(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*) ||==\\ ||==\\ ||===|| //==\\ //==\\ ||===|| || || || || || || || || || || || || ||==// ||==// ||===|| || \\==\\ ||===|| || || \\ || || || || || || || || || \\ || || \\==// \\==// || || (*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*)-(*) The Official News Letter of PRACSA The Public Remote Access Computer Standards Association. News and reviews of programs, hardware, and peripherals for users of microcomputers. William A. Strouse - Editor (Sysop Wild Bill's) Beth Hall - Asst. Editor (Asst. Sysop Wild Bill's) *** ================= -={ Distribution/Copyright Notice }=- ==================== This newsletter and its articles may be freely distributed on other remote systems as long as this title page and all copyright notices remain intact. We accept material submitted from outside sources for inclusion in future issues (subject to editorial review of course.) *** ============================== CONTENTS ==================================== July 1987 Vol.2 No.7 Use your wordprocessors "find string" function to jump to the numbers. 1. LETTER FROM THE EDITOR Where is PRACSA headed ? 2. CP/M CRUNCH/UNCRUNCH (By Steven Greenberg) 3. DOS Pereline (from PereGrin Data Systems Inc.) 4. Hardware 5. The FCC and Packet Switching AND THEN THERE WERE NONE By Brock N. Meeks from Microtimes, August, 1987 #34 HOW TO REPLY TO FCC DOCKETS By Bruce Bergman from Microtimes, August, l987 #34 INTERVIEW, Dave McCord 6. System Spotlight 7. Humor 8. PRACSA news The June meeting. 9. Classified Ads Upload your ad to the PRACSA bbs and in the FOR file put SUBMISSION FOR NEWS LETTER CLASSIFIED. ======= 1. Letter From the Editor ========================================== For this months editorial I would like to share some thoughts that have been running through my head on how we could improve our association and expand our membership. 1. Computers are about information, mass storage and instant access, the 'information revolution'. BBS's are for sharing this information and software. 2. We have an online system for our members, but it's mostly P.D. software and electronic messages. A good one, but not much different from all the rest. 3. Our pooled knowledge is our greatest resource, especially to the vast majority of computer users, who are not lucky enough to live in or around the Silicone Valley. 4. I think we all agree that we must offer some sort of incentive to expand our membership and keep old members involved. Especially those that live too far away to attend the meetings. 5. And, I think most of us agree to some extent with Al Mehr that we also need to do something constructive so we're not just another social group. If we just had a more effective way to pool and share our knowledge with members all over the world I think it would create a real incentive. Let me regress for a second. I set up my first copy of BYE.COM about three and a half years ago and it took me better than three months to make it work properly with my computer. I was running the new (at that time) CP/M Plus and I had to do a great deal of research to find help with it. I was not known by anyone and I must have left messages on fifty different bbs's before someone told me about George Peace in Harrisburg Pennsylvania and Paul Bartholomew in Freeport IL. That's how I found out about PRACSA to begin with. I ended up spending literally hundreds of dollars on the phone and hundreds of hours to get BYE working. If there had been a database I could have searched for who to call to get help with CP/M Plus & BYE.COM the whole process would have been much faster, easier and much, much less expensive. What I envision is a remote system a member could call and browse through a database. Choose the subject of interest and search on multiple keys for the desired information Al Mehr's a dBASE whiz maybe we could get him to construct these databases. Or as Dave McCord suggested, maybe we can use regular ASCII text files and get Irv Hoff to alter FOR/NEW to do the job. Then one would look at a list of key-words and search a text file for the answers. They would be maintained and kept up to date by volunteer sysops who would answer questions and take suggestions through the message base. Thus splitting up the workload and allowing us to have resident experts in each field. One sysop (Irv) would be in charge of organizing the system, security, directing callers to the proper bases, sysops and/or messages and coordinating system use. Public Domain software would be a good one to start with. Someone in our group recently made a list of P.D. software (was that you John?), We could create a database so a user looking for a specific piece or type of software could find it in the database as well as what system(s) it was on and who to contact for help. For instance, say someone was looking for "WORD PROCESSING", "WORDSTAR", "PATCHES". The database would produce a list of relevant files and what system(s) they could be found on, the phone number(s) and the resident expert(s). We could create a PRACSA database on OEM's and VAR's so people living in remote parts of the USA and foreign countries could search it to find who, what and where for commercial hardware and software. With Phone numbers and addresses for customer support, upgrades, etc. I would be willing to contribute to that list myself. Since so many of us keep in touch with systems all over the world we could also do a regular verified list of systems keyed on special interests, area code, country, etc. This would create a "NETWORK" of all our member bbs's and still leave us free to be the Maverick's we all are. To work this would require some effort from all of us and I'm willing to volunteer to coordinate the project if there's enough support from the membership to make it work. We will need to. 1. Consolidate our information. 2. Create databases from this information. 3. Set up software to make it accessible to remote callers. 