[jlarocco]

As much crap as AOL used to get, there's not much difference between their chat in 1996 and Teams and Slack now. And it managed to do it with 8 Mb of RAM over a 14.4k modem. Of course it didn't have video, but the group chat itself was basically the same.

In some ways, tech progress has been pretty disappointing.

[Hobadee]

Except that the AIM protocol was reverse-enginnereed and you could then use a single client (GAIM/Pidgeon, Trillian) to talk to all your friends. The protocols nowadays are so locked down that there has yet to be a decent 3rd party implementation.

[jlarocco]

The AOL chat rooms were different than AIM.

From the chat room you could open instant messages to specific people, and that one-on-one chat eventually became AIM.

For one-on-one messaging, the 3rd party clients were often better, but I don't remember any 3rd party clients for the chat rooms. I only used them from the AOL application itself.

[Melatonic]

Loved Trillian

[burntwater]

The sound effects were way better back then. "You've got mail!". The doors opening/closing.

Though maybe it's different because back then, then meant someone I wanted to interact with was now available.

Today, a chat sound means someone I probably don't want to, but am required to, interact with is now available.

[BLKNSLVR]

I had a thought a couple of days ago about the flood of emails and notifications that we enjoy the privilege of these days and came to the conclusion that, the value of the notification has a direct relationship with he amount of effort that went into creating it and the number of recipients it's destined for.

The effort that goes into a bulk email is divided by the number of recipients, and therefore its value to me rounds down to zero.

The value of an email that's manually written by management (or an assistant at the direction of management) that goes to all staff or my team is divided by the size of it's distribution list. Higher than zero value.

An email sent to me by a friend or colleague to ask a question or organise a meeting or get together has a high value because I'm the only recipient; it was specifically for me.

We need a method to rank these things, and then we need to personally choose some minimum floor at which notifications will 'ping' on our chosen device.

[themadturk]

At a law office I worked in during the 90s, several of the secretaries and paralegals had AOL Instant Messenger installed on their machines for IM inside the office (and to/from people outside the office too, I'm sure). I dunno if it violated any licensing agreements, but it worked well and didn't cost the firm a penny.

[endemic]

Yeah, even as late as the early aughts I was using instant messaging for internal office communication.

[nyarlathotep_]

> In some ways, tech progress has been pretty disappointing.

AIM had lots of delightful sounds. Can't say the same about Slack or Teams.