[11164] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: How Long to a Multimedia Internet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roy Folk)
Wed Mar 23 17:37:52 1994
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 1994 18:55:31 -0800
To: com-priv@psi.com
From: rfolk@shell.portal.com (Roy Folk)
wdawson@willard.atl.ga.us (Willard Dawson) writes:
>walkerl@iscmed.med.ge.COM writes:
>
>>>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 94 20:37:26 EST
>>>Subject: How Long to a Multimedia Internet?
>>>
>>>how long will it be until mosiac style internet interfaces are the
>>>most common form of internet access?
>
>Actually, Mosaic is possible even with only a "normal" dialup shell
>account, so long as one has term + the term-hacked version of Mosaic.
>Unfortunately, certain providers feel this is an unfair usage of their
>normal accounts, and specifically prohibit it.
I am a PC/workstation software entrepreneur with a serious interest in
helping to bring easy to learn and use operating interfaces to the breadth
of Net resources and utilities. The current affordability of flat rate,
"full Net access", dialup shell accounts (from many providers across the
U.S.) would allow Internet to be much more formidable competition to other
services for new users, with the right interface access to Net resources.
Thus, it is disappointing to find that Mosaic-class interfaces might be
restricted by some providers on such accounts.
It would help me to understand the opportunities available in this area to
read answers to _any_ of the questions listed here, either from individual
providers or from anyone on behalf of the service provider group:
Do most providers have a serious interest in attracting significantly more
new users to the Net, and/or in making current "email/newsgroup-only" users
extend their use of the net to broader areas?
Is there general agreement that "much better than Unix command line"
interfaces (e.g., Mosaic) will dramatically facilitate Net use additions
and extensions?
Does the ratio of un-metered shell account vs. SLIP/PPP account charges
(currently observed to be between 1/5 to 1/8, at least in the Silicon
Valley area) reflect provider estimates of typical, average packet traffic
ratios between the two types of accounts? If not, are there some other
provider cost differences that those ratios reflect?
Are such cost differences the reason why a provider might want to restrict
relatively "bandwidth-hungry" applications like Mosaic from use on shell
accounts? If so, would they also logically want to restrict other Web
readers?
If the account charge differences in the two cases is not directly based on
estimated cost differences, are shell account charges set low to attract
individual new users to the Net, or as part of some other market
segmentation strategy?
If much better user interfaces _and_ attractive shell account rates will
work together to attract many more new users to the net, will it be worth
finding other pricing strategies that don't discriminate against the use of
software like Mosaic over shell accounts?
-- Roy
Roy Folk
phone/fax: 408/395-1501
Internet: rfolk@shell.portal.com
