Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Microsoft ending newsgroup support

51 views
Skip to first unread message

MP

unread,
May 4, 2010, 9:22:36 PM5/4/10
to
Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style
newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forums
such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.

Although venerable, Microsoft said that so-called NNTP newsgroups are past
their time in terms of being usable and secure.

Link:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.htm

Mike P

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 4, 2010, 9:47:11 PM5/4/10
to
This is sad. What is worse, they have an "NNTP bridge" mechanism (I found it on
http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums ) that is supposed to let us use our
professionally-designed and professionally-written news readers (instead of having to use
the first-draft amateur efforts they call a "forum") but when you go to the page to
download it, the page is COMPLETELY BLANK! How hard is it, really, to create a page with
a download button or a download hyperlink that WORKS? It ain't Rocket Science here,
guys, and why is it that Microsoft so misunderstands the Internet that they can't create a
simple download?

They make silly meaningless noises about something they call "security" but they STILL try
to run client-side scripts, which are always the mark of a sociopathic Web designer. You
don't need scripts to do simple downloads, and it is silly to require this! I actually
believe in security, and anyone who wants security should disable all forms of client-side
scripting (the preferred attack vector these days). Anyone who demands to use their Web
site it is sick.
joe

Joseph M. Newcomer [MVP]
email: newc...@flounder.com
Web: http://www.flounder.com
MVP Tips: http://www.flounder.com/mvp_tips.htm

Hector Santos

unread,
May 4, 2010, 10:04:45 PM5/4/10
to
MP wrote:


IMO, this is a poor decision made by some one is basically clueless at
Microsoft about the history of cyber-space communications and
technical support.

Unfortunately, they are tasting the water, waiting for feedback, and
unless there is an outcry, they will move to the next step.

Are they just really saying that they own employees and advising the
MVPs to use the new system instead of the NTTP groups?

But I also believe they are trying to keep the "GOOGLEs" and other
systems from mirroring what they deem is "Data Mining" Microsoft IP
material.

Maybe all they needed to do was CUT DOWN on the newsgroups. There are
certainly many groups that was more productive and with high quality
than most of the others.

This is, again, a bad decision by some HUMAN at Microsoft who got a
bug up his ass to "change things" under the name of "consolidation and
control" without really thinking about the repercussions.

Anyway, this will drastically alter the landscape and if anything,
begin to eliminate a lot of people from the support process. I
suddenly feeling less enthusiastic about developing products for
Microsoft OSe or "devices" only.

--
HLS

David Ching

unread,
May 4, 2010, 10:20:59 PM5/4/10
to
"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newc...@flounder.com> wrote in message
news:3hi1u517hmbrh029m...@4ax.com...

> This is sad. What is worse, they have an "NNTP bridge" mechanism (I found
> it on
> http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums ) that is supposed to let us
> use our
> professionally-designed and professionally-written news readers (instead
> of having to use
> the first-draft amateur efforts they call a "forum") but when you go to
> the page to
> download it, the page is COMPLETELY BLANK!

It works for me. Dare I say it? You may need to have Javascript enabled!
:-O

-- David

David Ching

unread,
May 4, 2010, 10:22:51 PM5/4/10
to
"MP" <mpNo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:esIqxF$6KHA...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style
> newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forums
> such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>

There is an MFC forum:
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vcmfcatl/threads

Hope to see you there! And do check out the NNTP bridge:
https://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums

-- David

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 4, 2010, 11:59:28 PM5/4/10
to
But JavaScript is an antisocial technology that cannot be trusted. I have been taken out
by JavaVirus attacks, and in the five years since I put three layers of firewall in (two
of which strip out JavaVirus scripts) I have had no security problems. Only sociopaths
require JavaVirus to access a Web site, and only a moron would use it to replace a simple
"download" link.
joe

David Ching

unread,
May 5, 2010, 1:55:16 AM5/5/10
to
"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newc...@flounder.com> wrote in message
news:a5r1u5p62t7k54p1s...@4ax.com...

> But JavaScript is an antisocial technology that cannot be trusted. I have
> been taken out
> by JavaVirus attacks, and in the five years since I put three layers of
> firewall in (two
> of which strip out JavaVirus scripts) I have had no security problems.
> Only sociopaths
> require JavaVirus to access a Web site, and only a moron would use it to
> replace a simple
> "download" link.

I just wanted to make clear that most people have no trouble downloading the
bridge.

-- David

Goran

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:45:18 AM5/5/10
to
On May 5, 3:22 am, "MP" <mpNoS...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style
> newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forums
> such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>
> Although venerable, Microsoft said that so-called NNTP newsgroups are past
> their time in terms of being usable and secure.

I don't like this one bit. As Joe said, a dedicated NNTP client beats
the hell out of any "forum" software. That's one reason against the
decision. Another is that some people (me included) are accessing this
through Google Groups (and I am sure that there are other sources). I
prefer the format, for familiarity, for one, and also, I don't care
logging on with a Passport account (I have one that I don't use much).

Perhaps I'll just stop coming here. Oh well.

Goran.

Goran

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:47:31 AM5/5/10
to
On May 5, 5:59 am, Joseph M. Newcomer <newco...@flounder.com> wrote:
> But JavaScript is an antisocial technology that cannot be trusted.  I have been taken out
> by JavaVirus attacks, and in the five years since I put three layers of firewall in (two
> of which strip out JavaVirus scripts) I have had no security problems.  Only sociopaths
> require JavaVirus to access a Web site, and only a moron would use it to replace a simple
> "download" link.
>                                 joe

I don't like Javascript neither (I run ScriptBlock, AdBlock and Flash
Block), but come on, it's not sociopaths. Rather, apply Hanlon's
razor.

Goran.

David Lowndes

unread,
May 5, 2010, 3:08:14 AM5/5/10
to
>Unfortunately, they are tasting the water, waiting for feedback, and
>unless there is an outcry, they will move to the next step.

Maybe what's needed is an outcry similar to the one when the MVP
program was to be axed several years ago?

>Are they just really saying that they own employees and advising the
>MVPs to use the new system instead of the NTTP groups?

From the feedback with using the NNTP bridge we know some softies are
far from happy about the inefficiency of using the forums to help
users.

Dave

Bo Persson

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:13:40 PM5/5/10
to
David Ching wrote:
> "MP" <mpNo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:esIqxF$6KHA...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000
>> old-style newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to
>> discussion forums such as those found on the Microsoft Answers,
>> TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>
> There is an MFC forum:
> http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vcmfcatl/threads

I don't like the flashy and slow interface of forums. That's why I pay
extra to get a news access.


> Hope to see you there! And do check out the NNTP bridge:
> https://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums
>

So Microsoft is closing down their NNTP server and then asks me to run
my own? Come on!


Bo Persson


Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:52:10 PM5/5/10
to
See below....

****
Is this the "never ascribe to malice what can be accounted for by simple incompetence"
criterion?

Actually a sociopath is not malicious, merely incapable of empathy with others. The
choice of word was very careful. And anyone who would replace a simple "download" link
with a complex script is clearly incompetent.

[The analogy I use: what if UPS insisted they would not deliver a package to your home
unless you left your front door unlocked so they could put it inside? How long do you
think they would last? "Trust us, our drivers are all background-checked and bonded". The
amateurish design of IE which does not allow me to grant specific privileges to specific
Web sites (instead, having only one category "trusted sites", into which all trust is the
same---clearly a design done by a newbie---is, to put it mildly, totally inadequate]

However, in checking the definition, I found the definition of psychopath:

psychopaths "use charisma, manipulation, intimidation, sexual intercourse and violence" to
control others and to satisfy their own needs. Hare states that: "Lacking in conscience
and empathy, they take what they want and do as they please, violating social norms and
expectations without guilt or remorse". He previously stated that: "What is missing, in
other words, are the very qualities that allow a human being to live in social harmony"

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy)

Doesn't this seem to describe someone who would force us to use badly-designed forums? The
lack of empathy is what produced the VS IDE. A lack of empathy combined with zero
experience and a lack of any adult supervision is not a good combination for producing
quality interfaces.
joe
***
>
>Goran.

Ajay Kalra

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:53:44 PM5/5/10
to

Truly sad. I dont really understand the reasons.

--
Ajay

Ajay Kalra

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:55:58 PM5/5/10
to

I already dont feel like taking the step of using the bridge. This
era is coming to a rather abrupt end.

--
Ajay

Ajay Kalra

unread,
May 5, 2010, 2:57:48 PM5/5/10
to

Is this going to be the new place for those who are here?

--
Ajay

Ajay Kalra

unread,
May 5, 2010, 3:01:27 PM5/5/10
to
On May 4, 10:22 pm, "David Ching" <d...@remove-this.dcsoft.com> wrote:
> "MP" <mpNoS...@gmail.com> wrote in message

>
> news:esIqxF$6KHA...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> > Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style
> > newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forums
> > such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>
> There is an MFC forum:http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vcmfcatl/threads

It already knew who I was as I had logged in using the Live ID. I
guess MSFT is getting everyone all under one big umbrella.

--
Ajay

David Lowndes

unread,
May 5, 2010, 3:26:15 PM5/5/10
to
>I already dont feel like taking the step of using the bridge. This
>era is coming to a rather abrupt end.

I've been trying to use the NNTP bridge with the forums, but quite
frankly it's still a poor solution compared to using a proper NNTP
source. I don't think I can be bothered much more.

Dave

Giovanni Dicanio

unread,
May 5, 2010, 3:36:02 PM5/5/10
to
"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newc...@flounder.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:qt23u55s551a96vft...@4ax.com...

> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy)
>
> Doesn't this seem to describe someone who would force us to use
> badly-designed forums? The
> lack of empathy is what produced the VS IDE.

While there are some aspects I don't like in the new IDE, there are others
that are great.
For example, I like the C++ squiggles feature which appeared in VS2010!

BTW: I agree with you on the NNTP-bridge thing (I prefer pure NNTP
newsgroups like this one).
And one of the problems of the web forum interface is the lack of threading
view (they are "flat"); there are also problems in using the quoting tool in
the web-based editor.

And yes, I fail to understand the reason why there is no simple download
link to get the bridge binaries... Useless complexity in requiring login
before downloading :)

Giovanni

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 5:52:33 PM5/5/10
to
David Lowndes wrote:


It is really getting tiresome. What makes this difficult is that its
really one man's decision and certainly they have not thought out
completely. But this type of new direction was precisely why I was
concern when Ozzie took over.

We develop sell electronic mail and forum software, and I've seen all
angles to it as a vendor and also provider, we use it for support as
well. And been doing this since the 80s.

Once upon a time, it was all local support, then it your have internet
integration.

Admittingly, it is difficult to single source it not only from a
development standpoint but from an operations and customer support
standpoint. I can understand it from a SMALL VENDOR standpoint, but
not Microsoft.

Case in point, ourselves.

We developed, sold and used our own Online Support system. Users
could connect via:

Dialup first only.
Then Dialup Connetion (PPP)
Then a native GUI frontend (free) was offer
Then a WEB interface offering was made
Wildcat! Exchange (hook into Outlook Exchange, MAPI)

These were still Online Mail, then offline mail technology via RFC:

POP3/SMTP <-- store and forward
IMAP <-- still a online concept
NNTP <-- still an online concept with local cachine
LIST MAIL <-- Email based Group ware

So from a support standpoint, we offerre all various ways to support
users. When the RFC methods appear, there was "some lost" of control,
it was no longer a strong "centralized concept" with the exception of
IMAP.

But you have also the other angle of support levels:

Free
Subscription levels

And there also the concept of USER SUPPORTED areas, your own customers
supporting others.

Lets not forget where Ozzie came from - Lotus Notes - the very essence
of centralize control and group ware communications.

In short, they are behaving as if they are a small vendor and doesn't
have the technology to properly integrate the diverse nature of
electronic support. Like if the easiest thing as a small vendor is to
use one method only and make a hard decision to alienate decades of
diversity for support and connectivity.

Don't get me wrong, they can still do what they want but they need to
have ready the different ways people can connect and access
(upload/download) information and do so properly.