4. Advertise it! Any place we can do it free. We can start with our systems, newsletter and possibly Computer Currents. I suggest we don't allow downloading of an entire database (to maintain control of them) and the software (as it will probably be proprietary). Users would do a search with capture buffer open thus only receiving the needed portion of the base. With one central system listing all possible (public) information about members and their bbs's in multiple databases, with stacked security levels we would have something very special. Something extremely useful to computer users all over the world. Members would join to get access to this information and the databases would grow with each new member. There's a system in Canada called CRS (Canada Remote Systems) that's set up a network of twelve or fifteen computers, some LAN'ed and some linked through iNET. They're charging $60 for the first year and $40 to renew membership (full membership); $35 with no system access and $20 to renew (limited membership); $50 to sign up for iNET access or $85 bundled with a full membership and $60 to renew (plus you have to pay for the calls you place through iNET). They have something like 2,500 members so you know they must be making a bundle. Now I know we could never do something like that because the majority of us see ourselves as promoters of public domain. Also, we would be hard pressed to find three members that would give up there (system) individualism to band together that tight. But, with a loose network such as I have described I believe we could offer better service to our membership than CRS for a very small membership fee and expand greatly. We could even provide the service to the general public and charge a nominal fee for non-members and possibly recoup some of our investment. I've always felt that the users should help out with some of the expenses and I've met a few users that felt the same. Why should a sysop cover all the cost of hardware and maintenance just so any kid can call and try to crash it? I feel we would attract a better class of user and weed out some of the riff-raff if users had an investment in the systems they call. Consider: If users paid you just $5 a year for full access to your system and you had 200 regular members you would have $1000 a year to upgrade hardware and software. But you would have to offer something that other systems didn't have. What do you think? *** ======= 2. CP/M ============================================================ I picked on Irv Hoff a great deal over using Crunch/Uncrunch on PRACSA bbs files (and so did several others members). Mainly because of incompatibilities between different versions of the program ie: it was reputed one version could not un-crunched some files crunched with other versions of the same program. Also members had problems with it working properly on certain brands of computers (such as my CP/M Plus Morrow). It got to the point where there was talk of "The Compression Wars" and we got lots of good natured chuckles over the on-going arguments that ensued. But it looks like all the problems have been solved with the latest version (v2.3) so I feel in all fairness I should tell all that v2.3 has been accepted by PRACSA vote. What follows are excerpts from the documentation included in CRUNCH23.LBR (By Steven Greenberg 201-670-8724 (voice; eves, wknds)). ======================================================================== USAGE Prgm: CRUNCH v2.3 filename date, etc. Verbose / / / Usage: CRUNCH {du:} {du:} { [id] } { /Q | /V | /C} \ \ \ \ source destination Quiet Confirm Items in curly brackets are optional (namely everything except for the filename). The two optional 'du:' specs may be of the form DU:, UD:, D: or U: where D is any legal drive letter, and U is a user code from '0' thru '15' inclusive. The colon must be typed. The first 'du:' specifies where the filename '' is located, and it should immediately precede the with no intervening blanks if it is used. If no drive is specified, the default (currently logged) drive is assumed. The same is true for the user code. The filename may contain the ambiguous (wildcard) characters '?' or '*' if desired. The second 'du:', which has the same form as the one described above, is an optional drive specifier where the output will be directed. No filename may follow the the second 'du:' - the filename will be generated automatically (see below). As above, if either part of the 'du:' spec is not included (or if the spec is left out altogether) appropriate defaults will be used. The resulting file will have the same name as the crunched file, except that the middle letter of the extension will be converted to "Z". If the original file's extension was blank, or already had a "Z" in the middle, then a filetype of "ZZZ" will be used. [id] is an optional "date stamp" (or other information), used to identify the file. If used, [id] consists of any text contained between a pair of square brackets (ie the brackets must actually be typed). The text contained in [id] will be recreated at the console for the operator's reference when the file is later uncrunched. Three command line options, "/Q", "/V" or "/C", are available. If used, the option should be last on the command line, and the "/" must be preceded by a space. Although the technical usage above implies only one letter may be used, rev 2.3 will accept any two options. Other combinations, which would include both Q and V, are contradictory. "/Q" and "/V" will "quiet down" a version of CRUNCH which has been configured to be "verbose", or cause a "verbose" run of a program normally configured to be "quiet". This relates to the amount of information sent to the console while the function is in progress. "/C", the confirm option, is used for selective crunching. Norm- ally used in conjunction with wildcard filespecs, this option causes the program to ask "Y/N" for each matching file. Only the files to which "Y" is responded will be crunched. Selecting this option causes the program to automatically ask for additional confirmation if a pre-existing file is about to be overwritten, regardless of the program's configuration. Prgm: UNCR v2.3 filename Quiet Confirm / / / Usage: UNCR {du:} {du:} { /Q | /V | /C} \ \ \ source destination Verbose All usage, options, and patches are identical to CRUNCH, de- scribed above, except that no [id] can be specified. Also note that the that the resulting filename will be recreated from the name of the file that was originally crunched. It is not necessary that the file to be uncrunched have "Z" as the middle letter of the extension; an attempt will be made to uncrunch any filename explicitly specified. Note however that "UNCR *.