Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!seismo!rochester!bullwinkle!uw-beaver!tikal!sigma!bill
From: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Newsgroups: net.micro
Subject: Re: abuse of the net (apples on the net?)
Message-ID: <737@sigma.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 27-May-86 13:12:24 EDT
Article-I.D.: sigma.737
Posted: Tue May 27 13:12:24 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 30-May-86 04:47:59 EDT
References: <779@hoptoad.uucp> <218@cbmvax.cbmvax.cbm.UUCP>
Reply-To: bill@sigma.UUCP (William Swan)
Lines: 16
Summary: What would be the result?

Distribution:

In article <51@intelca.UUCP> cem@intelca.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes:
>> I've seen three followups to my article, none of which have given
>> any reasons why other machines couldn't set up their own network.
>>
>[...] there are two reasons why networks for micros aren't used. 
>    1.) Very few people have a phone line available to dedicate to 
>        network transmissions. (our uucp line is almost always in use)
>    2.) There is no standard and free package available for a critical
>	mass of microcomputers. (If Fidonet was brought up on CP/M and
>	apple machines it would have a good chance here).

Does anybody have a conjecture as to the effect of a generally-available
program that would allow apples and CP/M machines (and others) to connect
to the usenet?

This question is not completely idle. Think about your responses..