AOL has just notified us that it is cutting off newsgroup service,
thus:
"Please note: The AOL Newsgroup service, will be discontinued in early
2005. For members using AOL over a dial-up connection, you will no
longer be able to access Newsgroups. If you have a separate high-speed
connection, you can contct your broadband provider to see if they offer
Newsgroups. Newsgroup sservices can often be accesed through a third
party reader, such as Mozilla Thunderbird.
Alternatively, you can access Newsgroups via Google, etc."

I have a high-speed connection, but I have been using it only to get to
AOL, which, in spite of comments from others here, I have always liked
a lot. It gives exceptional service in many areas. E-mail in all of
its areas, excellent spyware for free, excellent Pop-up blocking, good
spam blocking, fast service, and REAL Customer Service where you can
actually talk to a human being. I started using it in Edition 3, and
it has improved steadily to the present 9.0 Edition.

The problem is, I don't like Yahoo, which is the broadband provider I
signed up for in order to get high speed AOL . And
http://groups.google.com can be slow (today the postings are 7 hours
late, and still waiting. ) Even when "groups.google" is working
faster, it isn't the same back-and-forth communication that you can get
presently . I checked Mozilla Thunderbird, and it seems unwieldy.
Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
too.
Nancree

On 24 Jan 2005 15:00:20 -0800, "nancree" > wrote:

>AOL has just notified us that it is cutting off newsgroup service,
>thus:
>"Please note: The AOL Newsgroup service, will be discontinued in early
>2005. For members using AOL over a dial-up connection, you will no
>longer be able to access Newsgroups. If you have a separate high-speed
>connection, you can contct your broadband provider to see if they offer
>Newsgroups. Newsgroup sservices can often be accesed through a third
>party reader, such as Mozilla Thunderbird.
>Alternatively, you can access Newsgroups via Google, etc."
>
>I have a high-speed connection, but I have been using it only to get to
>AOL, which, in spite of comments from others here, I have always liked
>a lot. It gives exceptional service in many areas. E-mail in all of
>its areas, excellent spyware for free, excellent Pop-up blocking, good
>spam blocking, fast service, and REAL Customer Service where you can
>actually talk to a human being. I started using it in Edition 3, and
>it has improved steadily to the present 9.0 Edition.
>
>The problem is, I don't like Yahoo, which is the broadband provider I
>signed up for in order to get high speed AOL . And
>http://groups.google.com can be slow (today the postings are 7 hours
>late, and still waiting. ) Even when "groups.google" is working
>faster, it isn't the same back-and-forth communication that you can get
>presently . I checked Mozilla Thunderbird, and it seems unwieldy.
>Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
>too.
> Nancree

Try news.individual.net

You'll need a news reader like Forte Agent and you'll need to email
them to set up an account. But it's free and works well.


modom

"Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
-- Jimmie Dale Gilmore

Michael Odom wrote:
> On 24 Jan 2005 15:00:20 -0800, "nancree" > wrote:
>
>
>>AOL has just notified us that it is cutting off newsgroup service,
>>thus:
>>"Please note: The AOL Newsgroup service, will be discontinued in early
>>2005. For members using AOL over a dial-up connection, you will no
>>longer be able to access Newsgroups. If you have a separate high-speed
>>connection, you can contct your broadband provider to see if they offer
>>Newsgroups. Newsgroup sservices can often be accesed through a third
>>party reader, such as Mozilla Thunderbird.
>>Alternatively, you can access Newsgroups via Google, etc."
>>
>>I have a high-speed connection, but I have been using it only to get to
>>AOL, which, in spite of comments from others here, I have always liked
>>a lot. It gives exceptional service in many areas. E-mail in all of
>>its areas, excellent spyware for free, excellent Pop-up blocking, good
>>spam blocking, fast service, and REAL Customer Service where you can
>>actually talk to a human being. I started using it in Edition 3, and
>>it has improved steadily to the present 9.0 Edition.
>>
>>The problem is, I don't like Yahoo, which is the broadband provider I
>>signed up for in order to get high speed AOL . And
>>http://groups.google.com can be slow (today the postings are 7 hours
>>late, and still waiting. ) Even when "groups.google" is working
>>faster, it isn't the same back-and-forth communication that you can get
>>presently . I checked Mozilla Thunderbird, and it seems unwieldy.
>>Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
>>too.
>> Nancree
>
>
> Try news.individual.net
>
> You'll need a news reader like Forte Agent and you'll need to email
> them to set up an account. But it's free and works well.
>
>
> modom
>
> "Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
> -- Jimmie Dale Gilmore

I've been using news.individual.net for quite a while. It works well but
doesn't support binary groups.

