Path: utzoo!utgpu!BITNIC!FUTURE-L Date: Tue, 27 Feb 90 23:50:00 EST Reply-To: BITNET Futures List Sender: BITNET Futures List From: "A. Harry Williams" Subject: Re: The fall of Bitnet To: UofToronto LAN redistribution References: Message of Tue, 27 Feb 90 20:00:07 EST from Message-ID: <90Feb28.004700est.57387@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca> Newsgroups: list.future-l Distribution: ut Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu On Tue, 27 Feb 90 20:00:07 EST Roger Fajman said: > >I also agree with this line of reasoning. Convincing the powers that >be in the Internet that they can learn anything from BITNET could be a >difficult task though. After searching through all this, I'm finding myself also in agreement with Roger and Michael. I also agree that the Internet never seems to believe that any of Bitnet services are worthwhile, and yet seems to be growing number of USERS on the Internet that want connections to Bitnet. (Heaven forbid servicing the users). I find more and more subscribers from the internet that are subscribing to lists on Bitnet listservs that are simply redistributions of internet lists. When I've asked some of them in the past, it was because they found it easier and more accurate. Several also commented on the two big items mentioned here in the past, interactive messages and sender initiated file transfer. I'm also getting a little tired of the internet biased people just drop Bitnet and go to internet without discussing these other issues. The NJE bashing is not appropriate, and I have found less productive than the VM-MVS wars that occasionally get started. At least with that, I usually learn something from Leonard that I can apply to my job. > >Roger Harry > >(I agreed with Michael AGAIN???? Better check this out -- seems about >as likely as the Berlin Wall coming down. :-) Well, we all have our bad days.