Re: Don't waste time on offline newsreaders...

[Ulric Eriksson <ulric edu stockholm se>]

On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Gianluca Montecchi wrote:

> On 9 Feb 1998, Michael Alan Dorman wrote:
> 
> > 2) It's not an efficient use of net resources for the same reason
> > Netscape's cache is when compared to squid---it means each person
> > using a machine must downloading a copy of gnu.emacs.bugs instead of
> > using a shared cached copy.  Disks are cheap, but bandwidth rarely is.
> 
> I use the net only when I must download the articles and post my articles.
> I am not always on line. If it is true that disks are cheap (and this is
> true) it is better to waste disk-space.
> You don't take care of the dial-up lines. I agree that we cannot take care
> only this, we must take care also this. 
> 
> What I want is a newsreader that it is usable also with a dial-up
> connection. I don't want to pay a expensive phone bill, so for me (or
> other) is better the offline reader.

Is it necessary to have this discussion here?

I personally run INN at home, through a dial-up connection. I get fed only
the groups I want. I read news a *lot*, and do not have any problems with
the transfer time. It mostly takes place in the background as I am doing
other things.

The advantage of this is that I can use any newsreader I want (trn in my
case) and still read news off-line. Members of my family can also use any
newsreader they want, and use the same server despite running on another
computer (under Windows 95). This is all in spirit with The Unix Way. 
What, if anything, am I missing?

Ulric