Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AOL's New Alto Client Is Visual Email, and You Don't Need a New Address

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the more-slashdot-accounts-for-all dept.

America Online 108

pigrabbitbear writes "AOL, still looking to reboot itself from the dialup days, is shooting to actually change the way we deal with email. The company's new service, called Alto, isn't a new email client. You don't have to sign up for yet another email address, because as David Temkin, AOL's senior VP of mail said, 'We need another email address like we need a hole in the head.' Instead, Alto, which is in limited release starting today, is designed to be an intelligent aggregator of the email accounts you already have."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Great job /. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698549)

Another site down from the /. effect.

Wow (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698551)

An email client. Now I can use email.

Re:Wow (1, Informative)

c0lo (1497653) | about 2 years ago | (#41698687)

Alto isn't a new email client. You don't have to sign up for yet another email address

Now, somebody enlighten me: since when, if one switches email clients, the one needs to get another email address?

Re:Wow (4, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41698847)

Alto isn't a new email client. You don't have to sign up for yet another email address

Now, somebody enlighten me: since when, if one switches email clients, the one needs to get another email address?

Since the definition of "email client" changed from "software you use to read your emails" to "corporation that provides your email service via the web browser," apparently.

Re:Wow (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#41699761)

So what the hell is "visual mail"? On a mildly unrelated topic, I think people should make the effort of getting their own domain so they don't end up tied to a service they don't want. You should never need another email address if you have control over it ... just change clients (or use multiple ones).

Re:Wow (1)

SydShamino (547793) | about 2 years ago | (#41701091)

As an aggregator, isn't that what this new service is? Seriously I'm asking since I haven't RTFA.

I have my own domain, but I recently switched from using an open-source mail viewer to piping all my mail to a gmail account. I can sort and reply through Google and they are received and sent via my domain. Best of both I think.

Re:Wow (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 2 years ago | (#41698851)

Since we were talking about AOL? You're "one stop shop" to the Interwebs, including their nice fancy proxies?

Re:Wow (5, Funny)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 2 years ago | (#41699005)

Since we were talking about AOL? You're "one stop shop" to the Interwebs, including their nice fancy proxies?

I am NOT a "one stop shop"!
I would like you to stop insinuating that I am!

Re:Wow (1)

l810c (551591) | about 2 years ago | (#41701685)

I have several email addresses as I am sure many people do.

I have an Email address for my own consulting company.
An Email address with a company whom I do a lot of work for
A personal Email address
A hacker address ;)

The LAST thing I want to do is combine them and possibly make a mistake. I have different clients and web interfaces for each. I know when I am here on this computer that I am taking care of this particular business.

Definitely not needed here.

Not another one... (0)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about 2 years ago | (#41698561)

It only works with AOL mail, gmail, Yahoo mail, and some ecloud stuff. Even if it worked with other email providers, it would just provide another way to screw up mail-gathering. I'll stick with what I have, thanks.

Re:Not another one... (2)

Dan93 (222999) | about 2 years ago | (#41698623)

Right now, I get all of the mail from my gmail account forwarded though my company mail server with no ads, so I'm not so sure if they will.

Re:Not another one... (0, Flamebait)

ls671 (1122017) | about 2 years ago | (#41699155)

I'll stick with what I have, thanks.

For me, it is still pine accessed through VNC tunnelled through ssh. All my email addresses are forwarded or popped to one host so I only need to check in one place. With pine filters and rules, all emails go in the right folders automatically after I read them from my Inbox. Some less important stuff is filtered to go in the right folders even before I read it. Pine integrates well with pgp/gpg and eliminates all the html crap, images and what not.

Everything also goes through mailscanner/clamav/spamassassin before getting to my main Inbox.

I then forward everything to my gmail account just for redundancy and to be able to access my emails from corporate networks that don't allow you to use ssh. When I ever post from gmail (rarely), it goes to my host smtp server so all replies go to my host, not gmail. I keep my gmail address confidential so I do not need to bother checking it.

I delete all my gmail Inbox once every week or so...

Re:Not another one... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699333)

You're so l33t.

Re:Not another one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700231)

Nah, l33t requires procmail sprinkles.

Malaysian wombats == TEH HOTZ (2)

TiggertheMad (556308) | about 2 years ago | (#41699627)

You know, if you just stopped subscribing to illegal Malaysian wombat pr0n sites, you wouldn't have to go to such ridiculous lengths to sanitize your email...

