On Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:57:34 +0200 Eric Thomas said: >On Mon, 14 Sep 1992 08:28:42 EDT Stan Horwitz <[log in to unmask]> said: > >>Internet services such as FTP and TALK are available tell fill this gap >>and our MAIL software can dispatch files via Internet. > >FTP is great if you are looking for an excuse to twiddle your thumbs 15 >minutes at work while reading the paper. TALK only works with one person >at a time and is very slow, plus your correspondent gets to see all your >typos. Have you ever tried sending a MODULE file via mail? Your statements regarding FTP are wrong and I must take issue with them. I have used FTP on a variety of platforms here at Temple and at my previous employer, the University of Pennsylvania. Ftp can transfer huge files, binary and text, very rapidly between many types of systems. Delays in FTPing files here are rare so I don't understand why anyone would need to twiddle one's thumbs, unless maybe your network segment is very busy. In fact, if we dropped Bitnet, our FTP file transfers would probably be faster since we use Internet to send our Bitnet traffic to Princeton now. If I were to experience a delay in an FTP transfer, it would only be necessary to twiddle my thumbs if I was using an IBM system. On VMS or Unix, I could just log in again and work on something else. One some systems, the FTP process can be bumped to the background without logging in again. As such, delays in file transfers are rarely an inconvenience. The fact that FTP is not proprietary to any one system and was designed to work across different platforms enables me to rapidly transfer files to/from the PC, the Mac, and the Unix workstation in my office to anyone on the Internet without having to upload them to a Bitnet host first to use SENDFILE. True, SENDFILE is superior compared to mailing binary files, but then again, FTP sends binaries quite nicely and SENDFILE's RSCS heritage sometimes limits the size of files it can send and the number of columns a file can contain. With regard to TALK, you are absolutely right, it does limit conversations to two people. This is sometimes a nicety because conversations between several people at once can get confusing. For those who need to chat with lots of people at once, there's the IRC package which is to Internet what Chat is to Bitnet. Being very busy, I don't use either of these packages much so I cannot compare them any further. While we are on the subject, a key disadvantage to Bitnet is its inability to permit remote login sessions. Bitnet just doesn't follow the client server model of computing that's become so popular lately. I still like Bitnet, but I must be honest and say that it is getting harder and harder for me to find enough reasons to keep Bitnet here at Temple. Once again, I have to say that I am not in authority at Temple to make any decisions regarding which networks we use. Even if I had such authority, I would not necessarily drop Bitnet. My views are entirely my own and not necessarily those of my employer. Stan Horwitz Internet: STAN @ VM.TEMPLE.EDU Bitnet: STAN @ TEMPLEVM Temple University's Sr. Mainframe Consultant; Manager of the Help-Net and Suggest lists; Listserv Postmaster Standard disclaimers apply. One of these days I will make this sig file look much nicer.