[2223] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Low end users
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marc Horowitz)
Fri Jan 31 15:19:27 1992
To: scs@lokkur.dexter.mi.us (Steve Simmons)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com (Com-Priv Mailing List)
Reply-To: Marc Horowitz <marc@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 92 15:11:51 EST
From: Marc Horowitz <marc@Athena.MIT.EDU>
>> Ignoring the net is ignoring part of the cost of support.
Even in a pure centralized system, someone needs to run and maintain
wires to all the terminals. Sure, a bunch of serial connections is
easier to maintain than a two-mile long IP net with 5000+ hosts, but
the network support group here is only six people.
>> Forbidding customization does cut support costs, but is exactly what
>> centralized computing systems do to cut support costs. Customization
>> and heterogeneity are touted as virtues of distributed computing.
MIT does not forbid customization. In fact, they have put much effort
into supporting it. By simply running a script, you can make a
machine into a kerberos server, a mail server, an NFS server, a post
office server, a print server, and several other more obscure
services. When athena releases new software, your customizations are
automatically reinstalled. You can make your own customizations. I
know people (admittedly, mainly developers, but not all) who run,
guest accounts, ftp servers, wais servers, news servers, and even
custom kernels on their machines. So, you can have your cake and eat
it too.
>> MIT has correctly determined that they increase support costs, and
>> chose to give up that benefit for the sake of lower costs. Don't get
>> me wrong, I agree with MIT.
They gave up nothing. If you want only MIT's services (which are
fairly broad), you get all the benefits, at no time investment to
yourself. If you want to hack kernels, it's on your own time. Yes,
this is a "hidden" cost, but one which is now an option, whereas with
central computing, it was at best a pipe dream.
>> And if memory serves, doesn't MIT run large chunks of the project
>> athena stuff? Did the development cost of that get factored into
>> support.
I think you meant "write". Yes, much of it was developed here. Does
this get factored in? Probably not. But when you buy a machine from
vendor FOO, do you factor in their development costs? It's part of
the initial investment.
>> It's easy to support the "easy" 95% of users. It's the 5% that needs
>> (demands) customization, that needs special machines, etc, that increases
>> the costs.
MIT has done this. Their solution (design systems with hooks for
customization) works quite well.
Marc