So the reasons are far from just being technical here, but one of
consolidation and honestly some bug up someone butt who think he can
redirect Microsoft into a new era by forgetting decades of diverse
support methods.

I didn't know they tried to get rid of the MVP group. If that was the
case, then indeed they are trying to create a new model for technical
support that will come with different fee based support tiers. They
can't afford (liability wise) to have MVP people deal with Enterprise
people for example, that has to come from internal employees only.

Like I said, I am personally tired of they new directions in many
areas and they are making it very difficult to dedicate to Microsoft
only.

They really need a support manager that understands all this and is
not just a FaceBook and Twitter a-hole. That is where all this
mindset is coming from.

--
HLS

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:10:48 PM5/5/10
to

Ajay Kalra wrote:

Do you know if the have a API (REST for example) for accessing the
Microsoft Forums network?

Lets remember, the key thing here or lost is there NNTP server
network. That is what is the key thing is.

If they plan is to just separate the internal employee support from
the NNTP groups but keep the NNTP services active for user support
(and MVP) usage, then nothing much is going to be lost. The worst
that can happen is that they won't bother with filters and the
Microsoft "sponsored" NNTP groups will begin to mold into alt.* usenet
groups with is completely whack. IOW, there has to be some level of
filtering or moderations (if only for filtering spam/porn purposes).

But if they kill the NNTP servers, then that changes the picture in
drastic ways.

In short, it really not about NNTP but rather offing a centralized
storage system that allows different connectivities, different ways
that people can use it. Each method is not going to provide the same
level information, i.e, the extra info a view of the forums provide as
oppose what is lost with a NNTP or RFC 2822 view. But that shouldn't
be a problem technically. When a message is extract, they can use
X-Headers to expose this information.

The problem, a common discussion in the IETF 2822/2822 group is that
there aren't enough clients that would support these X-HEADERS that a
server might expose.

So the only way you can do that today is with a online rendering and
presentation - i.e. an online web access.

Unless Microsoft does this right with providing an protocol and API,
there won't be any incentive for alternative connection/viewing
methods. It would be web access only with a poor NNTP bridge.

They need to have a protocol so that 3rd party MUA vendors and
gateways can be developed that support the "extra" information.

--
HLS

Tom Serface

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:20:30 PM5/5/10
to
I've just been using the web interface and it's not so bad once you get
used to it. I have to be careful not to accidentally do something that
makes it go "back" or I lose everything I've typed and offline work is not
possible, but it's not too bad.

Tom

"David Lowndes" <Dav...@example.invalid> wrote in message
news:ceh3u5lbi4u34titg...@4ax.com...

Tom Serface

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:20:48 PM5/5/10
to
Yes

"Ajay Kalra" <ajay...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:666081b1-e5bc-4e9a...@l28g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...

David Lowndes

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:27:24 PM5/5/10
to
>I've just been using the web interface and it's not so bad once you get
>used to it. I have to be careful not to accidentally do something that
>makes it go "back" or I lose everything I've typed and offline work is not
>possible, but it's not too bad.

It's OK for asking questions, but I really can't face it for answering
- life's too short.

Dave

David Lowndes

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:28:39 PM5/5/10
to
>I can understand it from a SMALL VENDOR standpoint, but
>not Microsoft.

Unfortunately big companies tend to make big decisions :(

Dave

Stephen Wolstenholme

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:36:42 PM5/5/10
to

Reliable bridging solutions like MPNews have been around for years.
Microsoft could use an existing solution rather than reinventing the
wheel.

Steve

--
Neural Planner Software Ltd www.NPSL1.com
EasyNN-plus. Neural Networks plus. www.easynn.com
SwingNN. Forecast with Neural Networks. www.swingnn.com
JustNN. Just Neural Networks. www.justnn.com

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:37:12 PM5/5/10
to
David Ching wrote:

I just installed it and it can't handle my login it displays some
"exception box", although I was able (and required) to login at the
connect web site to even download it.

Also, this is not a MICROSOFT DEVELOPED product.

HOW DARE MICROSOFT CHANGE THERE SUPPORT SYSTEM AND OFFER A BROKEN 3RD
PARTY DEVELOPED PRODUCT IN ORDER TO KEEP WITH CURRENT CUSTOMER
PREFERRED MUA ACCESS?