*" will be internally converted to "UNCR *.?Z?" to facil- itate quickly uncrunching all crunched files in a mixed group. CRINSTAL.DOC ----------------------------------------------------------------- Note: You need CRINSTAL v2.3 to install CRUNCH and UNCRunch v2.3. If you run the old installer on the new program or vice-versa, you will get an "Invalid or Incompatible CRUNCH.COM" message. ----------------------------------------------------------------- As of v2.1 an installation (or "configuration") program is pro- vided to facilitate defining certain default options to a users own preferences or requirements. The program is called "CRINSTAL.COM". It is quite self-explanatory in nature, so not many further instructions need be given here. The only thing which requires some clarification is how to "fire up" the thing. All you need to do is follows. 1. If you are running TurboDOS or Compupro Concurrent on your computer, you may wish to read "TURBODOS.WRN" before proceeding. 2. Get copies of CRUNCH.COM, UNCR.COM, and the install program itself, CRINSTAL.COM, all on the same drive (and area). Note that CRINSTAL will try to configure both programs at once, so they BOTH must be there. Since CRINSTAL is a simple program which makes no provision for entering different filenames, you must also make sure that the programs have exactly the names given above. If you prefer different names (eg CR instead of CRUNCH), you will have to rename your programs after the instal- lation process. Note that their is no such thing as an "unin- stalled" version of CRUNCH or UNCRunch. Each may be configured as many times as desired. 3. Make sure there is enough room left for 1 more copy each of CRUNCH.COM and UNCR.COM, as the old files will be left on the disk as well, renamed .BAK. Normally, this should only require about 12k total free space. 4. Type "CRINSTAL". Just plain "CRINSTAL". 5. Answer the five questions (six counting "Do you want to con- tinue"). If you are unsure about anything, just hit and you will get the default selection. Saying "Y" to "Do you want to continue" followed by five will provide a very rea- sonable installation similar to previous versions of CRUNCH. PATCHES.DOC for CRUNCH / UNCRunch v2.3 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Note: The patch bytes for v2.3 are in different locations than previous releases. The corresponding functions are the same, how- ever (except of course the Z3 flag, which is new to this version) ----------------------------------------------------------------- This document describes every possible one byte patch which can be made to CRUNCH.COM and UNCR.COM. In each case, the patches can be made to either program for corresponding identical effects (except the "Bigger File" patch has no significance on the UNCRunch program). The patches marked "***" are the ones which can be changed by running the installation program, CRINSTAL. In each of those cases, a "NO" answer corresponds to the "zero" patch value, which is considered the default. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Byte Significance ==== ============ 10EH *** "Quiet Mode Flag". Patch to any non-zero value to have the program default to "non-verbose" mode. This has the same effect as using the /Q option on the com- mand line, ie the program will not display lots of churning numbers on the screen during operation. If this flag is zero, it can be effectively reversed for any single run of the program by using the /V option on the command line. 10FH *** "Prompt Before Overwrite flag. If patched to non- zero, existing files will be overwritten without a prompt. 110H *** "Turbo-DOS Flag". If patched to non-zero, program will not attempt multi-sector I/O. Otherwise the pro- gram will use it if the BDOS "Get System Version" call returns a value of 3.0 or higher. See "TURBODOS.WRN" for more information. 111H "Confirm Every File Flag". If set to non-zero, the program will ask "Do it?" for EVERY file (as it does when the /C option is invoked). While this is probably not a particularly useful configuration, it is included for the sake of completeness. 112H "Warm Boot Flag". If set non-zero, the program will perform a "warm boot", as opposed to a return to the CCP, each time its is run. This is normally not neces- sary, but is included for people running systems who have reason to believe that the CCP will not remain resident. 113H *** "Bigger File Flag". If set non-zero, the program will NOT ask the question "Result file larger than original. Keep it anyway?". The assumed answer to the question will be "Yes". 114H "Maximum Drive allowed, plus one". The default value here is "FF", effectively disabling the feature. If you so desire, you may enter a value here ("A" = 2, "B" = 3, etc), in which case the program will intercept any references to higher drives (giving an "Invalid Drive" error). If you leave this feature deactivated, your operating system will gladly tell you about the invalid drive spec when it gets it. 115H "Maximum User Code Allowed, plus one". Similar to above. Note however that the command line parser will reject all references to values above 15 no matter what. In this case, you don't even get an "Invalid User Area" message, you will get "Invalid Argument". 31 user areas are NOT currently supported. 10BH *** "Z3 Flag". Non-zero configures program for use on the ZCPR3 operating system. Non-zero values in either 109H or 10AH ( Z3 "environment descriptor" ) will have the same effect. +--------------------------------------------------------------+ | All source code contained in CRUNCH23.LBR, as well as object | | code created from it, are Copyright (C) Steven Greenberg, | | 15 November 1986. May be reproduced for non-profit use only. | | Public release of modifications strictly prohibited without | | expressed consent of the author. | +--------------------------------------------------------------+ This source code is being released in the public interest by its author, with the good faith that those receiving it will adhere to the above copyright message. In other words, you can distrib- ute "CRUNCH / UNCRunch", and you can modify it if you wish, but you can't do both. I must also suggest that you be careful of changing CRUNCH, in particular, in any way that might affect the program's output. Incompatible "crunched" files floating around won't do anyone any good. ***************************************************************** Changes for v2.3 NOTE: Although there is a CRUNCH22.LBR, there is no v2.2 of CRUNCH or UNCRunch. It was skipped to get the library names back in sync with the program versions. 