Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!netsys!jsheese!jeffery
From: jeffery@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG (Jeff Sheese)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: List of sites with broken Followup (No References) Software
Summary: Fidonet vs Usenet
Keywords: Fidonet
Message-ID: <89.247289F5@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG>
Date: 18 May 89 09:10:15 GMT
References: <102@cipric.mn.org>
Reply-To: jeffery@jsheese.Fidonet.ORG
Followup-To: news.admin
Organization: JStek Enterprises - Frederick, MD
Lines: 20

In an article of <16 May 89 15:23:42 GMT>, chris@ciprico.mn.org (Chris  
Johnson) writes:

 >Many such people that run FidoNet (not to imply FidoNet is better or 
 >worse than USENET) or other computer networks are likely to be of the mind
 >that to make such a change would be a big step backwards in technology
 >and protocol.
 >The one big advantage that USENET has is sheer size.

Well, almost.  Most Fidonet mail transfer programs are able to use Zmodem file  
transfer which beats the heck out of G protocol.  Other than that the shear  
size and technical content of Usenet is VERY inviting.  I'm sure as interest  
grows the connectivity will grow as well.
 
--  
Jeff Sheese - via FidoNet node 1:109/116
UUCP: ...!netsys!jsheese!jeffery
ARPA: jeffery@jsheese.FIDONET.ORG
(I am sole owner.  My opinions represent my company.)
(Send all flames to null@jsheese.Fidonet.ORG)