mlee@cs.cornell.edu (mark lee) (04/25/91)
******************************************************************************* * * * The top prize for IMPACT's second software contest has been awarded to Mr. * * Jean-Christophe Dhellemmes (jcd@maps.cs.cmu.edu) and Mr. Frederic Perlant. * * * * Mr. Dhellemmes and Mr. Perlant have recently founded Teledia, Inc., a * * software company located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. They submitted a * * program called PhrasePlayer which is a voice-controlled digital dictation * * machine that can be used to play back a recorded message with varying speed * * and pauses. PhrasePlayer plays back the phrases in a message step by step * * instead of continuously. It does this by automatically recognizing and * * segmenting a message into a series of phrases. * * * * PhrasePlayer can be activated to play each phrase by a mouse click or by * * voice control. And it can be adapted to a user's typing speed, play a * * user's voice mail faster, or help a user rehearse a speech. NeXT mail * * voice attachments can be dragged directly into the application. * * * * In addition to PhrasePlayer, Teledia, Inc. has also developed BackupMaster, * * an automated software backup system onto floppies or optical disks, and is * * developing other voice-controlled applications. IMPACT Software Publishing * * is currently seeking distribution rights for these programs. * * * * As the top prize winner, Teledia, Inc. received a $1000 award and will be * * offered a contract to have PhrasePlayer published by IMPACT Software * * Publishing, Inc. * * * ******************************************************************************* * * * Starting in June 1991, IMPACT Software Publishing will be distributing * * PhaseScope, PhrasePlayer, BackupMaster, and other software written by * * independent developers from all over the country. If you have developed or * * plan on developing a NeXT program which you would like to have distributed * * by IMPACT, please send your name, address, and a brief description of the * * program to l3my@vax5.cit.cornell.edu. * * * * ___________________________________________________________________________ * */ ___ _ _ ___ _ __ _____ \* *| | |\ /| | \ / \ / \ | Daniel Hung |* *| | | V | |--' |---| | | IMPACT Software Publishing, Inc.|* *| _|_ | | | | | \__/ | l3my@vax5.cit.cornell.edu |* *| |* *| S o f t w a r e P u b l i s h i n g, I n c. |* *| |* *| 306 College Avenue, Ithaca, New York 14850 |* *\___________________________________________________________________________/* *******************************************************************************
louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) (04/25/91)
Does anyone else think that this posting, and the ones before it are just a little bit too commerically oriented to be appropriate for this USENET newsgroup. Especially the last "batch" of them?
anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) (04/25/91)
In article <1991Apr25.134348.25432@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: >Does anyone else think that this posting, and the ones >before it are just a little bit too commerically oriented to >be appropriate for this USENET newsgroup. Especially the >last "batch" of them? Since you ask, yes, I do. I've been wondering about this ever since the first solicitation to sign up for an Impact Card. To tell the truth, what got me was that the form for the card asks for the Social Security number. Maybe I'm a bit old-fashioned, but it used to be that only you and God had to know your SS number. Then the tax people decided they could force you to use it for financial transactions of a certain type (they prevailed in court, I believe), and now just anybody thinks of it as a personal identification number. No point protesting, but it *is* annoying. Now wrt Impact, there are a number of issues. One, it seems to me, is that they are using a Cornell account to transact a clearly commercial enterprise. Excuse me? I'm quite sure that is a violation of NSFnet appropriate use guidelines. If they are a business (it seems *very* likely they either are or soon intend to be), they should at least register in the *com domain and not abuse the *edu domain. But, having no love for the cop role, I'd prefer to leave that up to the net.enforcers at Cornell. Other vendors appearing in this newsgroup seem reasonably fastidious about these matters, and while Impact may still be largely a start-up (one does wonder who's really back there, behind the screen), they should get this part of the act together pretty soon, I would think. But I also have some divided loyalties wrt Impact, since the idea of giving small prizes to adventuresome developers seems such a good one. Also in their favor, they are apparently planning to centralize and publicize the distribution of certain software at modest prices. That would certainly seem to be a contribution to the general welfare of NeXT users. To the extent the card is an innovative idea, it seems a useful one, and should probably be explored further. My impression is that some thought has already been given to the whole set of things Impact represents, and likely they have some arguments and explanations at the ready for just such questions as are here being raised. If so, I would like to see them. <> People often find it easier to be a result of the past <> than a cause of the future. -- Unknown Hm. Seems pertinent in both directions. -- Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu (04/25/91)
In article <1991Apr25.143604.3979@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
Excuse me? I'm quite sure
that is a violation of NSFnet appropriate use guidelines.
