| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.99 07:00l 218 Lines 7853 Bytes #-9762 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_241F
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/241F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0FSG<DB0PV<DB0MAK<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PBR<
OK0PAB<HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990926/0103Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2701 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_241
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19925 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 00:07:36 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015938 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:08:26 MET
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:03:26 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_241F>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/241F
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
>
> What do you mean with world market prices? USA market prices?
>
> The tendency here (over the last decade or so) is for the monthly fixed
> rates to drop and the per-minute rates to rise. Also, the local and
> long-distance rates are zoning in on eachother.
> 10 years ago we paid more than a dollar a minute to call the US, and
> about 40 dollarcents an hour for local calls. Since then, local calls
> have become more expensive and international calls have come down
> dramatically. For the majority of customers this means the price has
> gone up, as I rarely/never call internationally.
>
> Many services now no longer have a monthly charge, but only a usage
charge.
> This started with pagers, then was introduced with mobile phones (many GSM
> users don't pay a monthly charge, most others get "free call minutes" for
> the equivalent of their monthly charge), now it has carried over to
> Internet providers as well. There are now serveral Internet providers
that
> ask no montly payment, and get all their income from special kickback
deals
> with the phone companies. Such an arrangement would not be possible in
the
> USA, because there is no per-minute charge that the phone company can
> partly transfer to the provider.
>
> It might seem unattractive when you want to have a permanent connection,
> but it certainly has opened up the Internet to everybody (contrary to
> what others claim here). When you want to be on the Internet here,
> you don't have to commit to monthly payments and you pay no more than
> it would cost you to call a local FIDO BBS. Do I need to explain what
> this means for BBS usage?
>
> >We all must act now to save ham packet radio. Stop burying our heads in
the
> >sand like Charles Brabbam and other Type B's. It is folly and will
decimate
> >amateur packet radio.
>
> >Please tell us Rob . . .
>
> >Rob how much in the Netherlands for 24 x 7 Internet service? Please
share
> >that with us.
>
> I hope you are not too disappointed now... things are not quit as you
> think they are. We have several options for Internet connections, and
> we can decide ourselves whether we want fixed rates or usage-based rates.
>
> However, we have a fully automated telephone system since the early
fifties
> and that has not killed the radio hobby either. It is just a different
> medium and a different hobby.
>
> Rob
> --
>
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
> | Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/
|
> | AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU
|
>
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 1999 18:16:35 -0500
From: "Mike Hughes" <mchughes@NOSPAM.netnitco.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Rob Janssen wrote in message ...
>Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>Charles:
>
>>Charlie, wake up and follow the bucks $ $ $ .
>
>>To understand the European (Continental) situation all you have to do is
>>shop their Internet access rates. (OK, then just look at the prices there
>>since , you really can't shop over there!) And, note the UK is different
>>having deregulated like us a few years ago. Thanks Margaret Thatcher!
>
>>Like most things in Continental Europe the Internet access rates are
>>extremely expensive (where you can get em).
>
>Who told you that?
>Monthly access fees vary between 0 and about US$ 15/month here, depending
>on what quality of service you want. Half of the country is on the
>Internet.
>
>Rob
That's one European country heard from. Any others???
Hopefully, other Europeans are following this thread and testify as to
whether Internet access is expensive in their country, and whether it's
permissible to have Internet/packet gateways there. Either Charles is
right, or he's wrong. Word from more Europeans will finally put that
matter to rest.
Incidentally, I *have* noted that packet/Internet gateways do exist in a
number of European countries, including Slovenia, which boasts a
very high speed packet network.
73, Mike - KG9HF
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 09:54:29 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn7umcuj.ar4.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
>
> Still, most of the network is operating via radio here. You see, the
> hobby is amateur radio. Of course there are *a lot* more people on the
> Internet than on amateur radio, probably there are even more amateurs
> on Internet than on packet radio. But that is just a different hobby.
Careful, Rob... That kind of talk will get you nowhere in a hurry with the
TAPR goons and LandLine Lids here in the US.
If you start talking about using radio instead of the Internet, they'll
accuse you of trying to undermine amateur radio. - Because, of course, radio
is just not good enough for ham radio, and the only way to save the hobby is
to abandon the use of radio, clear that valuable spectrum for other uses,
and move all of our operations over to the Internet.
Example:
----------------------------------------------------------
Phil Karn KA9Q (Author of NOS) in response to my statement on the tcp-group
SIG concerning:
Subject: Re: 2300 MHz band reallocated
N5PVL:
Many *NOS stations are now set up for the single purpose of misusing
Internet as a cheap, dumb way to avoid the use of radios. Internet message
forwarders are the best known example of this.
We can't really afford that type of stupidity any more, IMHO.
KA9Q:
Why is this stupid? Many people outside ham radio would consider it more
stupid to build a radio network that uses precious spectrum instead of using
existing fiber facilities with much greater capacity and lower cost.
I feel that radio spectrum is too valuable to waste on point-to-point links
that are better implemented with non-radio facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked earlier, but never got an answer... Where does Phil Karn work? Does
his employer stand to benefit when Hams lose spectrum? - Just trying to
understand what might motivate this "Ham" to make such ignorant and
irresponsible statements in connection with Amateur RADIO.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 11:42:43 -0400
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 18:18:05 -0700, "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>Why do you keep saying "alligator"? That means a station
>which hears poorly compared to how well it can be heard
>by normal stations. I am certainly not talking anything like
>that, but rather matched stations that obtain their required
>power spread via the use of reasonable power and good
>antennas. Remember: this is a point to point link I'm working
>on. It could well be full duplex, thus avoiding T/R switch time
>issues. However I wish to consider the half duplex alternative
>because it is easier to coordinate a single frequency.
I'm calling it alligator thinking because you keep insisting that
you need a much higher power level than is reasonable for the
To be continued in digest: hd_99_241G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
