Read this on Yahoo News and thought it's funny.

 

Number 1 on the list

 

1. America Online (1989-2006)

 

How do we loathe AOL? Let us count the ways. Since America Online emerged from the belly of a BBS called Quantum "PC-Link" in 1989, users have suffered through awful software, inaccessible dial-up numbers, rapacious marketing, in-your-face advertising, questionable billing practices, inexcusably poor customer service, and enough spam to last a lifetime. And all the while, AOL remained more expensive than its major competitors. This lethal combination earned the world's biggest ISP the top spot on our list of bottom feeders.

 

AOL succeeded initially by targeting newbies, using brute-force marketing techniques. In the 90s you couldn't open a magazine (PC World included) or your mailbox without an AOL disk falling out of it. This carpet-bombing technique yielded big numbers: At its peak, AOL claimed 34 million subscribers worldwide, though it never revealed how many were just using up their free hours.

 

Once AOL had you in its clutches, escaping was notoriously difficult. Several states sued the service, claiming that it continued to bill customers after they had requested cancellation of their subscriptions. In August 2005, AOL paid a $1.25 million fine to the state of New York and agreed to change its cancellation policies--but the agreement covered only people in New York.

 

Ultimately the Net itself--which AOL subscribers were finally able to access in 1995-- made the service's shortcomings painfully obvious. Prior to that, though AOL offered plenty of its own online content, it walled off the greater Internet. Once people realized what content was available elsewhere on the Net, they started wondering why they were paying AOL. And as America moved to broadband, many left their sluggish AOL accounts behind. AOL is now busy rebranding itself as a content provider, not an access service.

 

Though America Online has shown some improvement lately--with better browsers and e-mail tools, fewer obnoxious ads, scads of broadband content, and innovative features such as parental controls--it has never overcome the stigma of being the online service for people who don't know any better.

A pity they're all pretty much software or computer hardware.

 

I'm sure most of us can recall gadgets or misc. electronics that were absolute howlers. That Gizmondo is one of the latest additions to be honored with this accolade. "

I should have added it's by PC World. Starforce didn't make the top 25 though.

I knew there was a reason I didn't like RealPlayer.

 

Personally I'd add QuickTime to that list...tho I haven't tried it in a little while.

The Power Glove!!!

I dislike them intensely, but in the spirit of fairness i should say that I used their free trial and forgot about it. They started billing me, and I rang up to cancel. The young man I spoke to acknowledged not only my right to cancel, but in fact refunded the money since the trial period ended, since he could see I hadn't used it. Which was pretty decent.

Having Realplayer and Windows ME, I can verify with clear conscience that both are pieces of s**t. Every time Realplayer runs on my system it causes problems, and there is almost not a day that goes by where something doesn't go wrong on ME. Which is why later this summer I'll be upgrading to Windows XP.

Used ME myself. Never noticed any problems. Ofcourse when I got my own PC and my parents got ahold of the ME-PC hell broke loose and the PC turned into utter crap (-2500% performance anyone?); but that says more about them than ME...

Real Alternative and QT alternative are the way forward. The originals are just horribly invasive.

A pity they're all pretty much software or computer hardware.

 

I'm sure most of us can recall gadgets or misc. electronics that were absolute howlers.  That Gizmondo is one of the latest additions to be honored with this accolade.  "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wasn't that a dummy product for the mob to launder cash with?

 

 

Oh oh, I've said too much ...