1) NSFnet is not USENET
2) The non-commercial restrictions to net access historically have
been pretty much a matter of netiquette, and netiquette, like any
other set of social norms, evolves (read "changes") over time to suit
the real-time needs of the society.
example: within the last year, HP-Apollo users demanded that HP apply
for permission with net-administrators to make a newsgroup part of
their service-support structure, and that updates and the like be
distributed through this newsgroup. This arrangement was approved by
the net-gods and is now in place.
3) Brad Cox recently posted to this very same USENET newsgroup
suggesting that (and I paraphrase) severe separation of edu-research
and commercial enterprise may be a contributing factor in American
difficulty with being competitive with, for example, the Japanese.
4) I never cease to wonder at the willingness of folks to cut off
their nose to spite their face.
--
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster,
and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
-Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzschebarry@joshua.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (04/26/91)
How about, when we split up the group (hint , hint) we add a comp.sys.newproducts for the announcement of new NeXT products. While we don't want people running regular ads on the net, I don't see anything wrong with a company making one-time newproduct announcements. There Impact could announce their Software Card (I just got mine!), their latest round of winners, etc, in a socially acceptable way. Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet)
anderson@dogie.macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) (04/26/91)
In article <CNH5730.91Apr25114434@maraba.tamu.edu> cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu writes: >In article <1991Apr25.143604.3979@macc.wisc.edu> >anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes: >Excuse me? I'm quite sure >that is a violation of NSFnet appropriate use guidelines. >1) NSFnet is not USENET But for all practical purposes within the USA, NSFnet is the primary backbone of the Internet, and the Internet carries probably 99% of Usenet traffic, and most Internet networks subscribe to the very same or very similar appropriate use policies. So in all due respect, your point is irrelevant. >2) The non-commercial restrictions to net access historically have >been pretty much a matter of netiquette, and netiquette, like any >other set of social norms, evolves (read "changes") over time to suit >the real-time needs of the society. Historically is not now, you might notice. The time-honored anarchies of Usenet, of which I am one of the most ardent supporters, are long since the tail wagging the dog, and getting shorter to boot. So in all due respect, your point is irrelevant. >example: within the last year, HP-Apollo users demanded that HP apply >for permission with net-administrators to make a newsgroup part of >their service-support structure, and that updates and the like be >distributed through this newsgroup. This arrangement was approved by >the net-gods and is now in place. That too is irrelevant. As I already pointed out, the issue is not use of the net by commercial entities, its *commercials* by those entities for personal, private gain. >3) Brad Cox recently posted to this very same USENET newsgroup >suggesting that (and I paraphrase) severe separation of edu-research >and commercial enterprise may be a contributing factor in American >difficulty with being competitive with, for example, the Japanese. Whereas severe conflation of the educational/research enterprises with the commercial ones may be a contributing factor in the Japanese having difficulty with being as innovative as, for example, the Americans. Neither point is relevant. >4) I never cease to wonder at the willingness of folks to cut off >their nose to spite their face. Nor indeed at the tendency of some folks to exemplify considerable irrelevant righteousness. You must have an advanced degree in that. >"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, > and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." > -Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche <> Many a man fails to become a thinker for the sole reason <> that his memory is too good. -- Friedrich Neitzsche -- Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
mlee@cs.cornell.edu (mark lee) (04/26/91)
Regarding the previous posting about the software card: We apologize for the posting, and we will stop posting about the software card on the net. (We thought that since the card is free, it would not be considered commercial. But we see now that this was not a good idea.) As for the posting about the software contest, we assumed that this would be "okay" because we are "giving" something away. We thought that making the contest known as widely as possible would be beneficial to those developers who might participate. But if anyone believes that this also should not be posted, please send an e-mail to mlee@cs.cornell.edu and we will also stop posting about the software contest. Again, we apologize for our mistake in posting about the software card. Thank you. Mark Lee IMPACT Software Publishing, Inc. mlee@cs.cornell.edu
