Re: Most "distasteful enhancement" in MindSpring "take over" of Netcom

---------

Uri Raz (s2845543@techst02.technion.ac.il)
Thu, 23 Sep 1999 13:03:32 +0200 (IST)



> On Thu, 23 Sep 1999 01:41:19 -0500, "William M. Klein"
> <wmklein@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> 1) Change ISP
>> 2) Supply only "text" FAQs (get rid of www versions)
>> 3) "Upgrade" to a higher priced MindSpring account
>> 4) Warn your newsgroups that your FAQ won't be available toward the end of
>> some/each month.
>
> 5) put the actual page on a free host such as Geocities or Tripod, and
> just leave a forward pointer on the crippled Mindspring account. With
> any luck, a small redirect will never be able to suck up enough
> bandwidth to take you over quota.

[snip]

I think those free services are an abomination - most have too many
and/or too annoying advertisements (e.g. pop-ups). When I decided
to create copies of my web pages outside the Technion (I _will_
graduate eventually + I got complaints about speed), I thought it
be a unreasonable to expect readers to suffer those ads and opted
for a paid hosting package.

For my not-too-popular FAQ I could find a $10/Mo package, and I think
most FAQ owners could find one for $25/Mo ($50/Mo tops) which looks
reasonable to me.

> The "free, but with a bandwidth quota" thing looks like an extremely
> unwise business decision to me. Anybody whose pages actually matter
> will be forced to take them elsewhere. If I were them, I'd impose some
> kind of banner program instead, like the real free providers do.

I disagree - the free web space is good for people who wish to
have a home page displaying their hobbies, pets, kids, etc who
dont want to bother with a free service - it's easier talking
with your own ISP.

ISPs should put a limit on resources consumed by user's home pages
as the ISPs have to pay for the disk space, bandwidth, web server,
etc out of the finite amount of money their customers pay them.

E.g. why should the ISP allow someone to run a site on-par with
a corporate's web site for free ?

As for providing a quotaless bandwidth in exchane to banners, I
dont think ISPs have any reason to compete with the free providers.
For the ISPs, the free home pages are just a way to attract customers.

> (Some people find even that hard to tolerate, but then, if you have a
> problem with sponsored free service, you will pretty much by
> definition end up paying for yours.)

The point is you have two options - free provider with banners,
and paid hosting. ISPs offer a third option - a free (or, rather,
paid by the customer along with the dial-up fees) adless service
with other limitations (e.g. disk space, bandwidth, ...)

Uri.



[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]

---------

faq-admin@faqs.org

© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved