Lets create comp.microsoft.public.vc.mfc or alt.microsoft.public.vc.mfc
in [MFC]
|
Prev: Simple encryption solution
Next: MFC Dialog - Menu
From: Bert Hyman on 15 May 2010 12:48 In news:hsmip3$173v$1(a)news.ett.com.ua Hector Santos <sant9442(a)gmail.com> wrote: > You do realize that this is a "Network" of computers and that there is > really a "backbone" concept and that really a "LIST" that you are > managing? The backbone died along with UUCP. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert(a)iphouse.com
From: Hector Santos on 15 May 2010 12:46 Btw Bobf, Have you notice the the these other public servers, like news.ett.com.ua, are suddenly behaving more slowly and unreliable. I had trouble posting my last two messages. I'm not posting this off news.aioe.org. This is the sort of thing that will be predictable. Once people are forced to find other sources, nothing comes for free, they will provide the bandwidth that they can handle. Eventually, if there is going to be any survival of a "microsoft" group, someone, usually very big, will have to act as the concentrated central source again. Not every node wants usenet, but they may want "Microsoft.*" now they need to find someone that will at least keep the list, separated or not from the usenet list. -- Hector Santos wrote: > BobF wrote: > > >>> Did you know that the entire microsoft.public hierarchy is >>> scheduled to be deleted by the end of next month? >> >> I heard! I'm not yet convinced that it will disappear from all of >> usenet. A google group admin has stated such an intention, but that's >> it. > > > BobF, > > You do realize that this is a "Network" of computers and that there is > really a "backbone" concept and that really a "LIST" that you are managing? > > All these public systems directly or indirectly are off the "backbone", > there is really a "star" topology the deeper you go, if only, for PROFIT > reasons. Its not free and attempting to carry the entire usenet backbone > is expensive. You need high bandwidth. > > Sure, there will be pockets of computers that want to keep a new LIST > containing, microsoft.*, or maybe a separate list, like we once had when > I was pulling usenet selected newsgroups off my T1 MCI/UUNET (now > Verizon) but I had a separate list for msnews.microsoft.com because I > wanted to be closer to the source here. > > In short, the more automated you are off your uplink, the more likely > that you follow the "LIST" that is carried - automatically. > > So imagine if I used only usenet and indeed it was removed, then I would > be SAFE because I maintained a separate list. Now the the server will > be gone, I have to restart the usenet feed. But the activity will be a > lot less now because of similar setups. > > Overall, when its not honored or not, then you begin to get separate > listing for different mesh of links and now you have to literally create > a new HOST entry on your software in other to delegate the directed > paths that 2nd list follows. > > I guess my point is that it is fallacy or illusion that these UseNet is > a Glorious pipe of mail air broadcasted for anyone to get from any point > without any lost of dissipation. If you want to get a stronger whiff, > you need to get closer to the source. That source is going to be lost > soon. > > -- > HLS
From: Bert Hyman on 15 May 2010 12:56 In news:hsmj5q$vtv$1(a)speranza.aioe.org Hector Santos <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote: > Eventually, if there is going to be any survival of a "microsoft" > group, someone, usually very big, will have to act as the concentrated > central source again. Nah... There are scores of newsgroups that have far more traffic than anything you could imagine on the microsoft.* hierarchy, and they're distributed worldwide just fine. If you're not happy with the performance of your free news server, there are lots of places you can get service for a nominal cost. You might even find a "boutique" internet provider in your hometown that still provides USENET as part of the package; my own ISP is one. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert(a)iphouse.com
From: Hector Santos on 15 May 2010 13:12 Bert Hyman wrote: > In news:hsmip3$173v$1(a)news.ett.com.ua Hector Santos <sant9442(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > >> You do realize that this is a "Network" of computers and that there is >> really a "backbone" concept and that really a "LIST" that you are >> managing? > > The backbone died along with UUCP. The transport method did, but not the "backbone" distribution concept per se. These are still old guards that want to get paid. Try to go get mail from giganews.com or from other major providers for free. If you follow the path of any of these "free" peering servers, including fee based ones, they all lead to a pretty small set of "backbone" providers everyone feeds off directly or indirectly. Here are some information: http://www.top1000.org/ When you have a topology where most of the servers peer off the giganews.com and other top providers, we are talking a still a star and backbone concept. Giganews.com isn't going to peer off me or you. == HLS
From: Hector Santos on 15 May 2010 13:21
Bert Hyman wrote: > In news:hsmj5q$vtv$1(a)speranza.aioe.org Hector Santos > <sant9442(a)nospam.gmail.com> wrote: > >> Eventually, if there is going to be any survival of a "microsoft" >> group, someone, usually very big, will have to act as the concentrated >> central source again. > > Nah... There are scores of newsgroups that have far more traffic than > anything you could imagine on the microsoft.* hierarchy, and they're > distributed worldwide just fine. And many were transparently already removed and you didn't notice it. And not, not world wide, because many nodes do honor the control messages and those groups will not be part of the specific server listing. Try it, get a listing from multiple servers and do a diff and see that not all the groups are PERSISENT in this "usenet" of yours. > If you're not happy with the performance of your free news server, there > are lots of places you can get service for a nominal cost. You might > even find a "boutique" internet provider in your hometown that still > provides USENET as part of the package; my own ISP is one. Nah, I can get it off my T1 provider if I choose too. I did long ago, no longer. I have no need to pull unnecessary growth of junk plus we are private support system and most people interested in microsoft discussion areas are interested in avenues that are closer to the vendor sponsor areas. Once MS is no longer the sponsor, these Microsoft.* will effectively die leaving it to a small hangout of dedicated hard heads that think everything is free, open and the same across the board. -- HLS |