Access numbers -- AOL gets busted!
K.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
=======
America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
Seth Schiesel; 10 Feb 97
While thousands of frustrated America Online subscribers tried
in vain to dial into the service through its clogged electronic
doorways during the last few weeks, the company made little or no
effort to let people know that they could use older entryways
where the crowds were smaller. [...]
Some subscribers, who joined the service more than a few months
ago, still use Sprintnet numbers to dial into America Online. But
when new customers set up their software, or when veteran
subscribers request a new list of access numbers, the service
provides them only its current list. In major metropolitan areas,
the current lists include few, if any, of the still-active
Sprintnet numbers.
"It's a combination of the speed of the modems, the amount they
are busy during prime time, the quality of Sprintnet's network,"
said David Gang, America Online's senior vice president for
product marketing. "I do not think it would help the customers to
have the Sprintnet numbers on the list."
Until 1995 almost all of America Online's incoming calls were
delivered over networks belonging to other companies. But over
the last two years, America Online has been building its own
network of modems and telephone lines to reduce the charges that
it must pay to other carriers. The company says that about 80
percent of its traffic now flows over what it calls AOLnet.
The company has not yet extended AOLnet across the country, and
still relies on Sprintnet for coverage in some rural areas. The
company does volunteer Sprintnet access numbers in areas where
AOLnet does not exist.
But America Online volunteers no information about the usable
Sprintnet numbers in area codes that cover cities like Atlanta,
Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Los Angeles, Miami,
New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington.
In New York City, for instance, a Sprintnet telephone number is
(212) 206-0256. But when America Online customers use the
keyword "access" to pull up a list of potential access numbers
for the 212 area code, that number does not appear.
"It would cost them a little bit, but it would seem to me that
it would make sense to pay Sprint something to keep people
happy," said William Haynes, president of a small computer
consulting company in Charlotte, N.C.
"People expect to be able to get their E-mail. People expect to
be able to get their stock quotes. I think there's a real
responsibility that comes with that," he said. [...]
Gang said that the company could reintroduce Sprintnet numbers
to its listings, but added, "I do not see that happening in any
major metropolitan areas any time soon."
"It is obviously more efficient and more cost-effective to our
shareholders to build our own network," he said. "We've got the
best-quality network available." [...]
America Online recently reached a settlement with attorneys
general from 36 states who had threatened to sue the company for
deceptive business practices. In early December America Online
began to promote an all-you-can-eat pricing plan that offered
users "unlimited" access to the service for $19.95 a month. But
the company underestimated demand and the AOLnet modems quickly
became clogged, preventing many customers from using the system
as often as they liked.
"I've given all my clients the Sprintnet number and they're
getting on line with no problems," Haynes said.
Customers who dial (800) 473-7983 can find a Sprintnet telephone
number in their area. Sprintnet usually offers speeds up to 14.4
kilobits per second.
=======
> Special Community Update
> January 16, 1997
>
> Dear Members,
>
> I know that you may have had great difficulty connecting to AOL
> in recent weeks, so I wanted to let you know what we're doing to
> address the problem. [...]
>
> We understand you joined AOL because you expected it to be the best
> Internet online service. I want to assure you that we are doing
> everything we can, as quickly as we can, to address your concerns.
>
> Thank you for your patience and support.
>
> Regards,
> Steve Case
> Chairman and CEO
K.
K. wrote:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
>
> =======
> America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
Not only did they keep Sprintnet numbers secret, but we remember
they had also delisted the Tymnet numbers:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subject: AOL surcharge on Tymnet
From: ric...@aol.com (RickB52)
Date: 1997/01/06
Newsgroups: alt.aol-Sucks
AOL is putting a surcharge on its Tymnet access numbers. I'm curious
if this really affects any of its customers negatively. Is there
anywhere where Tymnet is the only local number, or where it's one of
two and the other one is busy all the time?
Where I live, the Tymnet number was "delisted" months ago, although it
remains active. [...]
I kinda question the wisdom of putting me on those modems when I'd be
content on the 2400 bps Tymnet line where I'd be freeing up space for
others on the other lines.
Anyway, here's what AOL says about Tymnet:
==================================================
America Online has made new access numbers available for our members.
Over the last year we have been working hard to build a faster dial-up
network for AOL. We encourage you to change your setup connection
settings from the TYMNET phone connection you are currently using to
reach America Online.
TYMNET is a slow-speed, 2400 baud network, and there are increasing
costs to AOL in maintaining the TYMNET access numbers. Beginning on
February 1, 1997, ALL connection time to AOL by members utilizing
these TYMNET access numbers will be surcharged at $1.95 per hour.''
==================================================
So much for Art Stone's earlier suggestion that AOL buy up all the
2400 bps modems cheap for chatting purposes.
Rick Brown
ric...@aol.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I hope that in the class action lawsuit the lawyers shall use this
information -- AOL hiding access numbers.
