In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII



On Fri, 7 Apr 1995, Robert D. Seidman wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Apr 1995, Nate Zelnick wrote:
> 
> [original posts...]
> 
> > All true, but the 30/30 also includes access to the full Prodigy 
> > service, which is still a great information resource (although I have 
> > to admit the NAPLPS interface gives me the willies).  As good a deal 
> > as the Internet is today--and I use it as my primary research 
> > source--Prodigy gets points in my book for offering both hosted info 
> > via the consumer service and open information via the Web.  The 
> > pricing is really a shot at AOL, anyway.  Can we expect a similar 
> > plan when AOL's browser hits (seemingly a perpetual 60 days away...)
Personally, I use Prodigy for electonic banking, and Internet (web, chat, 
news, wais,...) for practically everything else.

> I agree that access to the Prodigy service (even in the awful NAPLPS 
> interface) adds value beyond what the Net is currently capable of providing.
> As for Web access, it seems that for the average user it is a heck of a lot
> easier to access the Web via Prodigy (and soon AOL,CIS, etc).
The main value that Prodigy adds is fire-wall protected encryption for 
financial transactions.  Nearly everything else is done, on a grander 
scale, on the internet.

> I also agree that this pricing is aimed more at AOL and CompuServe than 
> net providers, though it is competitive with several national net access 
> providers who offer plans very similar to the $30/30hrs plan, and at 
> least for the first 30 hours, a better deal than the recently announced 
> internetMCI rate that will go into effect on 7/1.  CompuServe plans to 
> launch their browser this week at Internet World and according to a 
> corporate spokeswoman, they also plan to announce special rates for 
> accessing the web (but not the rest of their extended services).  
It's quite likely that AOL and CompuServe will offer locallized 
nationwide SLIP or PPP connectivitiy in conjunction with Fire-Wall 
protections, and the AOL/Compuserver services themselves will just be 
services on the Internet.  The most expensive part of running a 
nationwide network is the Telecommunications links.  The X.25 links are 
not as efficient as PPP/Slip links with VJ Compression, and the links can 
be upgraded to frame-relay or ATM.  In simpler terms, by carrying 
internet traffic, the cost/hour/user drops from $6.00 to about $0.02

> The AOL browser is finally in Beta for both the Windows and the Mac 
> platforms.  I think the software will be released within...45 days.
> The beta seems pretty stable and there are some other nice features added 
> to the client software , but as you may have guessed, a new 
> software client is necessary.  Good news for Mac users though, the new 
That isn't a bright move.  If AOL just adds user/host authentication to 
their http server, they can pick up more "High margin" customers who will 
pay $5-$10/month for access rights.  Since AOL doesn't have to pay the 
telecomms cost, this would be pure profit.

> software should debut in both Windows and Mac flavors.  Prodigy is 
> currently only available for the Windows platform, and I'm told that at 
> launch, Web access via CompuServe will also only be available via Windows.
Again, custom servers defeat the whole point of being on the internet in 
the first place.  Besides, I would like to be able to access one of these 
services from my Linux box.  The only time I use MS-Windows any more is 
when I have to log into Prodigy.

> Speaking of Windows...  That all the online services will be offering a 
> browser is nice, but in the long run it won't matter.  After 5 months on 
> the Microsoft Network beta, I was beginning to wonder what all the fuss 
> over MS' entry into online services was about.  Then I saw the seamless 
> integration of MS Bookshelf (sort of a light version, no video or animation),
> into MSN.  Now I understand why everyone is so afraid of MS.  But I'll 
> save that for this week's newsletter!
You mean that someone actually got a version of the API that works with 
exchange?  I find it very interesting that after several news services 
spend 2 years trying to develop products for MSN only to be told that the 
Microsoft deliverables wouldn't be available, are now reading the 
announcment of MSN News services using their technologies.  At one point, 
we sent staff to a developer's conference with the understanding that he 
would get the updated Exchange disk which was 6 months late.  9 months 
later the disk was still not delivered with the appropriate APIs.

MSN might be pretty good, but after being ripped off to the tune of about 
$3 million, I'm a bit reluctant to put my paycheck into "Billy's Bank".

> Robert Seidman
> robert@clark.net


	Rex Ballard


From rballard@cnj.digex.net Mon Apr 10 00:12:11 1995
Status: O
X-Status: