Live data from Hacker News

AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

nytimes.com

121–130 of 240 posts

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#121
post #59

For younger users of the internet, it's hard to overstate how omnipresent the AOL brand was. The marketing team was on overdrive, all the time. And their marketing CDs probably caused a noticeable increase in CD-ROM adoption.

> hard to overstate how omnipresent the AOL brand was you could find AOL cds and floppies on the side of the road. They were everywhere.

Magazines had their CDs tucked inside, sometimes 2 of them! What a time.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#122
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was very common to be limited to a significantly lower speed. Wikipedia sucks, so I dug up the actual v.34 standard: 33.6 kbit/s (a later addition) 31.2 kbit/s (a later addition) 28.8 kbit/s (the theoretical maximum for most people; I remember being jealous of people who actually got it) 26.4 kbit/s (what my internet usually hit in practice) 24.0 kbit/s (I remember seeing this) 21.6 kbit/s (apparently this was ver…

> 28.8 kbit/s (the theoretical maximum) "56k" modems hit the scene (at affordable prices) in ~1998 and 3.2-4.1KB/s were pretty normal. People in high school who "only" had a 28.8 modem were considered dinosaurs by then. We didn't get DSL until ~mid 2000 IIRC

It's not a matter of what the modems were capable of, it's a matter of what the phone line would and could actually carry. Maybe it would be different in a big city, but I don't think I ever saw anybody get over 33.6 before upgrading to DSL.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#123
post #67
post #42

> Dial-up internet speeds average about 56 kilobytes a second Nope, that would be considered crazy fast back in the day, it was 56 kilo bits per second. That's about 6.8 kilobytes, but realistically and with overhead it was usually around 5KB/s.

It was very common to be limited to a significantly lower speed. Wikipedia sucks, so I dug up the actual v.34 standard: 33.6 kbit/s (a later addition) 31.2 kbit/s (a later addition) 28.8 kbit/s (the theoretical maximum for most people; I remember being jealous of people who actually got it) 26.4 kbit/s (what my internet usually hit in practice) 24.0 kbit/s (I remember seeing this) 21.6 kbit/s (apparently this was ver…

That's how I remember it.

For completeness, 33.6 required insane levels of signal clarity on the phone line, and was mostly fiction outside of urban and dense suburban areas.

Prior to 14.4k, there were other generations of modems that came before: 9600, 2400, and even 300 baud modems were all you could get in their respective eras. Each of which were cutting edge at the time.

56K (also called V.90 or "V.everything"), leaned into the quantization that happens on digital phone trunks, rather than let the analog-to-digital conversion chew up your analog modem waveforms. The trick here is that the psuedo-digital-over-analog leg from your house to the local exchange was limited by a few miles. Try this from too far out of town, and it just doesn't work. And to be clear, this was prior to DSL, which is similar but a completely different beast.

Oh, and the V.90 spec was a compromise between two competing 56K standards at the time: K56Flex and X2. This meant that ISPs needed to have matching modems on their end to handle the special 56K signaling. Miraculously, the hardware vendors did something that was good for everyone and compromised on a single standard, and then pushed firmware patches that allowed the two brands to interoperate on existing hardware.

Also, line conditions were subject to a range of factors. It's all copper wire hung from power-poles after all. So, poor quality materials, sloppy workmanship, and aging infrastructure would introduce noise all by itself, and even during weather events. This meant that, for some, it was either a good day or a bad day to try to dial into the internet.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#124
post #93

A small part of me has debated artificially limiting my internet speeds to 56k, to see how well I could actually live with dial-up speeds. If I did everything with w3m and Mutt and whatnot, I could see myself living almost comfortably.

Enable Chrome Developer Tools, you can choose the simulated speed to test.

yeah but that wouldn't work with Mutt and w3m.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starlink is so much more expensive though, more than a lot of people in rural areas can afford.

Dialup could be had for very cheap last time I had if (big if) you had availability of cellular internet that is probably just as cheap now. However, the landline I had for dialup back in the day had become outright ridiculous in price by the time I convinced my wife we should cancel it (she liked that it worked when the power was out). It seems they don't even want to sell that service anymore. VoIP is cheap but you…

No, it is not feasible to run modem signals over VOIP, as the various codecs all compress signals and cut frequencies and all manner of things to reduce bandwidth consumption, which are incompatible with modem signaling. You could get away with it in a homelab for fun, but you have absolutely no control over what VOIP codecs e.g. Comcast is running, so it is effectively impossible. Even if the phone company says they can offer you a copper line, your copper line will eventually get converted to VOIP at the end of the street or wherever, and then it's up to whatever commercial provider you're paying to choose the codecs for VOIP, which are never modem-friendly. I worked on this stuff about ten years ago. There are fax codecs but they are very hard to get working reliably.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#127
post #51

In case you have elderly relatives and T-mobile is available in your area, it might be useful to contact T-Mobile (via X.com or retail service) and ask for the "Basic Mobile Internet 30GB" plan (Service Order Code: MI30TI or MI30TE) It is $10/month for 30GB with auto-pay. Then get an unlocked phone and put in the T-Mobile Sim card and activate the hotspot (or via USB tethering since Wifi is too complicated for them).…

The caveat with this is that many people on dialup are the ones who live too far from civilization to get cell coverage. The only reason they have phone service at all is government incentives in the mid 20th century.

For that case, Starlink is $10/m for 10GB, $50/m for 50GB or $80/m for unlimited (fixed location).

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are they wrong?

As far as I can tell, yes. AOL pretends that the subscription offers other services (tech support, "security" etc) but you definitely appear to be able to keep access to your email address without paying the $50/month subscription.

I switched phones and somehow lost my Netscape (owned by AOL) email password. Would'nt have been a big deal but I had it linked to some famous .com service that I have been using since the 90's. I paid something like $10 to have a live human reset the password and get back in.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#129
post #4

Real miss by the NYT here in not finding and interviewing people who were still using it in 2025!

Almost certainly older people living in remote areas who login to the AOL to check the email box for pictures of the grandkids.

At this point, it would not surprise me if there was a very small but very enthusiastic community of retro computing enthusiasts with AOL accounts.

Re: AOL to discontinue dial-up internet

#130
post #52

This reminded me of BBS'[1], which again reminded me of the older days where you sent letters and got one back a week or three later. I had programmed a lot in Delphi before I started programming in C++, and the orders of magnitude slower build times caused me to program very differently. I would re-read several times and reason much more about my code before issuing a build command. Whereas in Delphi, the almost ins…

Any thoughts on using Rust, Go, or Zig?

Been tempted to try Zig. Rust made my head hurt just looking at it.

A bit incidental though, I was mainly romanticizing communicating more slowly and deliberately.

Post reply on HN