In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Status: O
X-Status: 


I apologize for being so late in responding, I'm still backlogged 400 
messages.
> On Tue, 25 Apr 1995, Richard Layman wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Apr 1995, R Ballard wrote:

> > > > One test they also didn't seem to include was sending attachments by 
> > > > e-mail. I don't know about Prodigy, but I know from experience I can't 
> > > > send an attachment by e-mail to Compuserve or AOL. Attachments are easily 
> > > > the best feature of Internet e-mail.
> > That would dampen the demand for Lotus Notes :-).
> 
> What do you mean by the Notes comment -- I'm going to an all day
> conference on Notes tomorrow to learn about it.
Lotus Notes can bundle ole documents and shoot them through the internet, 
but the content can only be read by a lotus notes client.

Mime e-mail can bundle any binary content, ship it, and can be read by 
about 30 different readers on about 200 different platforms.  I couldn't 
read your lotus notes e-mail, but I could read your MIME e-mail.  I'm 
protected by a fire-wall and the unix server doesn't pass notes.

> > > Some analyst wrote a long piece in the Wall Street Journal this week 
> > > about the travails of using the Internet as part of his business.  
> > Sounds like Walter Mossberg.
> 
> It was actually an oped piece next to the editorials.  But it was a couple
> weeks ago.  As you know, eventually, when file transfer conversion,
> formats, communications get worked out, the Internet or whatever it is
Communications has been worked out for about 5 years.  MIME e-mail was 
available on Sun's back when MS-Windows was trying to run on 8086s.

> will be killer.  Now, and remember I'm no power user (my interest in Linux
> notwithstanding), this is the biggest pain in the butt.
Download eudora, winftp, pegasus, and pine.  They are share-ware (you 
don't get source and there are registration fees), but they offer most of 
the same features as Lotus Notes, without the $500 price-tag.

> Prodigy was used by the org. as a backup.  And one of the problems was
> that the publisher they were communicating to isn't a strong user of
> technology, which is why they had to re-send the file.  
Putting binaries into Prodigy is a pain, especially if the recipient 
isn't using mail-manager.  That is because Prodigy does NOT follow 
internet standards.

> That was the real issue, not "the hype of the Internet."
> But, as a progressive (?), what do I expect from the WSJ editorial page.
I used to work at Dow Jones.  They will bless the internet when Bill 
Gates says so (Microsoft Ad Revenue represents about 15% of their ad 
revenue).


> Richard Layman, Mgr., Business Development, and Research Producer

From rballard@cnj.digex.net Wed May  3 18:54:26 1995