smb3u@psysun1.acc.Virginia.EDU (Steven M. Boker) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr25.134348.25432@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: >Does anyone else think that this posting, and the ones before it are >just a little bit too commerically oriented to be appropriate for this >USENET newsgroup. Especially the last "batch" of them? I was wondering if someone else thought these people to be particularly shameless. Sure they are selling the software cheap, but an advertisement is an advertisement. Steve
anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr25.183002.8668@cs.cornell.edu> mlee@elli.cs.cornell.edu (Mark Lee), a principle in Impact Software, writes: >Regarding the previous posting about the software card: >We apologize for the posting, and we will stop posting about >the software card on the net. (We thought that since the >card is free, it would not be considered commercial. But we >see now that this was not a good idea.) As part of your workup to future contests and followup to concluded ones, it seems to me it would be appropriate to mention that Impact is a NeXT-specific software distributor and to invite anyone wanting to know more about that to contact you directly. >As for the posting about the software contest, we assumed >that this would be "okay" because we are "giving" something >away. We thought that making the contest known as widely as >possible would be beneficial to those developers who might >participate. I think the contest notices are entirely appropriate for posting here. Naturally I do not speak for others. But for myself, at least, I am glad for your prompt -- and I think adequate -- attention to these matters. <> We have stopped believing in progress. What progress <> that is! -- Jorge Luis Borges -- Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr25.143604.3979@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes: > >In article <1991Apr25.134348.25432@ni.umd.edu> >louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: > >>Does anyone else think that this posting, and the ones >>before it are just a little bit too commerically oriented to >>be appropriate for this USENET newsgroup. Especially the >>last "batch" of them? > > [Rambling about SS# Deleted] > >Now wrt Impact, there are a number of issues. One, it seems >to me, is that they are using a Cornell account to transact >a clearly commercial enterprise. Excuse me? I'm quite sure >that is a violation of NSFnet appropriate use guidelines. >If they are a business (it seems *very* likely they either >are or soon intend to be), they should at least register in >the *com domain and not abuse the *edu domain. But, having >no love for the cop role, I'd prefer to leave that up to >the net.enforcers at Cornell. Net.enforcers at Cornell? Hah! Not unless a lawsuit comes up will Cornell do anything. Not to insult CIT, they do a great job but Cornell doesn't hirer near enough people to have an actual net-enforcer or anyone who prefers to do the job. Now, concerning Impact. I know the folks, they invited me to join but I have enough problems on my hands right now. They are mostly students. Attribute their postings to ignorance. Also, they are struggling to get off the ground. They really need the net coverage to get going. Cutting off their USENET line would be suicide to them at this stage. Here's the deal. They want to acqure and spread software through mostly grass roots efforts -- ie. the programs you and I write in our spare time and never have the time to really finish or add good docs. They do that bit for us and sell it. They want to distribute at very low costs to the common folk, researches, students, etc. Because they don't have their own full-time programmers and rely on being a publishing house, they need to get other people to do it. But how to get those people? How do you attract lots of people? Now, I agree that this is a blantant net.abuse. My anus says to tell them to stop posting or get off the net. My mouth (getting really Freudian here) says that we should post them a kind note saying what the USENET deal is. I'll try to talk to them too. > >Other vendors appearing in this newsgroup seem reasonably >fastidious about these matters, and while Impact may still >be largely a start-up (one does wonder who's really back >there, behind the screen), they should get this part of the >act together pretty soon, I would think. I agree. :-( But how do you spread the word around the grass roots? > >But I also have some divided loyalties wrt Impact, since the >idea of giving small prizes to adventuresome developers >seems such a good one. Also in their favor, they are >apparently planning to centralize and publicize the >distribution of certain software at modest prices. That >would certainly seem to be a contribution to the general >welfare of NeXT users. To the extent the card is an >innovative idea, it seems a useful one, and should probably >be explored further. That's why I feel bad about cutting off their postings too. Sigh.... jiro nakamura jiro@shaman.com but also jiro@heights.cit.cornell.edu <-- see there's a cornell thing in there after all ps. To Cornell, I'm just SID#331-820. They don't care what I say. ps. To Shaman Consulting, I'm EID#1. They do care what I say. -- Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com Shaman Consulting (607) 253-0687 VOICE "Bring your dead, dying shamans here!" (607) 253-7809 FAX/Modem
