Definately much faster than a modem, but much more expensive over a year's time.
I know I can't afford it, but if you can its great. Prodigy has DSL also.
Larry
Tom Scales wrote:
> Get a cable modem or DSL. You'll never go back. I consistently get 3mbit
> through put, or about 60 times faster than a dial-up modem.
>
> Great stuff.
>
> Tom
> > Hi Rich,
> >
> > My provider happens to be Prodigy, which I've been with since 1996, and
> have had just about
> > perfect service from. Almost never a busy signal, and excellent
> knowledgable (on many subjects,
> > even outside their expected realm), and patient, customer support.
> Changing will not be a pain in
> > the ass, so don't worry about that. Here's the link if interested:
> >
> > http://www.prodigy.com/pcom/prodigy_internet/prices_vs_aol.html
> >
> > http://www.prodigy.com/pcom/prodigy_internet/products_pricing.html
> >
> > Larry
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Larry,
> >
> > Great tirade! Thanks for writing it. I seem to be blocked from getting
> > anything posted to the list at the moment. Don't know if it's because I
> saId
> > something wrong or simply brought up the subject of AOL/html (but then,
> you
> > just did, too...)... I'm sure this is a sore point with many... only a
> > couple have spoken up about it.
> >
> > I'm forwarding your post on to AOL's tech support, with a "What are you
> going
> > to do about this?" challenge to them. If they don't fix v6.0, and pretty
> > damn quickly, I'm going to switch providers, even though it would be a
> pain
> > in the a** to do so. I haven't been impressed with the way they've
> treated
> > me as a customer from the start, so I have no love or loyalty for AOL.
> >
> > Give givin' 'em hell!
> >
> > Rich
> >
> > P.S. Any suggestions for alternative providers? Maybe it would be a
> service
> > to the subscribers of the list to ask others to share good/bad experiences
> > with providers. Certainly closer to the purpose of the list (sharing
> info.
> > about OM's and Olympus in general, isn't it?) than flatulence, etc.
> >
> > Larry wrote:
> >
> > > 25 million customers, having tried nothing else, ADAMANTLY believe that
> others are dead
> > > wrong when they point out how much easier & user friendly OTHER
> internet providers are to
> > > navigate the web. From EASIER & better designed common browsers, (as
> opposed to the
> > > one-of-a-kind AOL browser unlike any other), to a completely uncensored
> (from ANYTHING,
> > > unless you choose) web. (AOL forces censorship, and members aren't
> aware.) No pop-up ads
> > > that AOL forces on you,...email you can more easily keep for as long as
> you like, rather
> > > than automatically being deleted after 7 days, version 5 overtaking
> other isp's when both
> > > are on the same computer, etc...etc...etc... Its amazing how many
> problems I deal with
> > > every day at work from AOL related problems that are not the people's
> fault. But, they
> > > truly assume nothing could be easier or more reliable, and they'd
> actually be able to miss
> > > out on something AOL offers if they switched, not realizing you can get
> all that with
> > > other ISP's also - even your AOL "buddies". Also, AOL's customer service
> seems to
> > > generally not care about any of the problems they cause, unless it
> affects only
> > > themselves, or members INTERNALLY. The fact that html email bothers
> others outside of
> > > AOL, means they'll casually do nothing about it, and be glad they're
> hurting other ISP's,
> > > and ways others access the web.
> > >
> > > Version 5 problem of affecting other isp's, or providers on the same
> computer, effectively
> > > causing start-up probs with them, is a problem they're barely concerned
> with, as it screws
> > > OTHER people up using OTHER companies, as pointed out here:
> > >
> > >
> http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=prgy&script=410&layou
> t=9&item_id=72966
> > >
> > > Yes, this is what happens in a world where marketing rules.
> > >
> > > sorry for the soapbox tirade. Just hit a continual never-ending sore
> point... :(
> > >
> > > Larry
> > >
> > > frieder.faig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2000 at 05:51:03PM -0800, George Conklin wrote:
> > > > > AOL is not very on top of their latest blunder, however 25 million
> > > > > customers can't be wrong...??
> > > >
> > > > Well, I think in a world where marketing rules, everything is possible
> :-(.
> > > > But you can`t blame all the people, in our complex world you can`t
> > > > demand from everyone to make himself an internet expert...
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The suggested solution of setting a listserv to allow html can
> easily
> > > > > double the size of an online archive or data base... (increasing
> storage
> > > > > charges, slowing down searching and generally cluttering the
> Internet)
> > > >
> > > > I`m a fan of: "keep it small and simple" (isn`t this als part of the
> OM fascination?).
> > > > I can`t see a reason to use html for mail.
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > > Frieder Faig
> > > >
> > > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> > >
> > > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >
> >
> > < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> > < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> > < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
> >
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|