1. ZCPR3 support. The programs now can be configured for ZCPR use. The configuration may be accomplished by a patch byte, by running the install program CRINSTAL, or by performing a Z3INS installation of the program. 2. Patch Byte Locations. To support the Z3 environment descrip- tor, the patch byte locations have been shifted up. If you are going to be patching these bytes yourself, refer to the new PATCH23.DOC, included ( Note: while the location of these bytes has changed, their function has not). If you are going to use the install program CRINSTAL.COM, just make sure to use v2.3 of that program, included. If you make a mistake and use the wrong install with the wrong program, you will simply get a "Invalid or Incompatible CRUNCH.COM" or some similar message. 3. That's it. Usage of v2.3 is identical to that of v2.1. ****************************************************************** Release Notes: Many people have noticed that the type program TYPELZ has not been included in the last few releases of CRUNCH. I will shortly release a TYPELZ library which contains the most recent version of that program along with the source for the REL files needed to support it. I will then leave subsequent type program releases to others. There are already one or two very good alternatives to TYPELZ, and I prefer to concentrate my work on compression itself, rather than associated utility support. Speaking of utility support, there have also been a number of inquiries concerning a CRUNCH.REL (companion to UNCR.REL) for use by utilities to support crunched files. I will take care of this as soon as practical; possibly it will be included with the other support programs in the TYPELZ release. Greenbug notice: The USQREL file currently used with versions 2.x of TYPELZ will refuse to type a squeezed file in the 1/128 chance that one of the checksum bytes is zero. The corrected USQREL will be released in the TYPELZ library mentioned above. Note this only affects squeezed files, not crunched or uncompressed. (Note to programmers involved- In the mean time the problem can be fixed by inserting any non-0 value in these two [unused] bytes before calling USQREL). Questions, problems, suggestions, etc: Steven Greenberg 201-670-8724 (voice; eves, wknds) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Acknowledgements: ================= ZCPR3 Consultant: Bruce Morgen Also thanks to (continued from last release...) Keith Peterson, Jon Schneider, Jay Sage, Gary Inman, Steve Russel, Terry Carroll, George Peace, Pete Zuroff and many others... *** ======= 3. DOS ============================================================= At our May meeting Tom Serface and Einar Pederson of Peregrine software gave a demonstration of there new PereLine communications software. They were also kind enough to give me an evaluation copy. I have since used PereLine on several different IBM and IBM compatible computers and it's become my dialer of choice for DOS machines. I've used Qmodem for a long time and loved it, but I've found PereLine is much better for what I do since I never know what machine I'll be using next. For one thing I use an AT clone in an office where it's not unusual for me to show up in the morning and find it dismantled all over my desk. It belongs to a friend who's always scavenging parts to sell to a customer or test a faulty machine with. One morning I found it dismantled for publicity pictures. It's in a constant state of flux as to what boards it has in it and I've had three different modems in the last month. Or I'll show up at a company to work on their machine and find I need a piece of software I didn't bring. If they have a modem I can call and get it from one of my friends, but I've found many of the dialers people use are crude and have problems with file transfers. As a matter of fact some of the older ones refuse to do file transfers beyond a capture buffer. Well I can't learn to use all of them and I find Pereline is easy to transport from machine to machine. It's one of those "tools" I always carry with me. It's much quicker and easier to set up than Qmodem and I have not found a computer (PC/MS-DOS) or modem (Hayes compatible) that it's had problems with. PereLine allows the me to customize menus and/or create my own. It Supports multiple concurrent sessions using two windows so I can be connected to two modems at the same time, directly connected to two computers, or a combination of modem and direct connect then jump back and forth between the windows. One feature I really like is the LEARN function. Have you ever tried to write auto-logon scripts for a dialer? It's just like programming in any other language. First you write the code then you spend a bunch of time de-bugging it by making one call after another until it works properly. With PereLine's Learn function I just turns on the learn feature before placing the call and the program stores the keys-strokes (with the phone number) for use the next time I call that number. In addition when I enter a number in one of the (unlimited number of) "Phone Books" (limited to 60 entries each) I'm asked a short series of questions that establish the communication parameters for that individual phone number (baud rate, transfer protocol, terminal emulation, timing constants, etc). Speaking of emulation, PereLine emulates ANSI, VT100, VT52, VIDTEXT, IBM 3101, DG210/211. File transfer protocols include XMODEM, YMODEM, KERMIT, TELINK, and two file capture buffers, one for each window. I can execute DOS commands from inside PereLine without having to exit the program. PereLine's built in File Manager allows me to easily Copy, Rename, Delete files, Change directories, and Log onto a different drive. PereLine if requested will keep a log of all commands it executes and supports a telephone log to track calls and there length. And, PereLine has the ability to work as a simple unattended (password protected) remote system that I can call and drop to DOS to execute other programs (a mini-bbs with DOS privileges). PereLine is superior to any DOS dialer I've used and I would (and do) recommend it to my friends. But I guess you should also consider the fact that I might be a little biased since I got one of the nicest pieces of software I have in my collection, free. Two of it's strongest features are 1. Its easy to install 2. And it's easy to learn by someone that