bennett@mp.cs.niu.edu (Scott Bennett) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr25.205359.7746@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> smb3u@psysun1.acc.Virginia.EDU (Steven M. Boker) writes: >In article <1991Apr25.134348.25432@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: >>Does anyone else think that this posting, and the ones before it are >>just a little bit too commerically oriented to be appropriate for this >>USENET newsgroup. Especially the last "batch" of them? > >I was wondering if someone else thought these people to be particularly >shameless. Sure they are selling the software cheap, but an advertisement >is an advertisement. Perhaps now is an appropriate time to chastize Neil Gorsuch mildly for his tendency to plug *his* company's product at the remotest provo- cation. His original reply long ago to someone's article inquiring about the existence of such devices was welcome information, but the frequency and, sometimes, near irrelevancy (e.g. you need to hook a parallel printer to your NeXT? well, buy a[n expensive] serial port server from us since it comes with a parallel port on it) of his plugs has been irritating of late. One point is in Neil's favor, though: at least he isn't quoting his company's price list and offering to be your salesman himself. > >Steve Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG Systems Programming Northern Illinois University DeKalb, Illinois 60115 ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett@cs.niu.edu * * BITNET: A01SJB1@NIU * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "Spent a little time on the mountain, Spent a little time on the * * Hill, The things that went down you don't understand, But I * * think in time you will." Oakland, 19 Feb. 1991, first time * * since 25 Sept. 1970!!! Yippee!!!! Wondering what's NeXT... :-) * **********************************************************************
louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr26.015221.4672@shaman.com> jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) writes: > Now, I agree that this is a blantant net.abuse. My anus says to >tell them to stop posting or get off the net. My mouth (getting really >Freudian here) says that we should post them a kind note saying what the >USENET deal is. I'll try to talk to them too. Why don't they post to comp.newprod, where there is no question that the postings are commercially motivated and there is a moderation process to prevent abuse. My problem is that the postings being made had little to contribute to spreading useful information to folks that read the newsgroup and more to with the poster's trying to make a buck. That's where I draw the line. I can live with informational postings like "Check out my FooBar, Inc. new PostScript toaster, it even slices bread!" if there is some expectation that people might be looking for a bread slicing toaster. Its the blatent solicitations that cross the line. Would I take a "commerical" posting from a "company" which is clearly using a student's account seriously? Not me, but hey, I'm the suspicious type.
tagreen@lothario.ucs.indiana.edu (Todd Green) (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr25.232118.18742@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes: > >In article <1991Apr25.183002.8668@cs.cornell.edu> >mlee@elli.cs.cornell.edu (Mark Lee), a principle in Impact >Software, writes: > >>Regarding the previous posting about the software card: > [stuff deleted] > >I think the contest notices are entirely appropriate for >posting here. I think this is just one more example why comp.sys.next should be divided up. I believe that Impact's postings would be much more appropriate for comp.sys.next.announce. IMO, this group has grown enough to merit division. Todd -- Internet: tagreen@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu NeXTMail: tagreen@lothario.ucs.indiana.edu BitNet: tagreen@iubacs.bitnet
cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu (04/26/91)
In article <1991Apr26.130728.11444@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes:
Why don't they post to comp.newprod, where there is no question that
the postings are commercially motivated
hey, good idea. And they could cross-post to comp.sys.next so WE don't
have to subscribe to comp.newprod.
then writes
My problem is that the postings being made
had little to contribute to spreading useful information to folks that
read the newsgroup
This is your opinion. My opinion is that most of the stuff on the
newsgroup is a waste of bandwidth, but then that's what our 'n' key is
for. Use yours.
and then writes
Its the blatent solicitations that cross the line.
Again your opinion. We all have our lines. Use your 'n' key.
--
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster,
and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
-Friedrich Wilhelm NietzscheGarance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu (04/27/91)
In article <1991Apr26.130728.11444@ni.umd.edu> louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos) writes: >In article <1991Apr26.015221.4672@shaman.com> jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) writes: >> Now, I agree that this is a blantant net.abuse. My anus says to >>tell them to stop posting or get off the net. My mouth (getting really >>Freudian here) says that we should post them a kind note saying what the >>USENET deal is. I'll try to talk to them too. > >Why don't they post to comp.newprod, where there is no question that >the postings are commercially motivated and there is a moderation >process to prevent abuse? To zero in on the question posed (as opposed to the larger war that is raging), I for one do not follow comp.newprod. I am not interested in all products that have some connection to computers, although I might be interested in all products that have to do with NeXT computers (and Mac computers, but that's an issue for other newsgroups). By posting to comp.newprod, you're going to reach more people that you don't care about (people who don't own NeXTs), and fewer of the people you do care about. All the above is just my own humble opinion, of course. --- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu (04/28/91)
In article <0cwgha+@rpi.edu>, Garance_Drosehn@mts.rpi.edu writes: [...material (mostly from other posters) deleted...] > To zero in on the question posed (as opposed to the larger war that is raging), > I for one do not follow comp.newprod. I am not interested in all products that > have some connection to computers, although I might be interested in all > products that have to do with NeXT computers (and Mac computers, but that's an > issue for other newsgroups). > > By posting to comp.newprod, you're going to reach more people that you don't > care about (people who don't own NeXTs), and fewer of the people you do care > about. > I don't read comp.newprod either and I like to see new product announcements (including prices) in this newsgroup. I prefer them to be blatant instead of disguised--which is what I mostly didn't care about in the Impact postings. Let them go ahead and be blatant...in fact, I would like to see the heading state "commercial announcement." > All the above is just my own humble opinion, of course. Of course. And ditto:^) c.f.waltrip Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu> Opinions expressed are my own. > > --- > Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@eclipse.its.rpi.edu
mlee@shaman.com (Mark Lee (Impact)) (05/01/91)
We received about twenty letters since our last posting, and we would like to thank those respondents who gave us encouragement (17 out of 19) to stop posting about the software card, but to continue posting about the software contests. > Please continue posting the software contest notifications - that is clearly > a service that comp.sys.next readers would like to be aware of. > I think your postings to the network are just fine. > Perhaps you could make them more concise, and > remove the star border which makes them look > like an advertisement. I just wanted you to know > that there are some people out here that find your > postings informative (and inoffensive.) > the contest is a good thing, it promotes people > to develop stuff. The problem is when you say: > I have this super cool product at xxx$ BUY BUY BUY. > You are doing the NeXT community, and especially the small-time > developers, a service for which you should be thanked, not condemned. > Don't stop posting until (and unless) someone literally pulls the > plug on you. > It is usually appropriate for press releases and general information about > a company to be posted to the net, IMHO. However, sales/marketing items > are generally not looked upon favorably, especially coming from a *.edu > site rather than a *.com site. As suggested by many of the respondents, we will make our future postings about the software contests short, concise, toned-down, and less frequent. We are also in the process of moving all our e-mail accounts to a *.com site. (Thanks to Jiro Nakamura at Shaman Consulting, which is not affiliated with IMPACT, but is lending us a user account at his site.) Mark Lee IMPACT Software Publishing, Inc mlee@shaman.com