Re: New Newsgroup

[Gezza <gerardms@removeoptusnet.com.au>]

Fair enough answer.
Nice to know the ins and outs.
Thanks

Regards Gezza

On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 23:57:49 GMT, Michael Kurkowski
<mk@netstra.com.au> wrote:

>Gezza <gerardms@removeoptusnet.com.au> said:
>
>>Does anyone know of any plausible reason why there should not be a
>>binaries newsgroup?
>>No-one has come up with one yet.
>
>Binaries cost ISP's a lot of money. Period. Since this is the case, many 
>ISP's refuse to carry binaries newsgroups. The reason it costs so much 
>money is that the ISP still recieves every single binary file from each 
>newsgroup that it provides, whether anyone looks at it or not. Due to the 
>nature of usenet, where articles expire from anywhere between 6 hours and 
>an infinitive amount of time, most ISP's will expire articles after around 
>about 7 days. This makes people inclined to re-post binaries, in most 
>cases, more crap that no-one will ever download. Because of the encoding 
>used to allow binaries onto usenet, more bandwidth is used still. 
>
>If the photo is on a web site however, it is in a ready to view (i.e. not 
>encoded) format, which utilises less bandwidth, and will ONLY come through 
>the ISP link if someone requests it, i.e. a web browser. If the ISP in 
>question has a proxy, the photo in question will only come through once, 
>until it expires off the web proxy.
>
>Bear in mind also, that usenet, and particularly the binaries newsgroups 
>were designed primarily for USA conditions, where bandwidth is dirt cheap. 
>Bandwidth in Australia is comparitively expensive, so binaries after all 
>are an unwanted expense in the opinion of many ISPS.
>
>Hope this answers your and many other peoples questions...
>
>Regards
>Michael.

If replying by e-mail, remove 'remove' after the @