knows nothing PereLine is only $69.95 Contact PereGrine Data Systems, Inc. 5365 Baron Drive San Jose, CA. 95124 (408) 356-6105 P.S. Did I hear rumors about a bulletin board system in the works? *** ======= 4. Hardware ======================================================= Next issue. I ran out of time... *** ======= 5. The FCC and Packet Switching ==================================== AND THEN THERE WERE NONE by Brock N. Meeks from Microtimes, Aug 1987. I submit that in this age of high-tech high-touch, a new "right" should be defined: the right to low-cost access to information. There is not a moment to waste. On June 10 l987 the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) that will on January 1 l988 push the cost of information access into the stratosphere and guarantee the creation of a new social class: the "information poor." These information poor won't be able to dial into computer databases or commercial online services simply because they won't be able to afford them, not because they don't want them. We're close to that situation now given the current cost of information access, but with the promise of a dramatic rate increase looming on the horizon, the future looks grim. The FCC proposal calls for assessing an additional charge of about $5 an hour for computer telecommunications services that offer enhanced services, such as those provided by U.S. Sprint's Telenet and Tymnet. These enhanced service companies are currently exempt from access charges. The FCC proposes to eliminate this exemption. If the exemption is eliminated you can take the price you pay for every hour of connect time and jack it up by at least five bucks, and probably much more. (Five dollars would likely be the charge if these services just passed on the increase to their users; in reality they will probably raise charges even more to cover administrative charges.) "If this proposal were to go into effect, our country's blossoming information age could whither and die without ever fulfilling its heretofore bright promise," says Paolo Guidi, president of Telenet. Educational institutions will also be harmed, according to Guidi because "they are just now beginning to have affordable information services made available to them." A MATTER OF EQUITY FCC attorney Ruth Milkman told the Commission at the June l0 meeting that the basic theory behind the removal of the current access charge exemption is that if enhanced service providers use local networks to provide interstate services they should pay for the same access and contribute to cost of facilities in the same way as providers of voice services. Milkman adds that the commission realizes that imposing the fee on computer services would not offset the charges on long distance carriers. Rather she says, the FCC merely wants all carriers to pay an equal share for use of the local telephone exchange. The Commissioners were in agreement that the crux of the access charge issue is "a matter of equity," as stated by Commissioner Mimi Weyforth Dawson during the June l0 meeting. "The bottom line here...is that we want the networks to evolve...in response to a consumer demand... not to various subsidies and anomalies," said FCC Chairman Dennis Patrick during the agenda meeting. He added that the information service providers have had plenty of time to get used to the charge and would "bear a heavy burden" to prove they could not deal with it. "We're currently paying about 30 cents an hour effectively for dial-in access" counters Philip Walker a vice president for Telenet. "We buy an ordinary business line for about $30 a month. And we use it about l00 hours. Under (the proposed) access charges, that same dial-in hour of use would cost us about $4.50; that's a factor of 15 increase." What will Telenet do with that added charge? "Pass it on to the consumer, we can't absorb that kind of rate increase" says Walker. TELECO MATH 101 Consumer advocate groups are backing the ruling because they believe it's time that "data users pulled their own weight" according to Sam Simon, president of Issues Dynamics, Inc. a telecommunications policy firm in Washington, D.C. "The proposed access charges are considered common carrier line charges for fixed costs; that is the cost of the local phone companies to maintain their equipment." "After all," says Simon, "voice users, for years, have been saying they are subsidizing new costs to handle data line traffic, costs for services they neither want nor use. "When the BOCs (Bell Operating Companies - local telephone companies) start getting increased revenues from charges on enhanced services, that money will go for fixed costs. As this happens, overall charges will go down, and eventually, the access charges as well." Think again Sam. Let's do some math, and it's rather simple math at that. According to figures obtained from the FCC's traffic analysis branch, long-distance interstate, voice calls rack up 115 billion "conversation minutes" a year. Figures obtained from public records and conversations with officials at various enhanced services put interstate data use at 2.8 billion minutes of data usage a year. Mark Uretsky, a financial analyst with the FCC's traffic analysis branch says that data usage "certainly isn't any bigger than 3% of the (long distance) voice figures. A simple turn of the crank on your adding machine shows that our figures set data usage at 2.5% of voice use, a figure that's even less impressive when you consider that the revenue generated from this extra 2.5% is spread across all the BOCs. That 2.5% Doesn't go very far to maintain those fixed costs. Further, the increased overhead to administer the extra revenue will cut deeply into the 2.5% figure, so the actual increased revenue to BOCs is a somewhat meager 1%. That 1% is not substantial enough to cause the FCC to call for a lowering of access charges. (When the BOCs are treated to larger revenues, it's been the commissions policy to then decrease interstate access rates. However, with only a 1% increase, the FCC is not likely to require a lowering of access rates). the BOCs are handed a windfall profit. Merry Christmas. The BOCs gain; everyone else losses. Long distance voice users don't get lower rates, and data users are handcuffed into paying an astronomical rate increase. And, for the privilege of paying higher rates, data users don't get any increase in quality, quantity or performance! But