Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.ims.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com (David Tamkin) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: GEnie Star*Services Message-ID: <14607@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 12 Nov 90 17:54:08 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 90 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 812, Message 6 of 6 Jeff Sicherman wrote in volume 10, issue 809: | Since Prodigy has come up recently in the Digest, does anybody have | any experience with the new Genie Star*Services - a $4.95/mo flat rate | competitor to Prodigy. Offers a subset of regular Genie services | (email specifically excluded as yet, I believe). On the contrary, email is specifically *in*cluded. Time spent on line composing, sending, and reading text email is covered in the flat rate during non-prime hours (evenings, nights, weekends, and holidays). Time spent uploading and downloading binary email, however, costs the usual $6/hour during non-prime time and $18/hour during prime time. | Besides being cheaper I'm considering recommending it because of the | speed considerations: none of the graphics that slows down Prodigy | and would like to hear about actual comparisons. Not only is GEnie far faster than Prodigy is said to be and not limited to proprietary terminal software available for only two machines, but also there is no constant barrage of advertising. (Lest I sound too praiseworthy, I'm not in love with GEnie but it's hard to make anything look bad in comparison to what I hear and know about Prodigy.) GEnie customers speculated that the new pricing was a response to Prodigy's and perhaps Delphi's rates, but then Prodigy raised its rates and surcharged higher volumes of outgoing email. As a general rule, Star*Services cover text email, information bases, and the text areas of non-tech roundtables. Computer-topic round- tables, real-time conversation, and file transfers still carry connect charges. During prime time, all of GEnie has a connect time charge. But to say "Star*Services are a subset of regular GEnie services" can be misleading. Star*Services are a proper subset of the whole of GEnie, yes, in that some parts of the system are not covered by the monthly fee and a connect time charge still applies in them. However, Star*Services are not a separately subscribable option (GEnie's original releases made that very unclear), and you cannot set up an account that is restricted by GEnie to staying inside the flat-rate areas (you can stay inside them by self-discipline, of course), nor can you opt out of Star*Services and pay connect charges in all parts of the system instead of the $4.95 monthly fee. GEnie personnel explained the conversion to me as follows: all GEnie accounts, starting October 1, 1990, are under the Star*Services plan. The choice given on line to existing accounts during August and September was between consenting to the new rate structure as of October 1 and having your account canceled as of October 1 if you didn't like the new arrangement (say, you used GEnie for a few minutes a month and didn't feel you would get $4.95 worth out of it under the new rates). That way people who simply stopped using GEnie as of October 1, 1990 (or hadn't been using it during August or September and didn't know about the change), wouldn't get charged the $4.95 a month unless they logged in and used the system. Anyone who hadn't consented to the change by September 30 and logged in on or after October 1 had (and still has) to pick the new rate structure or immediate cancellation. (By then all customers with valid addresses on file should have received hardcopy about the change.) Any actual use of the system on or after October 1 requires consent to Star*Services pricing. Pre-existing accounts for which the customer doesn't make a choice by March 31, 1991, will be deemed canceled. Also, in volume 10, issue 810, David Lesher attributed this to me: > |"If you have a problem and want BETTER service, call J. C. Penney at > |xxx.xxxx" > |Followed, after a modestly long pause, by some suitable message for > |callers to Dave or Dan. This is one time Mr. Lesher didn't get it straight from the horse's mouth, because I didn't write that! Barton Bruce did. Not only does Mr. Bruce deserve credit for his own words, but moreover those are words with which I disagree strongly: the wrong numbers are not Sears Roebuck's fault (as they would be if, say, Sears had distributed advertising with a misprinted telephone number) and should not be taken out on Sears. Now, "Sears Roebuck and Company's number is XY*A*-5600, but they won't sell anything to people who are so stupid that they can't even dial a telephone" wouldn't bother me a bit. David Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 MCI Mail: 426-1818 GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN CIS: 73720,1570 dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com [Moderator's Note: David recently attended an 'open house' sponsored by Centel at their central office here. Perhaps he will write an article for the Digest soon talking about the affair. PAT]