They need to TAKE control of this!

--
HLS

Randall

unread,
May 5, 2010, 6:58:47 PM5/5/10
to
In article <0968667e-66c8-42d2...@h9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
Ajay Kalra says...

>
>On May 4, 9:22=A0pm, "MP" <mpNoS...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style
>> newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forum=

>s
>> such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>>
>> Although venerable, Microsoft said that so-called NNTP newsgroups are pas=

>t
>> their time in terms of being usable and secure.
>>
>> Link:
>>
>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20004109-56.htm
>>
>> Mike P
>
>Truly sad. I dont really understand the reasons.

It is sad and it sucks. The move solely benefits Microsoft by driving traffic
through their sites rather than an outside community (Usenet)... they can
control the content, and they can profit from the traffic.

Many web-based discussion forums are cumbersome to use, require the acceptance
of intrusive applications, and they collect a fair amount of personal data, so
it's funny to hear Microsoft condemn Usenet for not being usable and secure lol.

I prefer Usenet to the above mentioned alternatives, and will continue to use
them. I picked up a paid account with a dedicated Usenet provider (newsguy.com)
awhile back so I didn't have to worry about my ISP or free resources dropping
newsgroups at some point.

For what it's worth I get 12 months for $19, binary & text groups, NNTP & Web
access, newsgroup search engine, free SSL, tech support. Wasn't crazy about
paying for Usenet, but it works out to about a $1.60 month so it's not exactly
breaking the bank lol.

Randy

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 7:38:37 PM5/5/10
to
I was able to finally login into the bridge (once I change my profile
settings at the web site) and was able create a MUA (Thunderbird) NNTP
account to the local host server. Slow as molasses

Man, Microsoft should of came to us to private single source gateway
software that support NNTP, WEB, NATIVE GUI and EVEN TELNET TEXT.

If they are going to dump the NNTP servers, then they need to OPEN UP
THE WEB SERVER/REST API.

It would be totally unfair to only allow exclusivity solely to a 3rd
party NNTP Bridge vendor. It really SUCKS that Microsoft is allowing
this to happen.

I'm going by what it says in the bridge login box:

You are logging into (Microsoft Forums NntpBridge) which is
not a Microsoft developed application.

Finally, I don't see any merging of the existing NNTP forums with the
MS Web Forums. Was that suppose to be the case? I don't see it.

If that was not the case, then I don't see any reason why they can
continue to sponsor NNTP servers with the current open NNTP newsgroups
and continue to allow it to be USER/MVP supported. If Microsoft
doesn't want to allow their employees to participate in the newsgroups
anymore, then fine, don't allow them. Its not like they are have any
high participation rate anyway. But that shouldn't be a reason to
stop offering the long time NNTP based microsoft newsgroups.

People, if we really want this then we need to find out if Microsoft
is open to keeping the NNTP servers active but that might mean on
proposing how they be managed.


--
HLS

Geoff

unread,
May 5, 2010, 7:58:14 PM5/5/10
to
On Wed, 05 May 2010 19:38:37 -0400, Hector Santos
<sant...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

>
>Finally, I don't see any merging of the existing NNTP forums with the
>MS Web Forums. Was that suppose to be the case? I don't see it.

I don't see very many threads on the web side that clearly exist on
the NNTP side.

>
>If that was not the case, then I don't see any reason why they can
>continue to sponsor NNTP servers with the current open NNTP newsgroups
>and continue to allow it to be USER/MVP supported. If Microsoft
>doesn't want to allow their employees to participate in the newsgroups
>anymore, then fine, don't allow them. Its not like they are have any
>high participation rate anyway. But that shouldn't be a reason to
>stop offering the long time NNTP based microsoft newsgroups.
>
>People, if we really want this then we need to find out if Microsoft
>is open to keeping the NNTP servers active but that might mean on
>proposing how they be managed.

Why all this discussion? Bridged or not, the web forums will be
proprietary to MS and controlled by them. I see this as mostly a move
to exclude Google Groups from participation in the forums and a
closure of the support system from a global resource to a private one
that MS can censor or close at their discretion.

