| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 28.09.99 02:31l 191 Lines 7317 Bytes #-9755 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_243G
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/243G
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0ERF<DB0NHM<DB0SHG<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<
PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990927/2016Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:3616 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_243
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA20123 ; Mon, 27 Sep 99 19:37:02 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016035 ; Mon, 27 Sep 99 20:42:22 MET
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 99 20:38:49 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_243G>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/243G
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
tend to be of only moderate scope. That's Ok with me, so are VHF voice
repeaters, and they have proven sustainable over the long haul because they
meet a defined need. The same is true of moderate scope digital networks
which are well designed and offer good performance over the limited scope
they are defined to serve.
Gary
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it |mail to ke4zv@bellsouth.net
534 Shannon Way | We break it |
Lawrenceville, GA | Guaranteed |
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 16:53:55 -0400
From: Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
On Sun, 26 Sep 1999 11:20:46 -0500, "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
wrote:
>
>Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au> wrote in message
>news:7sl341$1mkq$1@arachne.labyrinth.net.au...
>>
>> Charles Brabham <n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote:
>> > Thanks for confirming that ham radio is not involved in any of the
>> > communications I mentioned, Brian. I knew Gary was a LandLine Lid, and
>he
>> > knew it, and now you have confirmed it for us all. It figures that Gary
>> > would try so hard to weasel... He knows he's in the wrong.
>>
>> Charles, I agree with your general sentiment, but insulting people
>> like Gary on this newsgroup just makes you look a fool.
>
>I pointed out that Gary was involved in "Amateur Telephone". That was a
>statement of fact, and if Gary is insulted by this, then he has insulted
>himself. I had nothing whatsoever to do with his choice in that matter.
No, it is still a lie, no matter how many times you choose to repeat it.
You only succeed in making yourself look the fool by trying to perpetuate
the lie.
Show us the header of a message that I have forwarded to or from a packet
BBS by telephone. You cannot because I have never done so. Nor have I
knowingly sent messages which have been so relayed at some distant point
beyond my control. Never once.
Put up or shut up, Charles. Either produce that message or stop making
false claims about me. I do not appreciate being falsely characterized,
even by a blowhard like you. I expect an answer, and I expect it in the
form of an abject apology from you.
Gary
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it |mail to ke4zv@bellsouth.net
534 Shannon Way | We break it |
Lawrenceville, GA | Guaranteed |
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 20:18:07 GMT
From: nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Rob:
>Well, Rob that's simply not true!
>The monopolists and cartels who "owned" the switch business were not the
>ones who introduced the "new switches" rather it was the new upstart
>competitors.
>You owe the deployment of new low cost technolgy to competition whether or
>not the technology actually is invioced by new era competitive or legacy
>cartel suppliers, the newcomers and their fierce competition forced the
>issue. Eliminate competition and go back to the monopolistic past? Heck,
>that's why all of the immigrants left the "old countries" to come to America
>the land of competition and low prices.
>Do you really think that Seimens, Bell Telephone, Ericson, Nokia, Alcatel,
>Lucent, Nortel, Fujitsu, NEC, etc would be offering new packet switching
>equipment if it were not for Cisco, Wellfleet/Bay, Stratacom, Cascade,
>Ascend, etc . . . etc . . .
Maybe the situation was different in the USA, but over here the telephone
company has never been the switch manufacturer. They bought switches
from several manufacturers (Philips, Lucent, Ericsson, Alcatel, etc).
So there has always been competition in that area, and of course that
is good. My point is that it is not good to have competition in the
infrastructure itself (between different telephone companies in the
same small country). It leads to lots of overhead and little or no
gain for the customer.
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: Mon, 27 Sep 1999 01:28:53 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Gary Coffman <ke4zv@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:qITuN3bo4KIVXiYr8IRYBXGdZBAR@4ax.com...
> >
> >I pointed out that Gary was involved in "Amateur Telephone". That was a
> >statement of fact, and if Gary is insulted by this, then he has insulted
> >himself. I had nothing whatsoever to do with his choice in that matter.
>
> No, it is still a lie, no matter how many times you choose to repeat it.
> You only succeed in making yourself look the fool by trying to perpetuate
> the lie.
Sorry OM... If you are trying to suggest that no user of the GRAPES net ever
attempts to communicate with other Hams outside of the network's coverage
area, you'll have a really hard time convincing me of it.
And we all know how such communications from within an amateur tcpip LAN
tend to occur.
>
> Show us the header of a message that I have forwarded to or from a packet
> BBS by telephone. You cannot because I have never done so. Nor have I
> knowingly sent messages which have been so relayed at some distant point
> beyond my control. Never once.
I never said you did.
What I said was that you are involved in "Amateur Telephone", which you most
certainly are. - You ARE involved in the GRAPES network, correct?
>
> Put up or shut up, Charles. Either produce that message or stop making
> false claims about me. I do not appreciate being falsely characterized,
> even by a blowhard like you. I expect an answer, and I expect it in the
> form of an abject apology from you.
Well, Gary, you've got a long wait ahead of you.
I have very little respect for "master debaters" who weasel around about
matters they do not want to admit, and then embarrass themselves by
splitting verbal hairs, coming up with bogus rationalizations, etc.
You remind me of the guy running an amphetamine lab who doesn't do the stuff
himself (just his customers do that) and then gets up on his high-horse to
claim that he has nothing to do with the drug problem.
"Show me the proof that I've ever taken drugs!"
- While he's sitting there in his speed lab, cooking the vile stuff up to
try to sell to for our children.
No, Gary, I've never seen evidence of you using a packet BBS at all. But I
sure have heard you parrot several of the "Amateur Telephone" mantras on
many occasions, and have seen you rush in to support the practice on many
occasions as well.
You're involved.
--
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
To be continued in digest: hd_99_243H
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