I hope too that a settlement includes complete reimbursement of the
money people had spent on the $6 hr surcharged 800 number, a number
they'd used because alternate ways to get online and get their
business done had been kept secret from them.
K.
K. wrote:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
>
> =======
> America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
Not only did they keep Sprintnet numbers secret, but we remember
they had also delisted Tymnet numbers.
K.
> > http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
> >
> > =======
> > America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
>
> Not only did they keep Sprintnet numbers secret, but we remember
> they had also delisted Tymnet numbers.
The New York Times version was a bit different than that given by AOL
staffers...
Svehla 24: Why did they take away access numbers?
Guide TBG: No they didnt cut down really. they have/had contracts
with sprintnet and Tymnet and they expired.
<I've edited out the other chatters from Rich's log>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subject: Re: the phone booth
From: NO_UC...@pacbell.net (Rich Maher)
Date: 1997/01/23
Newsgroups: alt.aol-Sucks
<...>
OnlineHost: *** You are in "Town Square -
Svehla 24: i have a question for you guide ok ?
Guide TBG: Sure Svehla
Svehla 24: my question for you is this
Svehla 24: Do you have any idea when AOL is going to like enlarge
there system
Svehla 24: get more access numbers?
Guide TBG: Sv they are working on it, but it takes time to build
the new facility they are talking
Guide TBG: about now.
Svehla 24: So Guide why wasn't AOL better prepared for this?
Svehla 24: why didn't they enlarge the system before the new plan
went into effect?
Guide TBG: Sv I would guess 5-6 months at least .. but in the
mean time they are adding more access num
Svehla 24: there were like 5 in my area
Guide TBG: Because steve case made the unlimited decision before
thinking it through
Svehla 24: but now there are 2
Svehla 24: why did they take away access numbers?
Svehla 24: Was this because of the total slowdown with AOL when
the plan first went into effect?
Guide TBG: Because AOL is going mostly AOLNet and the others were
Sprintnet and Tymnet
Svehla 24: so they cut down access numbers
Svehla 24: was this the plan?
Svehla 24: cause AOL has no total slowdown now and you can get
into chatrooms
Guide TBG: No they didnt cut down really. they have/had contracts
with sprintnet and Tymnet
Guide TBG: and they expired
Svehla 24: but when the plan first took effect you couldn't get
into chat rooms
Svehla 24: oh so that is why access numbers were taken away then?
Guide TBG: They enlarged the Chat capacity last week
Guide TBG: Meaning the added the ability to make more rooms
Svehla 24: well its been more than a week
Guide TBG: I gotta run.. duty calls. If you need any
assistance, please use Keyword: GUIDEPAGER,
Guide TBG: and a Guide will be in to help! :)
Rich Maher (cujo)
Please amend e-mail address to <cu...@pacbell.net>
-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<Anybody else suppose GuideTBG = the long lost Pam McGraw
in her new job?>
---
> Community Update
> Thursday, January 30, 1997.
>
> Dear Members,
>
> Last Fall, you told us you wanted an unlimited use plan, and we
> delivered. [...]
>
> We know that you are having problems getting online and we are
> working day and night to improve the situation. [...]
>
> The events of the past few weeks have vividly reminded us of the
> responsibilities we have, as the service that 8 million members rely
> on each day. We take these responsibilities seriously, and I can
> assure you we will do everything in our power to meet them.
>
> Again, on behalf of all of us at America Online, I thank you for your
> patience and support.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Steve Case
Darin Sullivan
K. wrote:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
>
> =======
> America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
It was my understanding that if we used the Sprintnet numbers we would
be charged an extra fee from Sprint at a per minute rate! Any truth to
this?
K.
Art Stone wrote:
>
> >It was my understanding that if we used the Sprintnet numbers we would
> >be charged an extra fee from Sprint at a per minute rate! Any truth to
> >this?
>
> will charge for SprintNet. You may want to check with AOL first, and/or
> watch keyword Billing very closely.
>
> As a public service (and probably as an excuse to flame me) here is the
> entire list of SprintNet Access numbers. SprintNet is only 14,400
> bits/sec, but that's 14,400 more than many AOL customers are getting
> now, and more than adequate for lurking in chat rooms for 20 hours a
> day.
>
> Share, Enjoy, pass it on, run up AOL's SprintNet bill:
I remember that when Mimi wanted her AOL account cancelled, the method
she used was to paste the secret TOS banned-words list throughout the
AOL message boards. What we need right now are some AOLers whose free
trials are about to expire, so that they can do the same thing with the
list of Sprintnet numbers.
Their message boards would be best, but I wonder if talking about the
Sprintnet numbers in the chatpits would get AOLers TOSed as well?
I'd venture that AOL would probably invoke the Living Document's
"UNACCEPTABLE DISCUSSION" clause...
---
> last guy aske me what I thought of his CD he got from AOL..
> I told him it wouldn't even make a good frisby, but it fooled me,
> it sailed just fine, and landed in the trash can just like it knew
> were it was going.
