[9293] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Cost vs benefit of internet services
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dennis Fazio)
Tue Dec 28 00:37:49 1993
From: dfazio@mr.net (Dennis Fazio)
To: com-priv@psi.com
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 1993 23:37:13 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To: <199312272343.AA02022@world.std.com> from "Barry Shein" at Dec 27, 93 06:43:32 pm
> From: dfazio@mr.net (Dennis Fazio)
> >1. That the host-based provider has done a good job at providing a custom
> >interface that shields subscribers from Unix (except for those either macho
> >enough or masochistic enough to demand it and have the need for the power
> >and flexibility it provides) and gives them a nice easy to navigate and use
> >system for mail, news and file fetching.
>
> Oh please, this is religion.
>
> Do you base this on anything more than your own personal beliefs?
I have no problem with Unix as an operating system. It is the platform of
choice, certainly, at present, but I only wanted to point out that support
costs for host-based or SLIP-based systems can be the same. It doesn't take
much to reduce support costs. On host-based systems, you provide a controlled
environment, which may consist of nothing more than a set of applications
(e.g. Pine for mail, PICO for editing, TIN or something similar for news,
Unix gopher client) all of which aren't too bad to use. You wrap these up
with a simple perl or C-shell script and you have a controlled environment
that's easy to support. As an alternative to the control script, you can just
give them a shell prompt with a good user guide explaining in a couple of
sentences or less, the dozen or so shell commands they need to manipulate their
files and invoke the applications. Again, you've created a controlled easily
supportable environment.
In either case, you just don't dump people into a "raw Unix" environment, say
"here's the phone number to dial, here's some recommended books on Unix
and the C Shell, call if you need help" and expect to ever have time for lunch.
That seemed to be what was being implied as the general practice on the SLIP
side that supposedly made host-based systems cheaper and easier. I only
wanted to point out that there are alternatives to the "raw SLIP" environment
that counter your argument that host-based systems are definitely cheaper
and easier.
I don't think most people who want to use the Internet care about Unix,
They just want to send and receive mail, fetch files and
information. Unix shells may not be that much more difficult than DOS, but
I'm not so sure there are a lot of DOS users out there. They turn their
computers on and get as quick as possible into WordPerfect, Lotus Notes,
Paradox or whatever else.
Either system (host-based or SLIP) will work just fine and be
just as easy to support if the provider does a good setup job, and provides
decent applications and documentation.
--
Dennis Fazio, Minnesota Regional Network --|||-- Gabnet: (612) 342-2570