As for AOL, if you like it that's great but everything that you said
with the exception of high-speed access is free anyhow. They're giving
you nothing special.

--
Steve

Ever wonder about those people who spend $2.00 apiece on those little
bottles of Evian water? Try spelling Evian backwards...

nancree wrote:
> AOL has just notified us that it is cutting off newsgroup service,
> thus:
> "Please note: The AOL Newsgroup service, will be discontinued in early
> 2005. For members using AOL over a dial-up connection, you will no
> longer be able to access Newsgroups. If you have a separate high-speed
> connection, you can contct your broadband provider to see if they offer
> Newsgroups. Newsgroup sservices can often be accesed through a third
> party reader, such as Mozilla Thunderbird.
> Alternatively, you can access Newsgroups via Google, etc."
>
> I have a high-speed connection, but I have been using it only to get to
> AOL, which, in spite of comments from others here, I have always liked
> a lot. It gives exceptional service in many areas. E-mail in all of
> its areas, excellent spyware for free, excellent Pop-up blocking, good
> spam blocking, fast service, and REAL Customer Service where you can
> actually talk to a human being. I started using it in Edition 3, and
> it has improved steadily to the present 9.0 Edition.
>
> The problem is, I don't like Yahoo, which is the broadband provider I
> signed up for in order to get high speed AOL . And
> http://groups.google.com can be slow (today the postings are 7 hours
> late, and still waiting. ) Even when "groups.google" is working
> faster, it isn't the same back-and-forth communication that you can get
> presently . I checked Mozilla Thunderbird, and it seems unwieldy.
> Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
> too.
> Nancree
>
You do know you can use Firefox/Thunderbird & Spybot (for free) and have
no need at all for aol?

Steve Calvin wrote:

> As for AOL, if you like it that's great but everything that you said
> with the exception of high-speed access is free anyhow. They're giving
> you nothing special.

This is so true. AOL used to provide a nice,
somewhat closed (safer) environment that was
particularly easy for new computer users. Now, it
offers very directly little from AOL itself and is
even opening up the previously member only message
boards (some what moderated, now not) to anyone
with an internet connection. What they're possibly
thinking, I can't imagine? Less control, greater
non-member access and getting rid of some
particularly handy services. How long can they
imagine they're going to be competitive and
attractive to paying members at the rate they're
going?
Goomba

Goomba38 wrote:
> Steve Calvin wrote:
>
>> As for AOL, if you like it that's great but everything that you said
>> with the exception of high-speed access is free anyhow. They're giving
>> you nothing special.
>
>
> This is so true. AOL used to provide a nice, somewhat closed (safer)
> environment that was particularly easy for new computer users. Now, it
> offers very directly little from AOL itself and is even opening up the
> previously member only message boards (some what moderated, now not) to
> anyone with an internet connection. What they're possibly thinking, I
> can't imagine? Less control, greater non-member access and getting rid
> of some particularly handy services. How long can they imagine they're
> going to be competitive and attractive to paying members at the rate
> they're going?
> Goomba
>
People remain because of inertia. aol carpet bombed the US with floppies
and later CDs and people started using it and became comfortable with it.

A friend just got a cable modem because the cable co upgraded the system
where he lives. I stopped by the other night to set it up. He is an aol
user. He had to run out and when he came back I was using firefox to
browse some sites. He asked me "how can you be on the Internet without
using aol?". I asked him what he usually does when on line and showed
him the equivalent non aol method. It took about 15 minutes before he
picked up the phone and cancelled aol.

George wrote:

> A friend just got a cable modem because the cable co upgraded the system
> where he lives. I stopped by the other night to set it up. He is an aol
> user. He had to run out and when he came back I was using firefox to
> browse some sites. He asked me "how can you be on the Internet without
> using aol?". I asked him what he usually does when on line and showed
> him the equivalent non aol method. It took about 15 minutes before he
> picked up the phone and cancelled aol.