Re:Not another one... (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#41700817)

Sounds like WAY too much of a pain in the ass for me to put up with. For me, email is and will continue to be simple.

Re:Not another one... (1)

ls671 (1122017) | about 2 years ago | (#41701241)

hehe, it started around 1985 using pine at the university and I built up on it ;-)

I originally quoted the parent saying "I'll stick with what I have, thanks"

The idea was that I stuck with what I had since the 90s. I was in no way recommending my setup to anybody but it still works fine for me.

Ask rms about mailing webpages to himself to get in the mood;-) I swear I still use pine as described above although and I find it efficient. You can even use the mouse in Pine when in X !

You know those funny images with text? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698567)

That's what all Alto email looks like. You pick your image, add your text, and boom, instant email.

Terms of service? (3, Interesting)

Lord Byron II (671689) | about 2 years ago | (#41698573)

Well, since this means that you'll be reading your @gmail.com email through Alto, instead of through Gmail, it also means that you'll be seeing AOL ads and not Google ads. How long will it be until Google, Yahoo, and Apple change their API or terms of service to ban this?

Re:Terms of service? (3, Informative)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 2 years ago | (#41698653)

I'm not convinced Google would—after all, they already offer free POP and IMAP. As does Apple, and iCloud doesn't even have ads in it. (I think?)

Re:Terms of service? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698655)

Not until it gains some popularity, which I don't see happening.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about 2 years ago | (#41698661)

Er, they all explicitly allow IMAP. They are pretty happy to let to you use thunderbird and see no ads at all, why would they have a problem with this service?
 
In fact I check my hotmail and yahoo email only though Gmail (I have asked Gmail to poll these accounts through IMAP). I have never logged into either of the accounts in years and have never viewed a single ad from them. They seem to be pretty happy about this setup, and have never complained.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41698761)

Really? How can I get my Yahoo mail via IMAP? They're POP only (or at least the AT&T version is).

Re:Terms of service? (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about 2 years ago | (#41698815)

Ah, it seems I have been using POP after all. Gmail doesnt even support pulling mail from other accounts through IMAP.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | about 2 years ago | (#41700653)

If they did, I would occasionally use it, and would see their ads. But alas, they don't support this.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

crashumbc (1221174) | about 2 years ago | (#41699317)

incomming:
android.imap.mail.yahoo.com
port 993

outgoing:
android.smtp.mail.yahoo.com
port: 465

pretty sure those work without the "android." in front also...

Re:Terms of service? (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | about 2 years ago | (#41699343)

$10/month.

Last I looked at least, 4 years ago.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#41699513)

No, it's now free. Hell, Thunderbird will even set it up for you automatically.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

sconeu (64226) | about 2 years ago | (#41699803)

Not for a pacbell.net address.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | about 2 years ago | (#41699407)

Actually, as far as I know, iCloud does work through Gmail, which is annoying. I've signed up for an Alto invitation. I've long wanted something to come along and challenge the quality of the Gmail web interface; maybe this is it?

Re:Terms of service? (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about 2 years ago | (#41699517)

iCloud does not support POP3, and gmail only supports POP3 (pretty sad, considering they were one of the first to offer IMAP access to their servers).

Re:Terms of service? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699961)

Since Aol partnered with google about 5 or 10 years ago to provide their search, I don't think there's any reason for google to care. Aol's ads are essentially google ads. Google gets search users, aol gets a revenue stream. Something similar may be happening behind the scenes of this email client.

Secondly, every email client other than google's own either doesn't display ads or displays ads other than google's. Google hasn't banned any other clients, have they? So your fears are completely moot, no?

Re:Terms of service? (-1, Flamebait)

mrmeval (662166) | about 2 years ago | (#41700237)

WhyTehFuck is this advertisement here? Sheesh.

AOL DIED, let it rest in pieces.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

Firehed (942385) | about 2 years ago | (#41700513)

They still (autonomously) scan your email and use the data for targeted advertising. Nobody clicks the ads in gmail, but they certainly use the mail to target the ads you see on google searches. I'm sure that's why they don't charge for Exchange/IMAP/POP access.

So... probably not an issue.

