ubb vs nntp

[homer]

 

Here a tip for yall who don't seem to realize exactly why UBB (or
                   whatever kind of webboards) prevails over NNTP, something with
                   more flexibilty, power, and all that neat stuff:

                   Pointy clicky things

                   AOL didn't get a buttload of customers because it is better than
                   an ISP, but because people on it don't have to configure things.
                   Face it, there's a lot more ignorant newbie types than the internet
                   pros that many of us have become over the years. Lowest
                   common denominator..

first...who says ubb prevails over nntp?  that's bull.  nntp is MUCH more popular than ubb.  that a few webmasters here or there have ubb message boards that get a little traffic isn't testament to anything other than setting up a ubb board may be easier than setting up and running a news server, which isn't that hard btw, and is much less bandwidth consuming as well.  not sure how the lease agreement htc has as far as their t1 goes, but i'm sure it's in their best interest to be bandwith conservative.

aol's popularity is neither here nor there as far as this argument goes.  sure, aol is popular with the computer illiterate...wfgas?  i doubt that htc considers the aol masses as their target consumer anyway. anyone who can't access a newsreader or figure out how to use it is never going to last long in a "hard core" flight sim anyway, so why even cater to those types here?

homer

[Ozymandias_KoK]

NNTP is more widely used due prolly to two things: porn and warez.  Look at the percentage of traffic that is alt.binaries.* versus anything else, you'll see a very large weight in favor of the binaries.  Not only due to size, but realize also when the 3l33t haxxor doodz upload Office 2000 it's going to be a buttload of individual posts.

As for popularity, just seems to an oz that you see a whole helluva lot more discussions being created (as in new discussion groups) on UBB/webboard type things than NNTP, tho it is somewhat subjective.  AOL's popularity is only relevant to illustrate the power of simoplicity (and a good deal of BS, but that's neither here nor there, as you suggest  ).

Oz not saying he prefers UBB over NNTP.  Oz saying one is overtaking the other.  And not the one oz would prefer also...

------------------
TKoKFKA-OZDS-

[homer]

how can i argue with someone who refers to himself in the 3rd person    

more than 90% of usenet ng's, prolly more like 99.something percent, aren't binary groups and likewise have little to do with warez or porn.  where do you get this stuff??

homer

[lakc]

Homer,

What certain kings do with their nntp readers is no business of ours.  

------------------
Lake City
-lakc-

[Gimp]

Oz,

I can't figure it out either. I live in a small town with one ISP and to access AOL takes either a long distance call or a PPP and a subsription price on top of the local ISP service cost and there are still people who insist on having it! I makes my mind swim why someone would want to pay double for something they don't really have to.

Gimp

[fats]

--- Homer: ---
um...HT...you need to get out more often  http://www.webboard.com/wb4/features.cfm  
--- End ---

Hopefully HTC is really looking into switching UBB thingy with the O'Reilly one. There's gotta be NNTP - these web boards don't even compare.


//fats

[Ozymandias_KoK]

Oz not say anything about the number of nntp newsgroups (last time oz paid any attention was well over 30K) but the volume.  And a lot of those groups have been ded a long time, too.  While the alt.binaries.* stuff may number less than 10% of total groups, traffic and post size-wise yer looking at something like 90% or more.  Ask any news admin why they expire the binaries so fast or simply don't carry most of those groups.  Aside from the binary groups, news server disk space wouldn't be a problem and you'd have room to hold them plain old text posts quite a good while.

And oz point is NOT that UBB is better, far from it.  But just remember, Beta vs VHS....product superiority is seldom the primary factor in it's success.  And it IS hard to successfully argue with a KoK to be sure, him being liable to call for executioners if you make him mad.  Not worry, we not near that stage yet.  

Now for Mr Lake City on the other hand, referring to oz as a mere king, he should be expecting a knock on the door at any moment...  

------------------
TKoKFKA-OZDS-

[homer]

oz...you're misrepresenting what network admin's would say.

what they would say, is that the binary groups probably account for a big hunk of the actual data transferred on usenet.  but that would make sense, as users of non binary groups are typically posting text only messages or small html messages.  binary groups often contain bmps jpegs and gifs and who knows what else...naturally in terms of the actual data flow, the binary groups will have a much larger proportion than the actual # of posters to such groups.  i doubt that binary group activity accounts for 90% of the data flow on usenet tho.  

either way, i'm not gonna waste my time writing an app to gather that data, when i could say for certain that there is a ton more warez and porn available on webpages than on usenet binary groups. what that has to do with choosing nntp or ubb is beyond me.

homer

[funked]

Can't do nntp at work.  End of story.

[-deft-]

The O'Reily bulletin board isn't much better
then UBB.  Don't let that side frame '+ -'
open close thread stuff fool you.  Every time
you want to expand/contract a message thread
on the left side of the screen, a connection
is made to the server, and a new page is
downloaded. (more server overhead)

There are 700+ messages on their test board.
If all threads are expanded its gonna take a
looooooong time to expand a thread to look
inside it because your going to have to
redownload the index page every time. Of
course they realized this and they limit the
number of threads you can expand at once.
Downside? constantly scrolling the left side
up and down to find out where you were...

nah, it isn't better then UBB at all....


[This message has been edited by -deft- (edited 09-29-1999).]

[fats]

--- Deft: ---
nah, it isn't better then UBB at all....
--- end ---

Yes it is, it has NNTP. I don't care what the WWW based interface really looks like, cause I won't be using it. I will be using  Emacs to read the news if NNTP is an option.

I checked out your project NG! and looked very nice as far as the WWW side goes, but does it have NNTP? Unless you code Emacs in java as front end to NG!, you're not gonna get me to use it if other options are available.

NNTP lets people to decide on their front end, customize it, add features and so on. The WWW based thingies don't, you're at the mercy of the program's coder's preferences.


//fats

[-deft-]

Emacs???  

yech....

[homer]

 

The O'Reily bulletin board isn't much better
                   then UBB. Don't let that side frame '+ -'
                   open close thread stuff fool you.

yes it is.  you can access the o'reily boards via a news reader.  granted, the web based interface isn't much better than most other web based readers, but you'd be doing no worse that's for sure..not to mention it has a lot more features than ubb for those who insist on reading messages with their <ugh> browser.

homer