But that ignores the fact that AOL used to provide
come nice exclusive content. Message boards with
moderation was good for kids and people not quite
ready for USENET; easy to join moderated chats
(not the same as the "pick up chat rooms",LOL) and
the like. They now offer nothing that one can't
find elsewhere. It didn't used to be that way.
Goomba

I've used AOL for years but am beginning to see I'm wasting my money.

I use a dial-up--what is my best option to replace AOL - cheap?????

Pat

PatETC wrote:
> I've used AOL for years but am beginning to see I'm wasting my money.
>
> I use a dial-up--what is my best option to replace AOL - cheap?????
>
> Pat
>

Talk to people in your area and see what service that they're using for
dial-up, assuming you can find folks using it. (not a "shot", but it's
becoming increasingly rare)

I've never used AOL but if you can, try downloading Firefox (net
browser/surfer) and Thunderbird (mail and newsgroups) and get familiar
with them. They're really very easy to get going with the basics.
http://www.mozilla.org

Then download SpyBot Search and destroy from:
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/index.html

As well as Ad-Aware from:
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/

Update the definitions and run them weekly. Updating them is simple.
There's a button on the startup menus that will say something like
"check for updates" or a similar phrase.

Do you have a antivirus program?(again, I'm not familiar with AOL) If
not, you definitely want to get one and set it up to start upon booting
the system so that it is constantly active. (Again, not a difficult
task) Norton Antivirus (now Symantec AntiVirus) is pretty decent.

I run a host of other things but I think that this is a pretty good
start and I'm sure that others will chime in.

--
Steve

Ever wonder about those people who spend $2.00 apiece on those little
bottles of Evian water? Try spelling Evian backwards...

On 24 Jan 2005 15:00:20 -0800, "nancree" >
scribbled some thoughts:


>I have a high-speed connection, but I have been using it only to get to
>AOL, which, in spite of comments from others here, I have always liked
>a lot. It gives exceptional service in many areas. E-mail in all of
>its areas, excellent spyware for free, excellent Pop-up blocking, good
>spam blocking, fast service, and REAL Customer Service where you can
>actually talk to a human being. I started using it in Edition 3, and
>it has improved steadily to the present 9.0 Edition.


Excellent Spyware?!? I can talk to a real person by calling
BellSouth, or when I was with Earthlink, had a real person
then. Once you get to know your comp and to tweak it's
settings, like I have, I've found no need to call tech
support for about 2 years now. The only issue I had with
BellSouth was when I had my phone reconnected and web
service reestablished, I was being double-billed, but that
is straightened out.

BTW, I just checked my German server: news.individual.de and
it carries this group, so if you want to access it via a
newsreader, then get thy browser over to

http://news.individual.net/

The service is free, but since all requests are approved by
humans, it may take a couple of days. The retention times
are shorter than most. They don't do binaries.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 17:47:01 -0600, Michael Odom
> scribbled some thoughts:


>Try news.individual.net
>
>You'll need a news reader like Forte Agent and you'll need to email
>them to set up an account. But it's free and works well.


Should have read ahead, I suggested the same thing as far as
the server, though I included the link.

http://news.individual.net/
--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:46:44 -0500, George
> scribbled some thoughts:


>A friend just got a cable modem because the cable co upgraded the system
>where he lives. I stopped by the other night to set it up. He is an aol
>user. He had to run out and when he came back I was using firefox to
>browse some sites. He asked me "how can you be on the Internet without
>using aol?". I asked him what he usually does when on line and showed
>him the equivalent non aol method. It took about 15 minutes before he
>picked up the phone and cancelled aol.


I love it. Once you knbow how to tweak your system and if
your ISP allows you to use your DUN, you can save HDD by not
installing their software.

