Hi Jonathan de Boyne Pollard, Yes it's me again 
06-May-97 09:55:12, Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote to William Geiger
          Subject: SMP...will it work with 1 CPU?
 JdBP> @REPLY: 1:3662/51.6 731fe5f5
 JdBP> @MSGID: 2:440/4.3 336f0502
 JdeBP>> Of course, many people, including me, would like to see _all_
 JdeBP>> versions of OS/2 Warp capable of SMP.  If this includes you, I
 JdeBP>> strongly suggest that you get on to the IBM customer support fora
 JdeBP>> on CompuServe and make noises. IBM doesn't monitor FidoNet, and
 JdeBP>> doesn't really have an official Usenet presence, either (although
 JdeBP>> you may find IBM employees there with their "private citizen" hats
 JdeBP>> on). CompuServe is the place to make noise if you want to be
 JdeBP>> noticed.
 WG>> This is a fairly sad commitary on IBM customer relations if they only
 WG>> listen to those who pay Comu$erve's bloated prices.
 JdBP> Nonsense.  We only have ourselves to blame, not IBM.
 JdBP> IBM has no choice here, in the same way that many other companies have
 JdBP> no choice.  The only fora where they can provide commercial
 JdBP> technical support are those hosted by commercial providers such as
 JdBP> CompuServe, America OnLine, and so forth.  Fidonet has a very strong
 JdBP> anti-commercial bias, with many people very likely to get up in arms
 JdBP> and start cutting feeds and causing minor civil wars
 JdBP> if they find that they are carrying commercial echomail (such as a
 JdBP> hypothetical official IBM technical support echo), and so does
 JdBP> Usenet.
 JdBP> People may sneer at companies that find themselves prohibited from
 JdBP> providing support access in Usenet newsgroups and Fidonet echoes,
 JdBP> but the very same people are usually the first to complain loudly
 JdBP> and long about cost and "rampant commercialism taking over" when
 JdBP> software companies try to provide
 JdBP> formal technical support in echoes or newsgroups.
 JdBP> Until this attitude changes, Fidonet will have no official presence
 JdBP> from anyone apart from the tiny freeware and shareware companies
 JdBP> (and even they, if they become too big, or start to look like they
 JdBP> are making a profit, start to be hassled by people telling them to
 JdBP> leave), and the major software businesses
 JdBP> will stick to hosting their own support fora (either on the WWW or a
 JdBP> private BBS) or using commercial hosting services like CompuServe,
 JdBP> and leaving the newsgroups and echoes well alone.
Their are plenty of alternatives for IBM to make a presence not only on
FIDO but also on the Internet to provide tech support & to it's customers.
One thing they could do is provide a FIDOInet feed for their tech
support confrences. That way BBS's that wished to cary these confrences
could do so without the current LD expences associated with FIDO.
I see no reason why the users of FIDO should have to pay for commercial
traffic. IBM is quite capable of funding their tech support without 3rd
parties incurring expences.
As far as Usenet IBM could set-up NNTP servers that all they carried were
IBM tech support confreneces. Most News Clients support multiple server
plus those ISP's that wished to pick-up those confrences could do so if
they desired.
There is nothing keeping any company off of FIDO and/or Usenet except
themselfs they just need to pay their way.
I can't see any justification for a multi-national company with revenue in
the Billions of dollars to get a free ride on the backs of the BBS
operators who pay for FIDO out of their own pockets.
 -=> See Ya!!, William Geiger <=-
--- Terminate 4.00/Pro
---------------