The microsoft.public.* groups exist on NNTP servers around the globe
whether or not the Microsoft NNTP servers exist or not. Unless
Microsoft is prepared to make demands on those providers that the
groups be deleted I see no reason to abandon use of the groups on
other servers.

David Ching

unread,
May 5, 2010, 8:27:48 PM5/5/10
to
"Hector Santos" <sant...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eDihewK7...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> I was able to finally login into the bridge (once I change my profile
> settings at the web site)

To be fair, there were pretty clear instructions before downloading the
bridge that you needed to change your profile, so this hopefully will not be
a hindrance to others.


> and was able create a MUA (Thunderbird) NNTP account to the local host
> server. Slow as molasses
>

Yup, forum traffic is typically low so after the first download, you
typically won't wait long. Compared to how long and tedious navigating the
forums are in a browser, I'd rather let this go for a few hours and not be
bothered.


> Man, Microsoft should of came to us to private single source gateway
> software that support NNTP, WEB, NATIVE GUI and EVEN TELNET TEXT.
>
> If they are going to dump the NNTP servers, then they need to OPEN UP THE
> WEB SERVER/REST API.
>
> It would be totally unfair to only allow exclusivity solely to a 3rd party
> NNTP Bridge vendor. It really SUCKS that Microsoft is allowing this to
> happen.
>
> I'm going by what it says in the bridge login box:
>
> You are logging into (Microsoft Forums NntpBridge) which is
> not a Microsoft developed application.
>

I hadn't noticed that before and have asked MS for an explanation. Will get
back to you. I certainly got the idea that the bridge was developed
in-house at MS.


> Finally, I don't see any merging of the existing NNTP forums with the MS
> Web Forums. Was that suppose to be the case? I don't see it.
>

No, for example I listed the equivalent MFC forum for this newsgroup, no
attempt will be made to merge the content or community of this one.


> If that was not the case, then I don't see any reason why they can
> continue to sponsor NNTP servers with the current open NNTP newsgroups and
> continue to allow it to be USER/MVP supported. If Microsoft doesn't want
> to allow their employees to participate in the newsgroups anymore, then
> fine, don't allow them. Its not like they are have any high participation
> rate anyway. But that shouldn't be a reason to stop offering the long
> time NNTP based microsoft newsgroups.
>

I hadn't heard the primary mover was stopping MS employees from
contributing. I had heard the current NNTP news servers had something to do
with some discontinued Exchange product, and while those could have been
replaced, there are other advantages to MS of moving to forums. First,
people who ask questions (as opposed to answering a ton of them) find the
web interface easier. (True enough, no need to deal with an NNTP client.)
Second, MS has clearer ownership of property and might leverage it on Bing
(and hide it from Google, or something). Third, NNTP doesn't support things
like ratings, moderators, marking answers, points, moving of threads, etc.
(The value of such things are debatable, but no denying NNTP doesn't support
them.)


> People, if we really want this then we need to find out if Microsoft is
> open to keeping the NNTP servers active but that might mean on proposing
> how they be managed.
>

I don't believe they are, this has been a battle (with MVP's championing
NNTP) for several years, and it looks like we have lost.

But at least our cries have netted the NNTP Bridge, which I think everyone
will agree is small condolence but better than nothing.

I will miss this newsgroup. The equivalent forum is lacking in community
spirit (though that may improve as hopefully all of us migrate there).

-- David

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:22:54 PM5/5/10
to
See below,..

On Wed, 5 May 2010 21:36:02 +0200, "Giovanni Dicanio"
<giovanniD...@REMOVEMEgmail.com> wrote:

>"Joseph M. Newcomer" <newc...@flounder.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
>news:qt23u55s551a96vft...@4ax.com...
>
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy)
>>
>> Doesn't this seem to describe someone who would force us to use
>> badly-designed forums? The
>> lack of empathy is what produced the VS IDE.
>
>While there are some aspects I don't like in the new IDE, there are others
>that are great.