to the advocates of this proposal, these facts are secondary. Simon, although agreeing that data users will feel the crunch in their wallets, says:"This applied access charge is the only 'fair' thing to do. It makes everyone pay their own way. Equity, not the bottom line, is the real issue here." What Simon and other advocates don't realize is that the ruling will actually create an environment of INEQUITY and discrimination. BITSTREAM DISCRIMINATION One of the potential loopholes in the proposed ruling is the creation of private networks as a bypass. Because there are comparative characteristics of such private networks that perform similar tasks as enhanced service providers, such private networks are likely to be the center of debate during the comment phase of ruling. (By law, the FCC must solicit comments from the public and the industry on any proposed rulings. After the initial comment phase the FCC then re-evaluates the proposal while sending copies of all comments to anyone that provided initial comments. A second round of comments is then worked through before the Commission sets the proposal into law.) Given the potential for private networks, the FCC is likely to be asked to consider what will be the difference in function between electronic mail provided by Telenet, for example, as opposed to one provided internally or through private lines, such as the nationwide private computer service run by General Motors. According to FCC attorney Milkman, the determining factor for applying access charges will be whether switched facilities will be used, such as those used to connect CompuServe or Telenet facilities with the user. No access charges would be assessed if no switched facilities are used, she says. If an entire intracompany network, used to provide enhanced intracompany network, used to provide enhanced services within the company, was on private line, or used no local teleco exchange facilities at all, no access charges would be assessed. "So what this ruling does is set up an inequity among all data processing providers, e-mail providers, or whatever," says Telenet's Walker. "Large companies and information providers "able to afford private lines" are exempted, while those not able to afford their own networks get banged on." INDUSTRY IMPACT Access charges will likely kill innovative services like PC Pursuit and Tymnet's fledgling PC Express network. "These types of services will not be possible under the proposed ruling," said Walker. "We couldn't continue to offer (PC Pursuit) at the current rate." (PC Pursuit presently costs a flat $25 per month for all the online time you can use during non-prime time hours.) Services like PC Pursuit are only possible because users are not "on the clock" when they go online. Joseph Markoski, counsel for ADAPSO, a trade association of data processing services rejects the idea that enhanced service providers (which now pay a subscriber line fee and local business line charge) should be subject to the so-called Common Carrier Line and traffic sensitive charges imposed on long distance companies. He maintains that they are users, not telephone companies. WRITE NOW And then there were none. That could be the information age epitaph of l987, the end of low-cost (or at least semi-reasonable)information services. Fortunately, there is already a groundswell of online activism set in motion on this issue, a signal to Washington that data users are a segment of the population to be reckoned with. The FCC is accepting comments on the ruling. Write to them now. Tell them what you think of the ruling. You can file your comments by writing to: Federal Communications Commission Office of Opinion and Review The Secretary 1919 M Street, NW. Room 222 Washington, D.C. 20554 Refer to "Amendments of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules relating to Enhanced Service Providers CC Docket 87-215." For more information you can call the FCC at (202) 632-7000. HOW TO REPLY TO FCC DOCKETS By Bruce Bergman The following is a do-it-yourself-kit for responding to FCC docket 87-215 regarding amendment of Part 69 relating to Enhanced Service Providers. Before I get started with the actual letter, let me take this opportunity to make a few comments regarding responding to the FCC. In my experience, the following information is useful and important to the success of your response. 1. If you really want to make an impression on the Commissioners, send more than one copy of your response. Send five copies. If you want to make an even better impression, send eleven copies. Five copies makes sure that your vote counts and provides a copy for each of the general groups. Eleven copies will get your document in the 'IN' basket of each Commissioner. If this isn't possible, even one letter counts as a vote. Don't send more than 11. Just 11 will do. 2. Don't send form letters. Form letters are usually not worth the effort you put into them. Why, you ask? Well, while each form letter you send gets counted as a vote, it can be rejected later. If it turns out that we win this round, it is entirely probable that our opponents will ask to go through each and every response. If they can show the 100 responses are identical (or closely similar) with the exception of the signature, the 100 responses can be reduced to only one vote! Make sure your letter is sufficiently different not to get caught by this. 3. Limit your main arguments to one page. If you want to go into more detail, augment your document with additional pages expanding on your original comments, keying to those original points. Number your points. 4. Give reasonable reasons why you oppose this docket. You can't just say that you oppose the rule-making without a sound, reasonable response. Remember that the opposition will read each and every response you send, if it can benefit them. We don't have that type of financial backing; they do. 5. Make a statement about who you are and what you do. If you have a certain expertise, or if you have a degree of some sort, tell them that. It counts a lot for what the commissioners think if they know you are someone who knows what you are talking about. if you run a service, are an administrator, offer services to the public, etc., briefly describe what you do and why. 6. Double-space your document. This can make the difference between your response's being read or just counted! If your response is clear, double-spaced, and concise, it will be read and given a better subjective value. 