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:51:19 -0500, Goomba38
> scribbled some thoughts:


>George wrote:
>
>> A friend just got a cable modem because the cable co upgraded the system
>> where he lives. I stopped by the other night to set it up. He is an aol
>> user. He had to run out and when he came back I was using firefox to
>> browse some sites. He asked me "how can you be on the Internet without
>> using aol?". I asked him what he usually does when on line and showed
>> him the equivalent non aol method. It took about 15 minutes before he
>> picked up the phone and cancelled aol.
>
>But that ignores the fact that AOL used to provide
> come nice exclusive content. Message boards with
>moderation was good for kids and people not quite
>ready for USENET; easy to join moderated chats
>(not the same as the "pick up chat rooms",LOL) and
>the like. They now offer nothing that one can't
>find elsewhere. It didn't used to be that way.
>Goomba

Lifeway Online, filtered DSL
http://signup.integrity.com/dsl/home.asp?siteid=73296

--

Sincerely, | NOTE: Best viewed in a fixed pitch font
| (©) (©)
Andrew H. Carter | ------ooo--(_)--ooo------
d(-_-)b | /// \\\

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 21:51:19 -0500, Goomba38 > wrote:

>But that ignores the fact that AOL used to provide
> come nice exclusive content. Message boards with
>moderation was good for kids and people not quite
>ready for USENET; easy to join moderated chats
>(not the same as the "pick up chat rooms",LOL) and
>the like. They now offer nothing that one can't
>find elsewhere. It didn't used to be that way.
>Goomba

Before AOL became AOL they were QuantumLink, which was a network for
Commodore64 users. They had PeopleConnection then, too. I was using QL in
the late 1980s, and I met my husband in PeopleConnection. He was living
on Long Island, I was living in Alaska. He moved up and we fell in love and
have been together ever since December 5, 1988 (got officially married two
years later but we were emotionally married immediately).

I have a lot of fond memories of the Red Dragon Inn from that time, but I
went in there a few years ago... man has it changed.

--
Siobhan Perricone
Humans wrote the bible,
God wrote the rocks
-- Word of God by Kathy Mar

"Steve Calvin" wrote in message > PatETC wrote:
>> I've used AOL for years but am beginning to see I'm wasting my money.
>>
>> I use a dial-up--what is my best option to replace AOL - cheap?????
>>
>> Pat
>>
>
> Talk to people in your area and see what service that they're using for
> dial-up, assuming you can find folks using it. (not a "shot", but it's
> becoming increasingly rare)
>
> I've never used AOL but if you can, try downloading Firefox (net
> browser/surfer) and Thunderbird (mail and newsgroups) and get familiar
> with them. They're really very easy to get going with the basics.
> http://www.mozilla.org
>
> Then download SpyBot Search and destroy from:
> http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/index.html
>
> As well as Ad-Aware from:
> http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/
>
> Update the definitions and run them weekly. Updating them is simple.
> There's a button on the startup menus that will say something like "check
> for updates" or a similar phrase.

Steve

I've had both of those programs installed for some time. A couple of
months ago I downloaded for free a program called SpyBlaster, at
www.spyblaster.com . This program gets rid of the spyware before it
reaches the computer. I've checked it against AdAware and SpyBot and
hardly any spyware gets through.

Dora

limey wrote:
> "Steve Calvin" wrote in message > PatETC wrote:
>
>>>I've used AOL for years but am beginning to see I'm wasting my money.
>>>
>>>I use a dial-up--what is my best option to replace AOL - cheap?????
>>>
>>>Pat
>>>
>>
>>Talk to people in your area and see what service that they're using for
>>dial-up, assuming you can find folks using it. (not a "shot", but it's
>>becoming increasingly rare)
>>
>>I've never used AOL but if you can, try downloading Firefox (net
>>browser/surfer) and Thunderbird (mail and newsgroups) and get familiar
>>with them. They're really very easy to get going with the basics.
>>http://www.mozilla.org
>>
>>Then download SpyBot Search and destroy from:
>>http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/index.html
>>
>>As well as Ad-Aware from:
>>http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/
>>
>>Update the definitions and run them weekly. Updating them is simple.
>>There's a button on the startup menus that will say something like "check
>>for updates" or a similar phrase.
>
>
> Steve
>
> I've had both of those programs installed for some time. A couple of
> months ago I downloaded for free a program called SpyBlaster, at
> www.spyblaster.com . This program gets rid of the spyware before it
> reaches the computer. I've checked it against AdAware and SpyBot and
> hardly any spyware gets through.
>
> Dora
>
>
>
hm. thanks' Dora. I haven't heard of it but I'll certainly check it out!

--
Steve

Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
Autograph your work with excellence.