Re:Terms of service? (1)

bWareiWare.co.uk (660144) | about 2 years ago | (#41702983)

Google still get to read your email and sell that information to advertisers, which is more then enough to cover the costs of running gmail.

Korriban would probably churn out spam specialists (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41698621)

"You have spam!"

A while back someone figured out how to spoof aol email and send stuff not just to your peeps, but to everyone cc'd on emails sent to you, like people 3 circles of friends away in joke forwardings.

This seemed to clear up a few months ago. Easy to mock AOL (or Wndows for that matter) but I wouldn't wanna be the engineers in charge of fighting off motivated engineers from shitholes around the world.

Yeah but... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698631)

We need anything from AOL like we need a hole in the head too.

Some companys just don't have the decency to lay down and die when their time is over... It's so sad.

Re:Yeah but... (2)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | about 2 years ago | (#41698675)

Well, I have a few holes in my head that are necessary for my survival. So you're saying Alto is necessary for my survival? Cool.

Re:Yeah but... (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41698919)

Well, I have a few holes in my head that are necessary for my survival. So you're saying Alto is necessary for my survival? Cool.

Yup, just stick your noggin in this here clamp and we'll get the install going for you!



Now, should I use the 1/2" wood-bore or the concrete bit? Hmm...

Re:Yeah but... (1)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | about 2 years ago | (#41699107)

Never has a username been so relevant.

Re:Yeah but... (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 2 years ago | (#41699415)

Hole saw.

I apologize... (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 2 years ago | (#41698947)

Some companys just don't have the decency to lay down and die when their time is over... It's so sad.

My parents are still on Compuserve dial-up. It's all their fault.

They should be apologising... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699035)

Not you. I will be here waiting for their apologies.

Re:I apologize... (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 2 years ago | (#41700905)

Some companys just don't have the decency to lay down and die when their time is over... It's so sad.

My parents are still on Compuserve dial-up. It's all their fault.

Wow, honestly I assumed compuserve had closed up shop years ago.

Re:Yeah but... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699249)

lay down and die

Hens lay,
Men lie.

Lie down and die.

And this is better than... (3, Interesting)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#41698647)

Thunderbird or Outlook HOW?

Re:And this is better than... (2)

Hentes (2461350) | about 2 years ago | (#41698829)

It's in the CLOUD, of course.

Re:And this is better than... (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41698929)

Thunderbird or Outlook HOW?

It's new, and if Apple's dev cycle has taught us anything, it's that new always, always == BETTER!


ALWAYS!

Re:And this is better than... (1)

Goodyob (2445598) | about 2 years ago | (#41700117)

ALWAYS!

Windows 8 would like to have a word with you

Re:And this is better than... (1)

AdamWill (604569) | about 2 years ago | (#41701157)

it's a web app, which at least makes it different. You can run it from anything with a compliant browser. (Though I think one of the five thousand things Microsoft calls 'Outlook' is one of those, too.) And it appears to have a rather neat implementation of what GMail calls 'labels' and what everyone else back in 1999 called 'virtual folders', which it calls 'stacks'. Aside from that, it appears a bit too early to tell.

Re:And this is better than... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41702215)

Did you even look at the article?

Does Thunderbird arrange all your photo attachments into a virtual folder through which you can browse?

Does Outlook automatically create a rule to put all your Groupon mails into a stack called "When I fancy a treat" afer you've dragged-and-dropped a single e-mail?

because (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#41698649)

.forward files don't cut it ?

Sorry. Stupid.

obligatory xkcd (0)

v1 (525388) | about 2 years ago | (#41698667)

oh this so reminds me of http://xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com]

Alto = web-based email client (4, Insightful)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 2 years ago | (#41698683)

>> Alto...is...an...aggregator of the email accounts you already have."

Aha - a web-based email client.

Re:Alto = web-based email client (3, Insightful)

SeaFox (739806) | about 2 years ago | (#41701455)

>> Alto...is...an...aggregator of the email accounts you already have."

Aha - a web-based email client.

I read it like this:

AOL (in pitiful voice): "Please, oh please give us your email credentials and let us datamine all your accounts. Nobody wants to use our email addresses anymore!"

W00T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698693)

Back to the days of limited browser support (firefox AND chrome this time)! Can't wait to relive the days!

