AOL outages and service status in Uxbridge, England
No problems detected
If you are having issues, please submit a report below.
Full Outage Map
- AOL generated 0 outage signals in the last 24 hours around Uxbridge, including 0 direct reports.
AOL (America Online) is an internet portal as well as an internet service provider. As an ISP, AOL offers dial up internet through its AOL Advantage plans.
Problems in the last 24 hours in Uxbridge, England
The chart below shows the number of AOL reports we have received in the last 24 hours from users in Uxbridge, England and surrounding areas. An outage is declared when the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line.
At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at AOL. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!
Community Discussion
Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.
Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.
AOL Issues Reports Near Uxbridge, England
Latest outage, problems and issue reports in Uxbridge and nearby locations:
-
Matt Stephens (@RealStephens) reported from West Molesey, England@sigmasports I’m doing my best guys, bear with me. I’m doing an online chat with AOL online support and have Ask Jeeves fired up in another browser.
-
Robbo (@sjr66qpr) reported from Richmond, England@londongirluk @AOLSupportHelp I'm the same Julie. The app I'm using won't let me sign in
-
Paddy 🇵🇱 (@slavicking18) reported from Windsor, EnglandI still have an AOL email address so never question my loyalty
-
Lorraine King (@lorrainemking) reported from Brentford, England@NW6Rd You've just reminded me my contract is up with my absolutely appalling @SkyUK broadband. It's so slow it's like AOL dial-up
-
anthony (@edgfrg) reported from Slough, England@AOLSupportHelp I’m trying to get into my email password help
-
-
Doug (@dougmortonagain) reported from Ealing, EnglandThe first PlayStation came out, and Macs transitioned to Power PC. AOL is launched. Amazon was founded. Microsoft announces it will no longer sell or support the MS-DOS operating system separately from Microsoft Windows
-
Lee 'Budgie' Barnett (@budgie) reported from Richmond, EnglandCompuServe when I first got online in 1995, MSN Messenger, the very occasional foray into Usenet. Tried AOL, ICQ, a few others. But never enjoyed them. Had both AIM and Yahoo Meseenger But only very rarely used them.
-
Josa Keyes (@JosaKeyes) reported from Ealing, England@Miss_Snuffy Self pity finds many friends online from the earliest days of community forums up to today's toxic social media. "Share your support" we used to say at AOL and people did and lots was valuable, but a deep streak of 'alternative truth' bedded down there too to solicit attention.
-
Jamie🐝 (@JL_BrentfordFC) reported from Hounslow, EnglandAOL would never go down. Is AOL still a thing?
-
LDN Scottie Pippen (@Alessandro_Babs) reported from Brentford, England@KwakuMMNT 112 by default. Jagged Edge were broadcasting to us using 2001 AOL dial up. Horrible signal.
AOL Issues Reports
Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:
-
A.J. Perez (@byajperez) reported@ChelseaV @DegenerateTBone Is your AOL that slow you didn’t see my next tweet?
-
Currer Ellis (@ActonBell) reported@DerrickEvans4WV Can we just go back to AOL and dial up internet? Do we really need everything connected to everything…? I don’t think so. Let’s cancel this AI stuff.
-
Bubblegum (@VeriPatriot45) reported@MapQuest Talk about a blast from the past. Didn’t know you guys still existed. You must be busy hanging out with AOL and floppy discs in the land of outdated crap.
-
Merica (@Niggerlogic) reported@MapQuest Who ******** even know your app exists anymore If you needed to show how ******* retarded your company is You just did it You were forgotten around the AOL timeline ******* obsolescent retards
-
Vishwamitra (Modi ka Parivar) (@RamachandraRavi) reported@SwarupChattrjee @ArtofLiving On the contrary, AOL has rejuvenated numerous rivers, thousands of lakes, billions of trees. The people who caused the 10 year trouble needs to be penalized.
-
Asymmetric Edge Research (@AsymEdge) reported@2147mill The problem with the normie test is that the internet passed it in 1999 too. Totally non techy families were on AOL back then as well, over 20 million of them by the end of 1999. Amazon went from 17 million customers to 25 million between 1999 and 2001 and nearly doubled revenue, and the stock still lost 94% over those two years. So usage only tells you the thing is real. For the bubble question I look at what people pay for the earnings. Cisco was over 100x forward at the 2000 top, Nvidia is under 20x right now. Same thing with the crypto half of your post by the way. Nobody uses gold day to day either and that never made gold a bubble.
-
Blue Collar Brandon (@RealBlueCollarB) reported@wongfeihungdong @DHSgov I'm not sure if its still abbreviated this way, we used to just type "s2s" for sucks to sucks. AOL and ICQ days.
-
Daniil (@DaniilBuilds) reportedAOL and Time Warner didn’t just pay for what the two companies were worth in January 2000. They paid for what they believed the two companies could become together. The announced merger was valued at roughly $350B, with AOL shareholders expected to own about 55% of the combined company. The logic was easy to understand: combine AOL’s internet business with Time Warner’s media assets and create value neither could generate alone. But there was a financial problem hiding inside that logic. Future synergies are uncertain. The merger closed in January 2001. SEC disclosures later put the acquisition cost at approximately $147B. Then came the accounting reckoning. In 2002, the combined company reported a $98.7B net loss, including a $54.2B goodwill impairment. That $54.2B was non-cash. It did not mean the company suddenly paid out $54.2B in cash. It meant the value previously assigned to acquired goodwill could no longer be supported at the same level. That distinction matters. When you pay upfront for future synergies, you are effectively putting a price on value that still depends on execution. If the synergies arrive, the premium can make sense. If they don’t, shareholders can end up carrying the cost. The most expensive synergy is the one you pay for before you prove it exists.
-
▇ .𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐡._ ▇ (@BacktheZhorse) reported@fatzgorrie @james_spir19274 Me too! I never had an aol email address
-
The Dread Bunny (@jpvanhoy) reported@lili_poobear @Phantom_King_99 @gizalovespizza Ok, look, you can probably find a half dozen slightly different definitions of the word "evolve" online (we both know you didn't use a dead-tree dictionary). But the fact remains, to not evolve is to stagnate. Even the definition you gave, if converted the boolean opposite, would say, "to NOT develop gradually, especially from a simple to a more complex form", and you could then argue that OP wants it to get more complex, but RAPIDLY rather than SLOWLY. The point is technology should always advance. Just because you're unhappy with some specific implementation of technology in the present, doesn't mean that "advance" will mean "things get worse". It's pretty childish to take that position, in fact. I mean, for ****'s sake, you're ON THE INTERNET right now, probably using either wireless broadband, or wired broadband access to post this message. Can you imagine sitting in at your computer desk, with the monitor riser and built-in CD-ROM storage slots, dialing into AOL in about 1996 and saying, "GAH! I don't want technology to evolve any more. I'm tired of sitting here waiting for JPGs of John Stamos to take 40 seconds to load. I'm tired of getting my directions from Mapquest!"