7. Get your neighbors into the act. If your friends and/or neighbors are familiar with and support you and your activities, ask them to write a letter to the FCC expressing their concern over how this docket might affect your community. If you can get local officials to do the same, great! Letterhead and many copies make the best response. 8. Make sure the date is on the document. It is important that the reader be made aware that this isn't an old response. Put the date on your document. And of course don't ever forget to put the docket number at the top! Lastly, remember that this is going to be a very important point in future rule-making efforts. Any time the FCC wins a battle, whether by apathy or some other means, it is a big step for them in the future. If the FCC decides in favor of this docket, it's likely that you will see more of the same type later on. Private agencies will see how easily it went over and base future requests on that information. if we win, it will make it tough for anyone to raise the issue again. if a specific proposal fails to make it through a certain number of times (because of the public's efforts), the commissioners tend to not reconsider it again during their term. THE LETTER Basically you will want to create a letter which has the name of the FCC at the top, as well as a clear pointer to the docket number. Here's a sample first page header: Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of GENERAL DOCKET 87-215 Amendment of Part 69 of the Commission's Rules relating to Enhanced Service Providers TO: The Commission COMMENTS OF (your full name), (any professional titles). After you have created the header, you can begin your text, double- spaced. Begin by expressing who you are and any specific titles, duties, or responsibilities that might qualify you as someone who has a vested interest in what's going before the FCC's consideration. Even stating that you're a user of a network is suitable. Now is not the time to be humble, however. Just tactfully explain what makes you significant to this proposal. You're out to make an impression. Do so! (Don't be verbose, however.) Then, begin listing the reasons (numbered) why you oppose this proposal. The more reasonable, the better. Be concise and clear. If you need to go into detail, refer the reader to attached pages. Here's an example: I am a user of an Enhanced Service Provider. I frequently make use of such services to obtain information from computer information services that would otherwise be unavailable to me. The information I obtain allows me to (something...). After you've explained who you are, and have shown why you have an interest to this docket, continue with: I strongly oppose the Commission's proposal to surcharge Enhanced Service Providers for the following reasons: 1. (reason one). 2. (reason two). 3. (whatever comments you feel appropriate.) Remember, you don't need to be verbose to get your point across. You want to make sure the reader understands why you feel the way you do. If you need additional material in order to accomplish this, feel free to include additional pages; however, if you are only interested in making your feelings known and don't want to get really in-dept, the simple statements like the ones pictured above are sufficient to make your point. Where you can refer to the text of the original document, do so! This is great for those who like to know exactly what you are referring to. it also shows that you have done your homework and are not just spouting off. The best mode of attack in instances like this is to first explain why you are against the proposal. Once you have made it clear that there are good reasons why this wouldn't be a good thing, suggesting alternate ideas. It can go a long way towards helping your arguments if you can suggest a viable alternative. Finally, follow up your reasons with a nice suffix like: Respectfully submitted, (Sign in BLACK INK) (Your spelled-out name and title) (Your street address) (Your city, state, and ZIP code) (The date) Black ink is important when you sign your response. Also, make sure that you send the original. Copies for yourself, originals to the people you are writing to. Make sure you sign and date your letter. If you have included additional pages, it would be wise to include a trailer at the bottom of each page, designating what page out of the total number of pages this is. Example: Responses to General Docket 87-215 Page 1 of 3 Finally, place a return address on your envelope, place the correct postage on it, and mail it soon. If you can spend the extra cash, don't fold your responses; mail them in a larger manila envelope and keep them flat. This is especially useful if you are sending multiple copies. Chances are that it will get there in one piece, and will look great sitting on the desk of some Commissioner (flat). The key point to remember is that you are out to make a valid point about the docket. You don't want to sound like you don't know what you're talking about, so be sure of your facts. You can best do this by being concise, clear, correct, and impressive. The impressive part comes to bear when you consider arrangement and looks of your document as well as your status in the topic under consideration *** ======= 6. System Spotlight ================================================ Enable Electronics BBS Vince Endter (sysop), Bryan Fitzwater (owner; sysop). This is probably not the bbs to call to chat with someone since there's seldom anyone watching the monitor. And you won't get civil answers in the message base to questions about Dungeons & Dragons problems, but if you're having hardware problems these guys do it all, from building custom clones to repairing IBM monitors. They fix Commodore, Atari, Morrow, IBM, Osborn, and Eagle computers; disk drives, hard disks, and monitors all the time. They fix, sell, and install aftermarket add-ons such as large hard disks, mother boards, controller cards, CGA; EGA boards, and modems. They have competitive prices on hardware and give free estimates on repair work. Bryan trained flight technicians for the U.S. Navy and worked for Amdahl computers before he started his own business so he's worked on just about everything in the way of computer electronics. You can leave a message about your problems on the bbs and