-- Jim Hopkins, 23 Jan (on AOL thread at techstocks.com)
Shaun McDowell
That's a good idea. I've been looking for a creative way to end my AOL
account(free trial, mind you, I wouldn't actually pay for it), and I'll
try that tonight. I will post the list to every message board I find,
and offer the list in several chatrooms, mainly the lobbies.
--
NOTICE TO SPAMMERS
Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, Sect. 227, any
and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject
to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing
denotes acceptance of these terms.
Shaun McDowell
mailto:smcd...@voy.net
Gene Douglas
I know that in Lawton, OK there are 2 numbers for GNN. One of them is the
same number used by aol. I was told by an aol tech that if I would type in
a code of some kind, I could use the second GNN number on aol. I tried it,
and thought I did what he said, but it didn't work.
I know that the second number is tied up much less of the time than the
first, so it seems reasonable that aol would add it to their available
numbers list.
Matthew Borowski
On Tue, 11 Feb 1997 16:23:43 GMT, njk...@hooked.net (Mimi Kahn) wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Feb 1997 19:51:48 -0500, arts...@ibm.net (Art Stone)
>wrote:
>
>>As a public service (and probably as an excuse to flame me) here is the
>>entire list of SprintNet Access numbers. SprintNet is only 14,400
>>bits/sec, but that's 14,400 more than many AOL customers are getting
>>now, and more than adequate for lurking in chat rooms for 20 hours a
>>day.
>
>An offer to send the list via e-mail would have sufficed.
>
>
>Mimi
>
>Want to trash AOL, but tired of spams and scams?
>Check out alt.aol-sucks.moderated.
POSTED AND E-MAILED:
Since when have you been the almighty owner of this newsgroup? Rather
than bugging Art to e-mail it to me it's right there for me in the
post.
--->>>Matthew Borowski
--->>>m...@emails.com
--->>>http://mkb.home.ml.org/
--->>>Was on AOL only 5 days in my life...
Mimi Kahn
I guess I'm *not* the almighty owner of this newsgroup. I guess
Matthew Borowski is.
POSTED AND E-MAILED.
And lest I forget --
*plonk*
(Yeah, e-mail too...I did that after your gratuitous e-mail copy of
this superlative bit of philosophical intellectualizing arrived in my
mailbox.)
Moron.
Mimi
Charter Member, Troll Patrol,
Too Much Noise and Not Enough Signal Division
Art Stone
on 11 Feb 97 21:27:06 GMT, "Gene Douglas" <gene...@sonetcom.com> wrote:
>I know that in Lawton, OK there are 2 numbers for GNN. One of them is the
>same number used by aol. I was told by an aol tech that if I would type in
>a code of some kind, I could use the second GNN number on aol. I tried it,
>and thought I did what he said, but it didn't work.
>
>I know that the second number is tied up much less of the time than the
>first, so it seems reasonable that aol would add it to their available
>numbers list.
>
What you have to do is to set up a second "location" in your AOL setup,
type in the SprintNet phone number, and set the "Network Type" to
SprintNet.
Art Stone
--
Have you mastered the Internet? Take the quiz and see.
http://kode.net/~artstone/isptest/
Art Stone
on 12 Feb 1997 21:45:18 GMT, patt...@aol.com (Patterner) wrote:
>
>There's no need to bother -- it will be a waste of the poster's time and
>of the folks who have to read it. The Sprintnet numbers are available in
>two libraries on AOL. You can find them in the PDA forum (keyword: PDA >
>PDA Software > New Files & Uploading Library) and in the Geoworks forum
>(keyword: GEOWORKS > Software Library > Library Search -- search on
>Sprintnet).
>--
>Marilee J. Layman Co-Leader, The Other*Worlds*Cafe
>patt...@aol.com A Science Fiction Discussion Group
>Web site: http://www.suba.com/~janice
>AOL keyword: FR > Science Fiction > The Other*Worlds*Cafe (listbox)
>
Thank you for providing that information. We'll be adding it shortly to
all the web sites maintained by readers in alt.aol-sucks, so that we can
help as many AOL members as possible get online for their unlimited
time.
You've been extremely helpful! Thanks again.
concerned
In article <330666c6...@news-s01.ca.us.ibm.net>, arts...@ibm.net says...
On 2/13/97 I tried the above 2 ( two ) suggestions, and NEITHER produced
the desired results. So I conclude that the SPRINTNET #'s are not l
concerned
R BLAU
In article <32FF22...@case.offline>, N...@case.offline wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/021097aol.html
>
> =======
> America Online Failed to Publicize Access Option
> Seth Schiesel; 10 Feb 97
>
> While thousands of frustrated America Online subscribers tried
> in vain to dial into the service through its clogged electronic
> doorways during the last few weeks, the company made little or no
> effort to let people know that they could use older entryways
> where the crowds were smaller. [...]
>
>
I noticed that one of my two possible numbers disappeared from the list
about a month ago. I couldn't figure out why AOL would hide the other
number. Now I know.