FidoNet

I recall, in 1994 or possibly 1993, telling people on FidoNet that the Internet was "coming" (it was already impressive, but few people had heard of it in those days), and that it would be a threat to FidoNet. I'm not sure if the INTERNET echo even existed then, but I have a strong memory of people being sceptical about the success of the Internet, in spite of almost total ignorance of it. I, OTOH, had used _both_ FidoNet and the Internet.

So, now I can be smug and say, "I told you so." ;)

The first web server I played with was the NCSA server for Win16. I was shocked at how simple it was to setup, compared to becoming a point off a BBS.

While a point I had a choice of two mailers (downloadable from the BBS I was point with). One was used by the BBS sysop, and I chose the other one, coz it looked simpler. I later told him how easy it was, and when he tried it himself, he agreed. Not that it was anywhere as easy to setup and maintain as an Internet email client.

Has anyone here read RFCs for protocols like NNTP, SMTP, POP3 etc? How do they compare to the docs for FidoNet?

Dare I mention TCP/IP? ;) There are certainly complexities, but the naive (clueless?) user needn't worry, as they won't see most of it. An experienced (advanced) user can do so much more.

Still, it's not all bad news. Apparently some companies still use a BBS for internal communications, and a few public boards still exist. The real question should be: How many new boards are appearing? Whether public or private, if there are no new users, then the tech is standing still. New apps for web and news servers are appearing at a frantic rate, and email is also growing.

There's always a need for communication, whether it's phone, fax, or whatever. Personal or business, we want more bandwidth. The big problem with FidoNet was the slow probagation rate. 5 years ago, my posts to UseNet took 3 days to reach the US, while a FidoNet post could take that long just to get around the UK. This, I feel, is the real killer.

For others, the killer might be the use of graphics. A BBS could use RIP, which ISTR was EGA graphics over a modem. Some sysops refused to use it, coz it used more memory per line on a BBS. Today, that sounds like a joke. A mere MB per line? Back then, it was a killer.

And then there was the FidoNet content. The US echos were always much more interesting. I once heard that the US is better at handling special interests, and the nets of echos were evidence of this. So are tens of thousands of newsgroups on UseNet, and countless email lists. The UK echoes always struck me as the interests of a stereotypical nerd, which probably didn't help much.

"Special interest" doesn't mean techie. So, US FidoNet was more interesting. UseNet and the Web have even more to offer. No contest.

OTOH, both worlds have one thing in common: the image of being a major source of porn. Perhaps it just depends on what you look for? I know people who only look for porn, but buying a modem has nothing to do with that. One of them was already obsessed with rubber...

Not that the media always present a fair image. ;) Hence CommUnity. Why are there so few news stories about pet owners sharing info, pictures of their pets, etc? Possibly because porn is more exciting to journos? Certainly the jounrnos _I_ know. However, that may say more about me than it does about journalism. I'll get my coat.