AOL webmail: replaced by Netscape 7
Written: Feb 06 '03 (Updated Mar 17 '03)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
|
Pros: a cheaper alternative to AOL 8.0
Cons: very buggy code
The Bottom Line: A clumsy, delicate, and bug-ridden website, finally replaced by Netscape 7.
|
|
|
| snsh's Full Review: AOL Internet Mail |
update:
As an alternative to the severely limited AOL8.0 and buggy AOL.com interfaces, AOL subscribers can access email using Netscape 7 software, which connects to AOL using the standardized IMAP protocol. Such access can only be made with Netscape's software (because of business reasons, not technological reasons) so programs like Outlook Express still cannot be used. Functionally, Netscape's IMAP access is a little slow, but overall, works on par with most other email software. It also works much, much better than AOL's proprietary interface.
Netscape 7 is very similar to the upcoming AOL Communicator, except Communicator comes integrated with instant messaging. Another imprortant distinction is that Communicator charges for AOL usage/minutes while Netscape 7 does not. So, Communicator is the best new choice for unlimited subscribers, and Netscape 7 for light-usage subscribers.
One issue: Netscape 7 still does not use AOL's proprietary PFC format. If you would like Netscape 7 to include access to your saved AOL mail, you will have to run PFC conversion software like TrueSwitch (www.trueswitch.com).
As it stands, AOL.com webmail is still the appropriate method of AOL access from places like cafes or libraries. AOL Communicator is appropriate for AOL access from home by unlimited subscribers. Netscape 7 is appropriate for AOL email access from home by light-usage subscribers.
------------------------------------------------------------
Why you should not depend on it
As a company, AOL shows symptoms of surprisingly poor software design. I mean that professionally and sincerely. From a customer service, business, content, and features perspective, AOL may be standing on firm ground. But from a software design perspective, AOL has real problems which will very likely worsen over time.
I have been using AOL webmail since the first week it went beta around five or six years ago. I still use it everyday to check my junkmail account. Though I cannot legally comment on the beta, I tell you that the first release of webmail was extremely flaky. I recall there was a major rewrite behind the webmail code around 1998, which helped, but since then I still fight bugs in the webmail interface everyday. Every single day.
The most obvious bug in AOL webmail is javascipt errors when deleting mail too quickly (I have to delete lots of spam). If you select and delete a message, the interface "hiccups" in between refreshing the local display, and fetching confirmation of the delete from the server. During this 1/2 second, if I try to delete another message, the javascript crashes. This crash is not obvious -- a tiny yellow icon appears in the bottom left corner of my browser window. However, if I do not "refresh" the display during the crashed state, I can continue selecting and deleting messages, but behind the scenes the server either deletes no messages or deletes the wrong message.
As I have said, this bug has existed for years. Not weeks or months, but years.
There is another AOL webmail bug worth mentioning. Attachments downloaded through webmail sometimes lose 1 byte. This is a 1-2 year old bug, and it always happens to my eFax attachments. I haven't investigated it too thoroughly, but AOL has acknowledged the existence of this problem without fixing it. Fortunately, I can successfully download the attachments (without losing that single byte) using AOL 8.0.
The less obvious problem in AOL webmail is the lack of sophistication in the interface. Columns are squished together. Messages are impossible to group together (without using the control-key). The screen is clumsy to resize.
As a last concrete example of AOL's programming problems, I give this: Today I installed Trillian on my PC. Trillian is a popular all-in-one substitute for AIM, ICQ, IRC, MSN Messenger, and Yahoo Messenger. In order for the software to connect to all my accounts, I had to supply Trillian with my current passwords for MSN and Yahoo, and my old password for AIM from three years ago.
This is evidence of a serious security flaw on AOL's servers. A three-year-old password is valid, while the current password is not? I suspect what is going on is this: AOL hacked together a connection between its screenname security database and its IM security database. Normally, when users run AIM, they supply their current AOL password, which an AOL screenname server accepts, and that screenname server holds an AIM password which gets forwarded to an AIM server. What sort of complexity is this?
On a web-forum I found postings from other people encountering this same problem 12 weeks ago. The only explanation that such a bug could persist for so long (or exist in the first place) is that AOL has been building on very tangled spaghetti code, making the bug very difficult to fix.
To my knowledge, AOL is not planning a rewrite of their client or server software. They probably don't have the economic resources to rewrite their code anyway.
I believe that "the big picture" of AOL is this: since 1990, software at AOL has been gradually evolving. AOL's programmers have been regularly adding new features to old code. They probably intended much of the code to be temporary ("we'll clean this up later") but it became so embedded that now it's permanent. Indeed, several of AOL 8.0's interfaces (such as their parental controls) have remained essentially unchanged since the 1990's. These habits have established a culture of sloppy programming at AOL. Their programmers have not adopted a discipline of meticulous software design. This is the fault of the company, and it impacts not just the quality of all their products, but the professional growth of their programmers. It's a shame.
Why you might need to use it
You nevertheless might have good reason to use AOL webmail. You have had an AOL screenname for several years. So many people send mail to your AOL account everyday, it seems unthinkable to give it up that email address.
You connect to the Internet through a cable modem or DSL, so the $22.95/month for basic AOL service is an exorbitant waste. Instead, by downgrading to the bare-minimum $4.95 plan, you can keep your AOL screenname and save a respectable $18.00/month. However, you must rely on webmail instead of AOL 8.0 to check your email.
This is only sensible reason to use AOL.com webmail, in my opinion.
What you might use instead
Disregarding AOL, Yahoo, and Hotmail, there many wonderful free or cheap email services to choose from today. Myself, I rely on FastMail.FM for my important email.
For the ultimate in email, I would recommend to anybody to take the plunge and buy your own domain name. It costs less than $10/year and you will actually be legal owner of your email address. It can be a little daunting to set up, but once you get it working, you'll be in email heaven.
Recommended:
No
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
snsh
|
|
Location: New England
Reviews written: 16
Trusted by: 7 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.