Goomba38 wrote:
> Steve Calvin wrote:
>
> > As for AOL, if you like it that's great but everything that you
said
> > with the exception of high-speed access is free anyhow. They're
giving
> > you nothing special.
>
> This is so true. AOL used to provide a nice,
> somewhat closed (safer) environment that was
> particularly easy for new computer users. Now, it
> offers very directly little from AOL itself and is
> even opening up the previously member only message
> boards (some what moderated, now not) to anyone
> with an internet connection. What they're possibly
> thinking, I can't imagine? Less control, greater
> non-member access and getting rid of some
> particularly handy services. How long can they
> imagine they're going to be competitive and
> attractive to paying members at the rate they're
> going?
> Goomba


Yahoo recently carried an AP or Reuters article about AOL. As their
customer base shrinks, their business plan is to make more money by
selling more advertising.

-bwg

limey wrote:
>>
>> I've had both of those programs installed for some time. A couple of
>> months ago I downloaded for free a program called SpyBlaster, at
>> www.spyblaster.com . This program gets rid of the spyware before it
>> reaches the computer. I've checked it against AdAware and SpyBot and
>> hardly any spyware gets through.
>>
>> Dora
>>
>>
>>
> hm. thanks' Dora. I haven't heard of it but I'll certainly check it out!
>
> --
> Steve

Hmmm. I gave you the wrong URL, which I got from Google. It must be
outdated - I tested it and it took me to what looks like a rival site.

I've taken this from the SpyBlaster program itself:

http://www.javacoolsoftware.com .

Sorry, Steve.

Dora

Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
too.
Nancree

I tried to respond to you via email, spent a lot of time and effort
composing an informative reply, only to discover upon sending that you
have my email address blocked... WHY THE **** IS THAT???... I've never
sent you email previuosly, not ever, I've given you no reason to block
me from sending you email. And here you have the nerve to request my
input, sheesh! Nancree, whoever the **** you are you are truly an
ASSHOLE.

Sheldon <--- posting from Google for now

"Steve Calvin" > wrote in message
...
> limey wrote:
>> "Steve Calvin" wrote in message > PatETC wrote:
>>
>>>>I've used AOL for years but am beginning to see I'm wasting my money.
>>>>
>>>>I use a dial-up--what is my best option to replace AOL - cheap?????
>>>>
>>>>Pat
>>>>
>>>
>>>Talk to people in your area and see what service that they're using for
>>>dial-up, assuming you can find folks using it. (not a "shot", but it's
>>>becoming increasingly rare)
>>>
>>>I've never used AOL but if you can, try downloading Firefox (net
>>>browser/surfer) and Thunderbird (mail and newsgroups) and get familiar
>>>with them. They're really very easy to get going with the basics.
>>>http://www.mozilla.org
>>>
>>>Then download SpyBot Search and destroy from:
>>>http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/index.html
>>>
>>>As well as Ad-Aware from:
>>>http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/
>>>
>>>Update the definitions and run them weekly. Updating them is simple.
>>>There's a button on the startup menus that will say something like "check
>>>for updates" or a similar phrase.
>>
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> I've had both of those programs installed for some time. A couple of
>> months ago I downloaded for free a program called SpyBlaster, at
>> www.spyblaster.com . This program gets rid of the spyware before it
>> reaches the computer. I've checked it against AdAware and SpyBot and
>> hardly any spyware gets through.
>>
>> Dora
>>
>>
>>
> hm. thanks' Dora. I haven't heard of it but I'll certainly check it out!
>
> --
> Steve
>
> Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
> Autograph your work with excellence.
>
Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an anti-spyware
program. It works much the same as an anti virus program, in that it checks
for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does an automatic check of
the entire system at a specified time of day and also has automatic updates.
It appears to be very well laid out I've also got Spybot and AdAware.
It's only a matter of time before anti-spyware programs are available
through the major anti-virus software companies.
Janet

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
> too.
> Nancree
>
> I tried to respond to you via email, spent a lot of time and effort
> composing an informative reply, only to discover upon sending that you
> have my email address blocked... WHY THE **** IS THAT???... I've never
> sent you email previuosly, not ever, I've given you no reason to block
> me from sending you email. And here you have the nerve to request my
> input, sheesh! Nancree, whoever the **** you are you are truly an
> ASSHOLE.
>
> Sheldon <--- posting from Google for now>

Sheldon, I don't have AOL but have had trouble getting e-mail through to a
friend of mine using AOL. She didn't get the messages and had never had
any problems before. I believe AOL has recently touted that it now has a
"spam blocker" - so perhaps you and I were victims of that. Just a thought.

