking about, for the features/price, the low end G4 is VERY good...i'm not sure if ur waiting for wintel prices but apple did good with this.



    As for AOL paying attention to OS X i'm glad to hear because i love the current version of AOL IM (cept file transfers taske my system amazingly). It is WAY better then iChat, AOL has done a great job with this! Hope the fix the away message bug soon because not being able to put up an away messag sux.
  • Reply 11 of 24
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    &gt;What are you talking about, for the features/price, the low end G4 is VERY good...i'm not sure if ur waiting for wintel prices but apple did good with this.&lt;



    Actually I was waiting for $200 more than a wintel-not $600. Overpriced is not my bag.....................



    [ 08-19-2002: Message edited by: steve666 ]</p>
  • Reply 12 of 24
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    [quote]Originally posted by steve666:

    <strong>&gt;What are you talking about, for the features/price, the low end G4 is VERY good...i'm not sure if ur waiting for wintel prices but apple did good with this.&lt;



    Actually I was waiting for $200 more than a wintel-not $600. Overpriced is not my bag.....................



    [ 08-19-2002: Message edited by: steve666 ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Compare the low end G4 with a similarly spec'd dell...say at least 2GHz...and don't forget to make sure to add dell's most expensive flat panel because that is the only oen that comes close to apple's. Plus don't forget software for music and video, and you'll probably want to upgrade to XP professional because you want all the features, not just some (can you imagine if OS X was liek this, haha). 600 more is nothing, if $600 turns ur off to apple then go buy a PC...600, what is that, another 2 weeks you ahve to wait until ou can afford the extra?
  • Reply 13 of 24
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    [quote]Originally posted by ast3r3x:

    <strong>



    Compare the low end G4 with a similarly spec'd dell...say at least 2GHz...and don't forget to make sure to add dell's most expensive flat panel because that is the only oen that comes close to apple's. Plus don't forget software for music and video, and you'll probably want to upgrade to XP professional because you want all the features, not just some (can you imagine if OS X was liek this, haha). 600 more is nothing, if $600 turns ur off to apple then go buy a PC...600, what is that, another 2 weeks you ahve to wait until ou can afford the extra?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't want or need a 2 Ghz machine. I can get a 1.whatever Ghz PC with a good graphics card for less than $999. Thats $700 less than the low end G4. I don't want or need an expensive LCD, I want a black NEC 17 inch monitor for $200. Apple needs a consumer tower.........................................
  • Reply 14 of 24
    This is why Apple has the iMac and eMac. They WILL NOT make a "consumer tower." It's their professional line, expect it to be expensive. You can't compare Apple's professional towers to some low end PC. It's nice to have the option to upgrade but I can't see why everyone is fussing about the tower's being SO expensive. Besides that other tower will probably only last 2-4 years. My friends Compaq lasted them 4 years before it started crashing every 5 minutes no matter what they were doing. I tried to convince them to get a new iMac because all they do is go on dial up AOL and do word processing. But their dad seems to think that Mac's suck. They ended up spending around $1,500 on a Dell. All I have to say is, have fun when it breaks in a few years and you have to buy another one! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />



    EDIT: BTW they have an old Apple Power Mac 6100 or 7100 from 1994 in their basement that still works like it did the first day they bought it!



    [ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: wolfeye155 ]</p>
  • Reply 15 of 24
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    There's already a thread about consumer towers.



    So, how about AOL for OS X. I'm pleased to hear that the seem to be taking the Mac more seriously now even though I can't stand AOL myself.
  • Reply 16 of 24
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    [quote]Originally posted by wolfeye155:

    <strong>This is why Apple has the iMac and eMac. They WILL NOT make a "consumer tower." It's their professional line, excpect it to be expensive. You can't compare Apple's professional towers to some low end PC. It's nice to have the option to upgrade but I can't see why everyone is fussing about the tower's being SO expensive. Besides that other tower will probably only last 2-4 years. My friends Compaq lasted them 4 years before it started crashing every 5 minutes no matter what they were doing. I tried to convince them to get a new iMac because all they do is go on dial up AOL and do word processing. But their dad seems to think that Mac's suck. They ended up spending around $1,500 on a Dell. All I have to say is, have fun when it breaks in a few years and you have to buy another one! <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>





    it's very understandable to compare Apple's "Pro" towers to cheaper PC towers. there is nothing wrong with... especially when those cheaper PC towers usually have much better specs.



    why do you think anyone who wants to spend less than 2000 dollars on a computer must not have upgradability? That is ludicrous.



    Apple should be selling a..

    Single 1Ghz PowerMac

    256MB RAM

    Combo Drive

    Geforce 4 MX

    60GB HD

    56K Modem

    $1399



    that would be ideal and I'm pretty sure they would be able to have good marins on that because they sell the 800Mhz PowerMac for less than that through education
  • Reply 17 of 24
    Yes I agree that they should have a cheaper tower but most people don't even upgrade their computers. I know that sounds ludicrous to us but it's very true. And even people that do, the computers themselves aren't really built to be upgraded. The Sony Vaio towers that I was looking at and was about to buy before I decided on the Mac was barely upgradeable. It only had one or maybe 2 ram slots. The video card it came with was very bad. I think it was just a basic TNT2. Lol and we think that GeForce 2 MX is bad....Not to mention what a pain in that ass to get into the case compared to Apple's little lever on the side. Power Mac's are built to be able to upgrade, and easily. iMac's aren't because general computer users never upgrade their computer anway and have no idea what the difference is between a megahert or a gigahert etc.
  • Reply 18 of 24
    Seriously though, what are you going to be doing with your computer? If it's just using Office, going online, reading email, playing games, doing some Photoshop stuff etc. then the iMac is more then enough power and will be for quite some time. If you are buying the latest video card every 2 years to play the latest games and using Final Cut Pro and Maya to make movies then yeh the Power Mac is what you need.
  • Reply 19 of 24
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    [quote]Originally posted by Amorph:

    <strong>There's already a thread about consumer towers.



    So, how about AOL for OS X. I'm pleased to hear that the seem to be taking the Mac more seriously now even though I can't stand AOL myself.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    AOL can be annoying at times. If it doesn't crash, and doesn't throw me off for no reason then I love it. I just like the interface and built in email. Hopefully OSX version will be superior.....................
  • Reply 20 of 24
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    &gt;Apple should be selling a..

    Single 1Ghz PowerMac

    256MB RAM

    Combo Drive

    Geforce 4 MX

    60GB HD

    56K Modem

    $1399&gt;



    There is a thread on this subject in consumer hardware, but I think the proper price would have to be $999-$1199 to really get sales moving since the eMac costs $1099.



    My specs would be:

    G4 1Ghz

    256 Mb RAM

    40 Gb Hard drive

    Nvidia 2MX

    Combo DVD/CDRW drive

    modem

    at least 1 PCI slot

    $1099



    Perfecto.......................................... .....
Sign In or Register to comment.