Also, do I need aggregated everything? No, I need all those nitwits with outlook to stop writing such atrocious mails. Badly formatted, incompatibly threaded, gratuitously quoted, laid out to discourage reading, poor spelling, grammar, punctuation, AND language, and devoid of meaning. And to top it all off, indistinguishable from real spam!

This is something technology cannot wholly fix, though it clearly can facilitate it and we should make the nitwits abandon their beloved extremely poorly playing with others software to stop that. Then we should educate them, starting with the basics. Most of them would do better writing notes on typewriters, OCRing the notes, and sending that. That's how far they, and thus we, have to go.

We don't need more software for that. We need more clues to go 'round.

As an Alto.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698725)

As I am a musician, and sing Alto.. is it mandatory that I use this service?

Re:As an Alto.. (2)

MrEricSir (398214) | about 2 years ago | (#41699549)

As I am a musician, and sing Alto.. is it mandatory that I use this service?

Yes, but unfortunately you first have to fly to Palo Alto, where you'll have to use this service on a Xerox Alto.

Re:As an Alto.. (0)

Papaspud (2562773) | about 2 years ago | (#41700897)

As I am a musician, and sing Alto.. is it mandatory that I use this service?

Yes, but unfortunately you first have to fly to Palo Alto, where you'll have to use this service on a Xerox Alto.

While playing an alto sax the whole time.

Let's get real for just a moment... (2)

Genda (560240) | about 2 years ago | (#41698755)

Email clients today allow you to easily and effectively organize all of your email Addys in one UI, neatly broken out by Source and Content Folders. So I'm seeing Alto as a big fat question mark, except for the fact that AOL is now a company looking for a raison d'etre.

So they're gonna aggregate everybody's email, suck out the interesting bits, grow huge amounts of data on millions of users... OH, now I see... they wanna be a PoBoy Facebook. Well why didn't you guys just come out and say "Hey we need a cup of data to stay alive, please give a starving corporation a break."

Maybe y'all could invent a round thing to move heavy objects on.

Re:Let's get real for just a moment... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699087)

Yeah, except Facebook sucks and a lot of people are starting to realise it. The reason everyone started using Facebook was so that they could stay in touch with friends more efficiently than via email. If this makes it as easy to stay in touch as Facebook is then I could see a lot of people switching services to avoid the massive torrent of advertising masquerading as updates.

Re:Let's get real for just a moment... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699871)

Hey we need a cup of data to stay alive, please give a starving corporation a break."

LOL, on Futurama there was a free booze kitchen for robots. I'm not sure if there were any mailbots or spambots there though. They should accept all robots, IMHO. For all robot kind...

How the hell is this "[not] a new email client?" (2)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about 2 years ago | (#41698757)

The company's new service, called Alto, isn't a new email client.

Alto, which is in limited release starting today, is designed to be an intelligent aggregator of the email accounts you already have.

Sure as hell sounds like an email client to me.

Yep, sounds like a web-based email client (3)

neminem (561346) | about 2 years ago | (#41698773)

Quoth, for instance: "Theyâ(TM)re like folders or labels, but managed through an intuitive drag-and-drop interface, and allowing users to decide that they want to make large swaths of their email bypass the main inbox entirely, to be saved in Stacks where they can be read later."

So... like folders or labels, but with filters on them! You know, filters, like Thunderbird and gmail have both supported since basically the beginning of time?

Re:Yep, sounds like a web-based email client (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41702741)

This is how it works:

  • Take an existing feature which many people don't know how to use.
  • Make sure it is activated by a simple, everyday action like dragging something somewhere, so that every shithead using the product will use it by accident and be pleasantly surprised, and call that 'intuitive' (it may be counter-intuitive for people who know what they're doing, but those are a minority so who cares).
  • Give it a new fancy name, so people who couldn't wrap their heads around it in the past don't panick it but instead think it's new and cool and nice to play with.

I'ts marketing. Make it look cool and entertaining to get the 'look: ponies!' crowd on board. While I do think it's positive if a majority of people know how to use useful features I think it's rather depressing that western societies seem to deteriorate into a state where people are constantly told there is no value in learning anymore but instead you get there by being entertained. That is not the best way to be happy nor to sustain progress.

@slashdot: why don't I see bullets when I use <ul> (or numbers when I use <ol>)?

procmail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698791)

AOL just found out about procmail?

