Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: AOL Acquires Netscape

Author:Micah Alpern
Posted:11/24/1998; 8:07:21 AM
Topic:AOL Acquires Netscape
Msg #:443 (In response to 442)
Prev/Next:442 / 444

I was thinking about this deal last night, and although it's mostly a moot point now I'd still like to share them.

Some aspects of the current AOL/Netscape merger discussion strike me as truly comical. The angle that the Wall Street types are going gaga over is that this would create the largest Portal currently on the web. It’s been my personal experience that no one who understands the nature (ie. AOL is not the same as the Internet) and extent of their alternatives available (yahoo, excite, infoseek, hotbot, etc.) purposely seek out either of these sites. They’re value lies in the ineptitude of their users. Those who are either too lazy or unaware that the Internet has no official center (except possibly for www.w3.org) and that they can _choose_ to start their surfing anywhere. Imagine if there were two major companies that made televisions. One Company’s sets would automatically switch to channel 2 when you turned it on, while the other Company’s switched to channel 3. Both set makers also control the content on their default channels and are consistently the top rated stations, not because of their content, but because of the laziness of their viewers. Now imagine if one TV Company bought out the other. All of a sudden the Analysts and Media Mogels would get excite because this will help both companies compete against a third Company (MS) that sets it’s televisions to channel 4. Meanwhile Company One announces that as a part of the deal they’re not even going to bother manufacturing the sets for company two (all they were interested in was making sure their sets switched to the right channel when turned on) but will pass on this task to another company (Sun) who makes VCRs (servers), broadcasting equipment (solaris), and cappuccino makers (java). All this deal would accomplish would be to further homogenize and control those users who are unaware of the artificial limitations being imposed on them. The deal sends the stocks for all three companies into the stratosphere and leaves consumers with less control, less innovation, and the same damn channels.

postscript– my analogy to TV does not currently map one-to-one onto the current big three TV network system we enjoy today because they don’t control the sets. Then again maybe they do, I’ve been shopping for a set recently and been unable to find one that allows me to arrange the channels how _I_ want them to be ordered (no, a limited 5 button selection of favorites won’t do). Perhaps the networks are feeding the television set makers some cash to protect their prime real estate in the low numbers. Another example that suggests that no matter how bad (aka one way, top down) some Internet interactions are today, they’re still not as controlling as television . . . Yet.

Micah



This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:45:55 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.