Dora

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Any suggestions? PENMART--what do you suggest? I know you like AOL
> too.
> Nancree
>
> I tried to respond to you via email, spent a lot of time and effort
> composing an informative reply, only to discover upon sending that you
> have my email address blocked... WHY THE **** IS THAT???... I've never
> sent you email previuosly, not ever, I've given you no reason to block
> me from sending you email. And here you have the nerve to request my
> input, sheesh! Nancree, whoever the **** you are you are truly an
> ASSHOLE.
>
> Sheldon <--- posting from Google for now

tehe..............too funny!
E.
>

Sheldon, I don't have AOL but have had trouble getting e-mail through
to a
friend of mine using AOL. She didn't get the messages and had never
had
any problems before. I believe AOL has recently touted that it now
has a
"spam blocker" - so perhaps you and I were victims of that. Just a
thought.

Dora


Nah, it's an AOL Parental Controls" issue... blocked email between
AOLers generates an immediate and specific response; "The recipient is
not accepting email from you at this time." I'd not be at all
surprised if Nancree also has my posts plonked too... and yet has the
unmitigated gall to invoke a response from me... Nancree is a total
waste of protoplasm, and has contributed nothing of any redeeming value
whatsoever to this Newsgroup, not ever, not even once.

Sheldon

"Andrew H. Carter" > wrote in message
...
> On 24 Jan 2005 15:00:20 -0800, "nancree" >
> scribbled some thoughts:

[...]

More info:


http://www.betanews.com/article/AOL_...ice/1106664611

AOL Pulls Plug on Newsgroup Service

By Brian McWilliams, Guest Columnist
January 25, 2005, 9:50 AM

"The world's largest ISP is cutting off direct access to one of the
oldest, coolest -- and strangest -- parts of the Internet.

America Online has quietly announced that it will discontinue providing
member
access to Usenet newsgroups next month. In recent days, AOL subscribers who
access keyword "Newsgroups" are greeted with a pop-up message informing them
of
the change: "Please Note: The AOL Newsgroup service will be discontinued in
early 2005."

According to a notice on AOL's Web site, the newsgroup shut-off will occur
in
February, severing subscribers from the thousands of discussion groups that
make
up Usenet.

AOL officials weren't immediately available to explain the newsgroup
shutdown.
The ISP's pop-up message advises subscribers that newsgroup services are
available from third-party providers. The message also notes that users with
separate high-speed connections may be able to arrange newsgroup access
through
their broadband provider. AOL users can read newsgroups over the Web using
Google Groups, the message said.

The Usenet dates back to around 1980. Now that blogs and instant messaging
have
supplanted older Internet technologies such as newsgroups and IRC, it's
unlikely
that AOL users will create much of an uproar over the decision. But the
event
nonetheless represents a milestone in Internet history.

The AOL newsgroup shutdown comes almost exactly eleven years after the
service
first unleashed its members on the Usenet. In early 1994, seasoned newsgroup
participants complained of the sudden influx of AOL newbies, who appeared to
know little of Usenet etiquette. One dismayed user likened AOL members to
drunk
drivers on the Information Super Highway."

</>

Greg provided:

> http://www.betanews.com/article/AOL_...ice/1106664611
<snip>
> In early 1994, seasoned newsgroup participants complained of the sudden
> influx of AOL newbies, who appeared to know little of Usenet etiquette.
> One dismayed user likened AOL members to drunk drivers on the Information
> Super Highway."

I guess that will leave webtv as the last bastion of bad Usenet netiquette.

Oh, and new users of Google who can't figure out how to quote...They're
Google-perplexed. (I apologize to those who GOT that joke; it was in
retaliation for the "pie are round, cornbread are square" thing.)

Bob

Janet Bostwick wrote:

> Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an anti-spyware
> program. It works much the same as an anti virus program, in that it checks
> for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does an automatic check of
> the entire system at a specified time of day and also has automatic updates.
> It appears to be very well laid out I've also got Spybot and AdAware.
> It's only a matter of time before anti-spyware programs are available
> through the major anti-virus software companies.
> Janet
>
>

Actually that's one piece of software from M$ that actually works rather
well. The reason is that they didn't write it, they bought it from Giant.