The problem with Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698823)

... is that you're expected to work 50 hour weeks. Forget annual pay, how much do these companies pay per hour?

Re:The problem with Google (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#41698975)

... is that you're expected to work 50 hour weeks. Forget annual pay, how much do these companies pay per hour?

A) Wrong thread [slashdot.org]

B) Base pay = $128,336

$128,336 / 2080 (hours worked in an year @ 40hrs/wk) = $61.70/hr.

@ 50hrs/wk, pay drops to $49.36/hr. Still not bad.

In other news. (5, Funny)

Psyko (69453) | about 2 years ago | (#41698907)

AOL's 3 remaining customers are going to use a new application to aggregate their mail from services that already provide more functionality than AOL does in an attempt to show relevant value and usefulness. One of the 3 customers, known simply as "granma" was quoted as saying "Now I don't have to remember all those complicated things like gee mails and yahooie for when I need to tell my grandson that the guv'ment is going to start charging for email, or if I forward this message bill gates is going to give me a dollar!".

Cool story, would read again, +1, +like & stuff. Need's more bitcoin.

Re:In other news. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700355)

You forgot the handful of q-link lifetime subscribers ;)

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41698999)

Kind of like any email client on the market? Making all your emails be in one place?

New? How? (1)

bmimatt (1021295) | about 2 years ago | (#41699053)

Been doing that since mid-90's, how's this new?

Devils Advocate (1)

Xacid (560407) | about 2 years ago | (#41699097)

I've got to say it's certainly an interesting enough of an idea and interface to make me at least give it a shot. This is the kind of stuff that AOL is going to need to do if they want to have any shot at getting back into the market instead of resting on their rears and hoping the seniors keep paying out to them for a 15 year old service.

Only supports AOL, GMail, Yahoo & iCloud (5, Informative)

mattbee (17533) | about 2 years ago | (#41699153)

I tried to request an invitation for my self-hosted address. "That email system is not supported". Thanks. So it's only for people that have more than one account on the above list apparently.

Re:Only supports AOL, GMail, Yahoo & iCloud (1)

legrimpeur (594896) | about 2 years ago | (#41702401)

which basically means that they only care about stealing customers form Google, Yahoo, and Apple... and that they don't give a damn about you customer....

Re:Only supports AOL, GMail, Yahoo & iCloud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41703449)

They could support vanilla IMAP you'd think.

Translated to something sensible (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699269)

'We need another email address like we need a hole in the head.'

AOL's in-house problem was 'How do we get people to use us instead of Google/Facebook/etc'. Pretty quickly, they figured out that the sort of people that might use, or at least try, AOL were very uninterested in the hassle of switching email addresses.

So the next approach was how do we get people to switch to us without switching email addresses. Hence this bizarre little client and its bizarre marketing.

I'm not saying it's a great solution. It's just the best the techs could come up with to deal with what AOL's executives wanted.

That's a HUGE security risk. (2)

Khyber (864651) | about 2 years ago | (#41699355)

Knowing AOL's prior shit security (Coach Account Access, anyone?) how long until this shit gets cracked and emails get stolen?

Watch out! (1)

sjames (1099) | about 2 years ago | (#41699393)

Once it gets it's teeth in you, it'll drag you under water, spin you around sharply to break your neck, then stuff you under the bank to tenderize for a while.

What's that? OH, AGGERGATOR!!! Same advice really.

Just No HTMLization Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41699423)

I'm all for whatever they want to do, just so long as the thing doesn't default to sending HTML-ized text that shows up as garbage in my email client. Of course if they default to HTML-ized garbage, then I will hunt down the IP addresses of every SMTP server they use and block them.

Re:Just No HTMLization Please (1)

AdamWill (604569) | about 2 years ago | (#41701167)

It's a good thing the Alto design team religiously checks deep into 0-ranked Slashdot discussion threads for feature requests.

Aptly named... (1)

Holistic Missile (976980) | about 2 years ago | (#41699469)

'Alto' = 'Stop' in Spanish...

Re:Aptly named... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700091)

Also 'high', which the seem to be, too.

Re:Aptly named... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41701467)

Maybe they could change the name to "Nova".

Considering this is AOL talking... (1)

guttentag (313541) | about 2 years ago | (#41699715)

You know, the company that almost owned the Internet and (fortunately) screwed up big time.

