Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84  Brag 10-8-84; site bragvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!bragvax!david
From: david@bragvax.UUCP (David DiGiacomo)
Newsgroups: net.news
Subject: satellite netnews costs (what I should have said)
Message-ID: <275@bragvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 14-Dec-84 20:55:44 EST
Article-I.D.: bragvax.275
Posted: Fri Dec 14 20:55:44 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Dec-84 03:12:20 EST
References: <466@vortex.UUCP>
Organization: Brag Systems Inc., San Mateo, CA
Lines: 55

Let me try to clarify my position...

I am excited about broadcast news.  I got a real thrill from tweaking
the vertical hold on my TV set and watching the bits flash by in the
blanking.  (Try it!)  If I didn't care, I wouldn't have gotten upset
when Lauren started talking about $650 decoders and encryption and
monthly fees.

Who are the real customers for satellite news?  How many commercial news
sites will even be able to get a cable TV hookup, or justify it to
management?  (Let them buy earth stations?  Ha.)  Cable TV hookups are
universally found in homes, so it seems that satellite news will
primarily benefit those with home Unix systems (PCs in general?).  I
don't think I would pay $650 to read the news at home.  (I suppose a
hybrid approach is possible where an employee who lives within free-call
distance gets an extra phone line and installs the news decoder -- it's
still a lot easier to get the company to pay for phone calls to a news
feed.)  My conclusion is that a truly successful broadcast news system
will have to be a low-cost, shoe-string, hacker type project.

Now I'd like to reply to some points in Lauren's counter-flame 
(article <466@vortex.UUCP>):

>As for costs, we're not talking about hacked-together toys here.
>We're talking about commercial equipment made by large
>firms who aren't in business for their health.

I think we should talk about hacked-together toys; isn't that what
Usenet was built on ? :-)  Seriously, why should Usenet hardware be
different from Usenet software: lovingly crafted by amateurs, and
distributed without thought of profit ?

>Once again, we are NOT talking toys here, we are talking national
>broadcasting over the largest non-sports basic cable service in 
>the world -- WTBS.  

OK, you need non-toy equipment at the broadcast end, but nothing my
Brand-X decoder does is going to cause WTBS to break FCC rules.  That's
the miracle of broadcasting.

>HOWEVER, if the network community doesn't like the way the project is
>going, I will give the satellite people a call, tell them to pull the
>plug on stargate, and then I'll even have more time to work on projects
>that can help me pay this month's rent.

That's an ugly threat, Lauren.  We have to play by your rules or you'll
take your marbles and go home.  How about option #3:  if the network
community doesn't like the way the project is going, you will find out
why and modify the project!

>What say you, oh entities of the net?  Please post to this group.
Better yet, just mail in your $650.
-- 
David DiGiacomo, BRAG Systems Inc., San Mateo CA  (415) 342-3963
(...decvax!ucbvax!hplabs!bragvax!david)