Dora: I looked at the link that you provided, thanks. I don't think
that it's worth sixty bucks though.

--
Steve

Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
Autograph your work with excellence.

On Wed 26 Jan 2005 05:01:12a, Steve Calvin wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> Janet Bostwick wrote:
>
>> Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an
>> anti-spyware program. It works much the same as an anti virus program,
>> in that it checks for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does
>> an automatic check of the entire system at a specified time of day and
>> also has automatic updates. It appears to be very well laid out I've
>> also got Spybot and AdAware. It's only a matter of time before
>> anti-spyware programs are available through the major anti-virus
>> software companies. Janet
>>
>>
>
> Actually that's one piece of software from M$ that actually works rather
> well. The reason is that they didn't write it, they bought it from
> Giant.
>
> Dora: I looked at the link that you provided, thanks. I don't think
> that it's worth sixty bucks though.
>

Actually, Steve, try this site. Here it's provided as freeware for
personal use.

http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Wed 26 Jan 2005 05:01:12a, Steve Calvin wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>
>
>>Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an
>>>anti-spyware program. It works much the same as an anti virus program,
>>>in that it checks for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does
>>>an automatic check of the entire system at a specified time of day and
>>>also has automatic updates. It appears to be very well laid out I've
>>>also got Spybot and AdAware. It's only a matter of time before
>>>anti-spyware programs are available through the major anti-virus
>>>software companies. Janet
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Actually that's one piece of software from M$ that actually works rather
>>well. The reason is that they didn't write it, they bought it from
>>Giant.
>>
>>Dora: I looked at the link that you provided, thanks. I don't think
>>that it's worth sixty bucks though.
>>
>
>
> Actually, Steve, try this site. Here it's provided as freeware for
> personal use.
>
> http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html

Yup, got it from the other thread that Carol replied to, thanks.

--
Steve

Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
Autograph your work with excellence.

I have a fair size piece of ham left over. Any suggestions?

"Steve Calvin" > wrote in message
...
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Wed 26 Jan 2005 05:01:12a, Steve Calvin wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>
>>>Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an
>>>>anti-spyware program. It works much the same as an anti virus program,
>>>>in that it checks for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does
>>>>an automatic check of the entire system at a specified time of day and
>>>>also has automatic updates. It appears to be very well laid out I've
>>>>also got Spybot and AdAware. It's only a matter of time before
>>>>anti-spyware programs are available through the major anti-virus
>>>>software companies. Janet
>>>>
>>>
>>>Actually that's one piece of software from M$ that actually works rather
>>>well. The reason is that they didn't write it, they bought it from
>>>Giant.
>>>Dora: I looked at the link that you provided, thanks. I don't think that
>>>it's worth sixty bucks though.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, Steve, try this site. Here it's provided as freeware for
>> personal use.
>>
>> http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html
>
> Yup, got it from the other thread that Carol replied to, thanks.
>
> --
> Steve
>
> Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it.
> Autograph your work with excellence.
>

"Steve Calvin" > wrote in message
...
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Wed 26 Jan 2005 05:01:12a, Steve Calvin wrote in rec.food.cooking:
>>
>>
>>>Janet Bostwick wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Currently Microsoft has available for download a beta of an
>>>>anti-spyware program. It works much the same as an anti virus program,
>>>>in that it checks for stuff before it gets in your computer. It does
>>>>an automatic check of the entire system at a specified time of day and
>>>>also has automatic updates. It appears to be very well laid out I've
>>>>also got Spybot and AdAware. It's only a matter of time before
>>>>anti-spyware programs are available through the major anti-virus
>>>>software companies. Janet
>>>>
>>>
>>>Actually that's one piece of software from M$ that actually works rather
>>>well. The reason is that they didn't write it, they bought it from
>>>Giant.
>>>Dora: I looked at the link that you provided, thanks. I don't think that
>>>it's worth sixty bucks though.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, Steve, try this site. Here it's provided as freeware for
>> personal use.
>>
>> http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html
>
> Yup, got it from the other thread that Carol replied to, thanks.
>
> --
> Steve

Yes, I had sent you a corrected URL. Glad we got that straightened out.
:-D

Dora