often get an idea of what's wrong and/or how much it will cost to fixed it. Or check prices such as a new EGA board and multiscan monitor for your clone. Since they're working with the latest hardware they're aware of many strengths and weeknesses of new brand name products such as how the Phoenix BIOS cured some of the ills Big Blue had. Enable is starting a series of "workshops" on software too. The first one is on basic Lotus 1-2-3 (with yours truly as instructor). It will be slanted more towards those that have very little experience with computers and want to do spreadsheet data entry at work. It will soon be expanded to include advanced spreadsheet functions, macros and graphs though. Some of you may get a chuckle out of this, but there will also be workshops on basic and advanced WordStar that include the use of mailmerge for form letters and mailing lists. There's an ever increasing demand for people that know how to use WordStar. They also have PD software to go with that new CGA or EGA system, color games, utilities, pictures for your new graphics package. RAM enhancement utilities to set up RAM disks and Print spoolers. You can download it like any bbs or bring your blank floppies with you when you come in. Send SASE to: Enable Electronics 1580 Old Oakland Road Suite C-106 San Jose, CA. 95131 (408) 998-8821 And receive a list of PD software available with short descriptions of what each does. Enable BBS, 30Mb (408) 998-8927 300-1200 baud, 24 hours 8N1 (8 data bits, no paraity, 1 stop bit) *** ======= 7. Humor =========================================================== Two distinguished looking ladies were window shopping and talking. One turned to the other and asked "Do you smoke after sex?" Her friend replied, "Gee I don't know, I never looked!!" *** ======= 8. PRACSA News ===================================================== A vote was taken and carried that PRACSA "recommends" all members write letters to the FCC in opposition to the new proposal. The first motion was to have Dave McCord McCord (PRACSA Pres.) write one letter. Dave said if the vote was carried he would write the letter, but he was personally in favor of the proposal and when the vote was taken he voted against the "recommendation". I dropped by Echelon headquarters in Los Altos this month and among other things Dave and I talked about his views on the FCC proposal (or what ever their calling it this time). When the conversation turned to the FCC the first thing Dave asked was, "do you use any of the big services?" I said I didn't, I don't even use PC Pursuit. I just make my calls and pay the bill. Dave said that the majority are the same way, they make their calls and pay long distance rates like I do and that the ruling would not effect them or systems like the Well either since the Well isn't part of an interstate network. He told me PC Pursuit's prime-time users pay the overhead + and since the off-hour users were pure gravy they could easily cover at the very least a good portion of the increase. And the big outfits could cover all of it. When you stop to think about it, at $ .30 per hour you would have to use PC Pursuit over 83 hours a month to get them upside down on the bill. At $4.50 one would have about 5.5 hours of padding, split the difference and make it $25.00 a month for ten hours. And Dave feels that if push comes to shove PC Pursuit and other data service suppliers such as Compuserve and the Source will shoulder just as much of the cost as they have to to stay in the game. Dave explained that its the big outfits that get to use the lines for 30 cents an hour and they don't pass the savings along to the end user. The last modem I got came with a starter pack for Compuserve with no subscription fee. All I'm charged is $15.00 per hour prime time or $12.00 standard/evening (at 1200 baud), $22.50 prime-time and $19.00 standard/evening at (2400 baud), plus $ .25 per hour for Telenet (there's the $ .30 were talking about). Gee whiz, what a deal, half the services they offer are $2.00 an hour in addition to the base charge. With the Source I have to send $12.95 for their SourcePack users manual (that's $7.00 off the regular price) and that's just to find out how much they charge. So Dave's contention seems to be, that it's time the biggies shouldered their rightful share of the cost to keep up the phone lines, stop sponging off everyone that makes long distance calls, also Brock Meeks is confused if he truly thinks the FCC is trying to lay it on the backs of the citizens. What Dave had to say makes sense to me. personally, I never could see where the FCC's ruling would have any dollar effect on the calls I make anyway. I thought about signing up for PC Pursuit since I first heard about it (almost two years ago) but it never seemed worth the headaches. *** The proposed merger with PICO-NET has been stalled for several months now due to PecoNet's inability to produce records of their non-profit corporate standing with the Infernal Revenue Service. Howard Stateman contacted the IRS for information concerning PicoNet's situation and this is his report. PicoNet/IRS "5/21 I received a letter from the IRS stating that there's a law against releasing information on what a non-profit corporation has been charged in penalties for late filings. However, in a follow-up phone call, the Fresno district office confirmed that PicoNet has not filled a tax return since December, 1984. I asked what the statutory penalty was for late filling, and the IRS officer said it was $10 a day, but this penalty can be waived depending on the circumstances. He said that although PicoNet would not owe any taxes unless they earned @25,00 or more per year, they still are required to file". A vote was carried unanimously to discontinue further efforts concerning PicoNet. *** ====== 9. Classified Ads ================================================== COMPLETE SMALL BUSINESS SYSTEM (used) Morrow MD-11 with Digital Research's CP/M Plus 3.0 operating system 11 meg. hard drive 384k Full Height Floppy NewWord word processor (like WordStar) with Spelling Corrector Mail Merge Personal Pearl data base management system SuperCalc spreadsheet Mbasic MicroSoft basic Pilot programming language Complete with a full set of NEW reference books for all software. $1000 Freedom 110 smart terminal by Liberty (emulates several different terminals). Is a computer in itself. $125 (with MD-11) ***