dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman) (03/11/84)
Well, with all these 2400 bps modems on the market now, why don't
some busy Usenet sites start getting them? I would think a reduction
in connect time by a factor of two would quickly make up the extra
cost.
I assume there are four reasons why this hasn't happened yet:
1. administrators move slowly and within annual budgets;
2. the sites already have enough modems for their phone lines;
3. if a site has N dial-in lines, it could only ensure 2400
baud communication with other systems by putting a 2400 baud
modem on *every* dial-in line;
4. the first site to get a 2400 baud modem won't have anyone
to talk with at 2400 baud for a while (although the fallback
to 1200 would work, of course).
May I suggest a strategy for any news or system admin looking at this?
Take one of your phone lines out of the regular hunt group (or make it
the last in the group) and put a 2400-baud modem on it. Once it's
working, encourage your news feeds to get 2400 baud modems, and give
them the new phone number. I suspect the change would soon pay for
itself.
Dave Sherman
Toronto
--
{allegra,cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo}!utcsrgv!davephil@amd70.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (03/18/84)
Well, at this site, phone costs are paid for by the corporation as
a whole (a "general and administrative" expense, much like the copier)
while modems would come out of this profit&loss center's profit.
Ain't economics wonderful?
(anyone using compact on their news?)
--
Phil Ngai (408) 988-7777 {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra,intelca}!amd70!philderek@sask.UUCP (Derek Andrew) (03/19/84)
There are lots of other ways to try to save money on Usenet besides
installing 2400 baud modems. One should investigate leased lines (we
have one between alberta and us some 400 miles long.) Also, common
carriers provide services like Datapac, Telenet and Tymnet which can
result in gross savings.
--
Derek Andrew, ACS, U of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskatchewan, Canada, S7N 0W0
{ihnp4 | utah-cs | utcsrgv | alberta}!sask!derek 306-343-2638 0900-1630 CSTjulian@deepthot.UUCP (Julian Davies) (03/20/84)
Our phone bill for uucp looks like being $10 to $15 a NIGHT. Just 150km to watmath. We are going to have to cut back a lot of traffic or find a cheaper line. It isn't obvious that the x25 networks save a lot of money; depends on mean packet size obtained and the carrier charge schedules. Julian Davies
rf@wu1.UUCP (03/22/84)
Julian Davies (watmath!deepthot!julian) writes:
It isn't obvious that the x25 networks save a lot of money;
depends on mean packet size obtained and the carrier charge
schedules.
For large volumes of traffic, public data networks can be much
cheaper than voice grade lines. They are usually far more
reliable than long-distance voice circuits, as well.
Public data transport services can offer much better prices than
most private networks, since 9600 bit per second trunk lines
make roughly four times better utilization of voice grade
telecommunications lines (known in the industry as "vee-effs"
for Voice Facilities) than a private user using 1200 b/s lines.
The public networks are just now starting to offer protocols for
computer (as opposed to terminal) use. Tymnet will probably be
the first; their X.PC protocol is slated for release in August.
It should be possible to implement X.PC on any computer that can
run uucp. If you'd like to learn more about X.PC, write:
X.PC Development Group
Network Technology Division
Tymshare, Inc.
10261 Bubb Road.
Cupertino, CA 95014
If only I could persuade Western Union to offer X.PC. *sigh*
Randolph Fritz
Western Union Telegraph
{philabs, allegra!sunrise}!wu1!rf