|
|
| GeoCommunity Mailing List |
| |
| Mailing List Archives |
| Subject: | RE: GISList: Comments on DEMS |
| Date: |
08/04/2001 06:59:46 AM |
| From: |
Anthony Quartararo |
|
|
Glenn,
Sorry you had to come back from holiday to this, you may yet need another
one soon.
I have been on the side of the "outsourcing" strategy in my recent posts,
whether implicitly support GeoComm or not, that's how I have come across.
However, some of your statements are just shouting for a response...
"... to discuss public policy or GeoComm's perception of it."
Actually, I think it would be quite appropriate to discuss GeoComm's
perception of it since it is THE source at the moment for this data.
"... however, if you know anything about running a
.com business and think your going to strike it rich serving
ads then you better wake up and smell the coffee. "
The choice of business model doesn't justify a cumbersome and onerous
delivery mechanism that is not at least equal to what consumers experienced
while data was hosted by USGS. It's not fair to say because you're a
"dot-com" then you should be allowed to charge consumers for higher
bandwidth that would be equal to what they got at USGS simply because you
may not be able to earn enough money off of ads or other services.
"..We have an agreement to make the DEM data available for free download and
we have done that."
I don't know what the details of the agreement are, I suppose it should be
in the public domain, but regardless, you could provide access at 33.6 or
less and it would still be "free" and accessible, but probably not
acceptable.
"..Data is available for free download or "premium" access can be obtained
by purchasing space on a dedicated line."
GeoComm's definition of premium and a $ to go with it may be sound on paper,
but again, if "premium" is only what users had access to at USGS, you can
see why this won't fly.
"The main reason that the premium pipe is available only by $$ is that
it would likely be abused if it was free (greedy data
mongers with multiple sessions grabbing the entire data
catalog would prevent needy site visitors from getting
acceptable download speeds). Argue this until your blue in
the face, I'll never change my feeling about this."
Sorry to hear that you are so intransigent on that, and it is somewhat
ironic that you tout GeoComm's "free" data, yet blast people for taking
advantage of it. So you punish the "needy" site visitor by making them pay
? Isn't that backwards ? If it's free, it should be free for all, no pun
intended, and not based on GeoComm's vision of varying degrees of free-ness.
"More band width might be needed and we are addressing the
issue... "
Might? When and where is more bandwidth NOT needed ? Frankly, USGS and
GeoComm should have forecasted and planned on this issue well before it
became one.
"When data is posted for free the
average user is not content to come in and grab what he/she
needs. Most people would rather grab everything they can get
- the net effect is that concurrent sessions from tons of
users will eventually back up even the fattest pipe."
Again, punishing "non-average" users by forcing them to pay? If the
business model is to provide free stuff, then make it free without hassles,
and since it is the "average" person, then why get so ruffled about it,
that's what your target audience is, "average" and so why not serve them
with a smile ?
"The moral of the story here is as follows:
- the data is still free and accessible"
I doubt "morals" have anything to do with this issue, it's more like $$$$.
Anthony Q.
To unsubscribe, write to gislist-unsubscribe@geocomm.com
________________________________________________________________________
Setup a GeoCommunity Account and have access to FAST DataDownloads
and Premium Career Posting at a discounted rate!
https://www.geocomm.com/cgi-bin/accounts/login
On-line Archives available at
http://spatialnews.geocomm.com/community/lists/
|
|
Sponsored by:
For information
regarding
advertising rates
Click Here!
|
