🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: chi.mail
Article #790

Re: Inter-network mail (was Re: Mail to GEnie)

#790
From: Dave Ihnat
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 23:01
38 lines
2903 bytes
In article <1992Jun26.223926.397@news.acns.nwu.edu> learn@speedy.acns.nwu.edu (William J. Vajk) writes:
>In the recent discussion of X-400 mail, it was announced that AMOCO
>pays 80 cents for a 2K e-mail message handled by commercial e-mail
>forwarder. Given the commercial nature of their mail, and the importance
>of rapid communications to the business world, I am inclined to think
>that the price is reasonable given the relatively small use such
>infrastructure enjoys presently. As with all new services, the price will
>doubtless drop as the volume increases.
>
>Based on the discussion, I would think that getting a more universal
>addressing system emplaced (X-400 has lots of leeway presently 
>concerning header info) is probably more important than getting the price
>down.

Bill, I hate to disagree, but I have to.  Electronic mail has been around,
in one form or another, for a long time--MCI Mail for instance, has been around
since the early '80s.  But no other electronic mail medium moves the volume
and number of messages that the internet moves--either the networks that
comprised the old Arpanet, and are now collectively referred to as the
Internet, OR the UUCP-linked portion of the system.  Yet there's not guarantee
of delivery--in fact, messages do get misrouted or lost--and no guarantee of
privacy.  So why is it so popular?  Because it's both widespread, and
affordable.  Notice I didn't say free--although many of the links *are*
free, save the cost of a phone call.  I said affordable.  Once you're talking
$.80/2K, messages like this one just aren't worth it.

The only thing that's going to make a more universal addressing system work,
and be worth doing, is the already-emplaced base of internet sites.  All that
will do, by the way, is allow a greater commercial use of the network; we've
already got a huge following outside that arena.  It'll be easier to get mail
between extant networks, for everyone; I just hope we don't see the semi-
volunteer nature of the network go away.

Cheap and workable beats perfect and expensive any day.  This is the real
world.
		Dave Ihnat
		ignatz@homebru.chi.il.us (preferred return address)
		ignatz@chinet.chi.il.us
Technical Details
Message-ID: <1992Jun27.230137.6317@chinet.chi.il.us>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!uchinews!machine!chinet!ignatz
References: <1992Jun13.165624.5694@ddsw1.mcs.com> <1992Jun20.205516.11257@chinet.chi.il.us> <1992Jun26.223926.397@news.acns.nwu.edu>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f8d04,38f73d7ae6fb76fe
X-Google-Attributes: gidf8d04,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1992-06-27 14:58:10 PST
Newsgroups: chi.mail
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!uchinews!machine!chinet!ignatz
From: ignatz@chinet.chi.il.us (Dave Ihnat)
Subject: Re: Inter-network mail (was Re: Mail to GEnie)
Summary: I don't think so...
Message-ID: <1992Jun27.230137.6317@chinet.chi.il.us>
Sender: Dave Ihnat
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1992 23:01:37 GMT
References: <1992Jun13.165624.5694@ddsw1.mcs.com> <1992Jun20.205516.11257@chinet.chi.il.us> <1992Jun26.223926.397@news.acns.nwu.edu>
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Lines: 38