David Temkin, AOL's senior VP of mail said, 'We need another email address like we need another hole in the head.'

There. Fixed it for him.

Re:Considering this is AOL talking... (1)

TheLink (130905) | about 2 years ago | (#41702839)

To be fair, if he kept his mouth shut things might actually be better.

All the better for AOL to spy on ALL your mail... (0)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 2 years ago | (#41699959)

AOL is not to be trusted. They have engaged in massive spying operations for decades now.

You'd have to be stupid to use this pathetic product.

Buy AOL? (1)

kimvette (919543) | about 2 years ago | (#41700005)

I'm thinking of buying AOL, but have only one dollar bills in my pocket. Do you think they can make change? I'm not sure AOL is worth $1.00.

Doesn't work with IE8 (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700107)

Yeah, not going to be supported even by MS soon; but that's beside the point. It's EMAIL, for cryin' out loud. It ought to work with Lynx, or by sending raw HTTP requests vial Telnet. Actually, POP3 itself is rasonably accessed via Telnet. Webified anything in a terminal is really not practical.

In other words, all the Web 2 million.0 kewlness is the first strike against it.

The 2nd strike is that it just introduces another point of failure. "Is my Yahoo mail server down or is AOL down?" is not a question I want to be asking. Ever.

Behold.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700503)

Procmail and fetchmail with data mining and a web interface. Just what I've always wanted....you shouldn't have. No, really, you shouldn't have. Here I'll put it over here with that @aim.com address you gave my aim screen name years back. I can finally migrate my fidonet stuff somewhere...

How many email accounts do people have? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700563)

I have exactly three - business, personal, and the account I use to sign up for things on the Internet, and none of those need to be aggregated with the others.

Re:How many email accounts do people have? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41701395)

I have a personal, business, 'send spam here', and a separate email address for every gaming account I have.

Tor Mail @ http://jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion/ (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41700857)

Tor Mail:

http://www.tormail.org/ [tormail.org]

which leads to the Tor Hidden Service:

http://jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion/ [jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion]

AOL, can you provide a hidden service to match? Aww, I didn't think so.

Re:Tor Mail @ http://jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion/ (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41702937)

Tor Mail:

http://www.tormail.org/ [tormail.org]

which leads to the Tor Hidden Service:

http://jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion/ [jhiwjjlqpyawmpjx.onion]

AOL, can you provide a hidden service to match? Aww, I didn't think so.

They had a completely hidden one but for some reason nobody signed up

AOL Mail, Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41701015)

I've been on my family's AOL account for a good decade and half. I have other e-mail accounts, but AOL maybe bit dated but established.
I got no problems with it as is. I don't need stupid thing become more annoying in sense of completely new type software. If they want survive, i'd wish they give paying people option to choose not to change their clients to some cloud base one. I'm ludy, i don't trust Cloud based software.

So... (1)

epp_b (944299) | about 2 years ago | (#41701671)

It's an email client that can be configured with multiple accounts ... just like all the other ones.

Great boon to spammers (1)

Chrisq (894406) | about 2 years ago | (#41702929)

The "auto image" display will mean that spammers can determine active email addresses. This goes away from the previous trend where images are only diplayed if you explicitly download so that spammers would have no idea if james.bog121@gmail.com is a real email address or not.

Same Old AOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41703041)

I clicked on the link to Alto and got this:

OOPS!
It looks like you're using an older version of Internet Explorer. The application works best with the latest version. UPDATE BROWSER

Can someone who got there confirm that the website is comprised of large, multi-colored centered content and makes liberal use of blinking text ?

Am I a sucker... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41703065)

for trying this out? After reading TFA it looks like it's a product useful to me. It seems to deal more directly than most clients with the functions e-mail serves these days.

Bad history (1)

ledow (319597) | about 2 years ago | (#41703685)

Every single time, ever, that someone has told me that something would "change the way I work", it never has. Not once. Except in a case or two where it "changed the way I worked" by stopping me being able to work, and then eventually getting scrapped.

And every single thing that *HAS* genuinely changed the way I work has come not from marketers telling me that would be so but by a stealthy, insidious insertion of something quite simple into my daily life and then one day realising I couldn't do without it.

So, by that history, this looks like something I'll say "And?" to and then never hear of it again. Can I come back in 5 years and see if I'm wrong?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?