Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!crs From: crs@lanl.ARPA Newsgroups: net.micro,net.lan,net.analog,net.dcom,net.lsi Subject: Re: reaching Apps engrs by email Message-ID: <22806@lanl.ARPA> Date: Mon, 4-Mar-85 10:50:54 EST Article-I.D.: lanl.22806 Posted: Mon Mar 4 10:50:54 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 7-Mar-85 04:15:03 EST References: <766@amdcad.UUCP> Sender: newsreader@lanl.ARPA Distribution: net Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 60 Xref: watmath net.micro:9607 net.lan:708 net.analog:185 net.dcom:888 net.lsi:89 > Most of AMD's apps engineers have accounts on Unix systems where > they can receive electronic mail. Without making any commitment > to do anything, I would like to inquire as to whether there would > be any interest in being able to ask applications questions to > our engineers via email or whether the old fashioned way of telephone > calls is good enough. I am sure that many (most) of the users of > USENET are software types but there are enough hardware types to > justify groups like net.analog. > > I had in mind publishing a list of chips and the mboxes of the engineers > responsible for supporting them. Send mail to me indicating: > 1) whether you'd use this > 2) how do you get applications assistance now > 3) what chips you're interested in > 4) estimate of the annual dollar value of AMD chips you buy now > (personally I don't care but I think management does) > 5) general comments > > If you consider this an exploitation of the net, don't flame me, > just let me know. We certainly don't want to offend anybody, just > possibly offer a service of value to people. > -- > Why, that's more useless than the left thumb of a touch typist! > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil > ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA I think it would be a convenience rather than "exploitation." I have wondered why this wasn't common practice. Your comment about "exploitation" may explain it but not to my satisfaction. If e-mail availability to someone who can help me get my job done more quickly is exploitation of the net, then I say we should have more of it. Consider the following: 1. Some people (including me) are better at explaining what they need to know in writing than via the telephone but writing a letter through normal "channels" is slow and costly. 2. If I do phone someone, they may be out, on another line, or their phone may be busy. I therefore must wait an appropriate time and then try again. If I send my query by e-mail, it waits for them. When they finish what they are doing now, they can then reply to *my* query. I don't have to do anything else (in the ideal). 3. E-mail is non-intrusive. It won't interrupt something important that the recipient is doing so it is better on that end too. I don't think that e-mail should *replace* the telephone as a means of such communication but I *do* think it can be a valuable supplement to it. I would like to have e-mail access to other semi-conductor houses, too. If others think that this is "exploitation" *I* would appreciate it if companies would e-mail path information to *me*. Charlie Sorsby ...!{cmcl2 ihnp4}!lanl!crs crs@lanl.arpa