****
I am primarily referring to the massive modality; to do certain actions, to see certain
things, you must FIRST get yourself in to the right mode, and the modality is implicit
rather than explicit; you have to GUESS what mode you are in, and GUESS what mode you WISH
to be in! We knew modal interfaces sucked 30 years ago, but the VS IDE added modality
*****


>For example, I like the C++ squiggles feature which appeared in VS2010!

****
And what makes this powerful is that it is NON-MODAL!
****


>
>BTW: I agree with you on the NNTP-bridge thing (I prefer pure NNTP
>newsgroups like this one).
>And one of the problems of the web forum interface is the lack of threading
>view (they are "flat"); there are also problems in using the quoting tool in
>the web-based editor.

*****
Let us say that the designer had a very sick sense of humor. Most of the design shows a
design done by someone who never ONCE used a threaded newsgroup reader! This is what
happens when you turn design loose on people with insufficient experience; they don't
understand what is and is not important! Where is the adult supervision?
*****


>
>And yes, I fail to understand the reason why there is no simple download
>link to get the bridge binaries... Useless complexity in requiring login
>before downloading :)

*****
Anyone who could design a forum interface as bad as the one we see is not afraid to
subject end users to gratuitous complexity!
joe
*****
>
>Giovanni

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:37:49 PM5/5/10
to
Years ago, the only hit google would deliver for my name was a quote I made that someone
posted, which went something like

"I don't mind people reinventing the wheel, but I do tire of trapezoidal wheels with
offset axles"

I don't know how much of what I know is covered still by my NDA, so I won't say anything
based on that information, but simply offer an opnion I've offered before: it appears
that there is a history of technology at Microsoft being controlled not by people who
cared about providing solutions, but by people who had political axes to grind about Doing
It My Way Or No Way. Whose jobs at Microsoft seem to hinge on their ability to "make
visible change" whether visible change makes sense or not. When IBM achieved this, they
essentially suicided the company, because people who knew better ways to do things ignored
them. I was fired in 1990 because IBM terminated a research contract I was working under,
because they had to retrench after losing US$5,000,000,000.00, and a million-dollar
University research contract was low-hanging fruit to the cost-cutters. 30 people lost
their jobs. But what had happened was IBM had taken a high-handed approach to how they
sold, serviced, and designed software, and the customer base walked away. It scares me
that Microsoft is now behaving like IBM of the 1960s-1980s (when I was at various times an
IBM customer, or more properly, worked for someone who had IBM equipment for which I had
some kind of responsibiity). I remember my boss getting into a shouting match at an IBM
conference with the IBM rep, who simply REFUSED to hear that a recent IBM decision was
causing immense problems (we later bought mainframes from Digital, that repeated the same
disaster in the 1980s-1990s, until they were so weakened that Compaq bought them!) Sun
did something similar in the 2000s, and they are now owned by Oracle. These were BIG
companies that failed because they got too arrogant. And decided that internal egos were
more important than happy customers.

I do not want to see this happen to Microsoft, but I don't know what we can do to stop it!
joe

On Wed, 05 May 2010 23:36:42 +0100, Stephen Wolstenholme <st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk>
wrote:

>On Wed, 05 May 2010 20:26:15 +0100, David Lowndes
><Dav...@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>I already dont feel like taking the step of using the bridge. This
>>>era is coming to a rather abrupt end.
>>
>>I've been trying to use the NNTP bridge with the forums, but quite
>>frankly it's still a poor solution compared to using a proper NNTP
>>source. I don't think I can be bothered much more.
>>
>>Dave
>
>Reliable bridging solutions like MPNews have been around for years.
>Microsoft could use an existing solution rather than reinventing the
>wheel.
>
>Steve

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:37:24 PM5/5/10
to
David Ching wrote:

> "Hector Santos" <sant...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:eDihewK7...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I was able to finally login into the bridge (once I change my profile
>> settings at the web site)
>
> To be fair, there were pretty clear instructions before downloading the
> bridge that you needed to change your profile, so this hopefully will
> not be a hindrance to others.


The directions are clear on what to do, but not clear in how to get
there and I'm an expert and know that to look for. :) But it took me
about 10-15 minutes to finally find that "My Settings" where that "Use
NNTP Bridge" check box is located.

Two basic instructions for needed for NNTP MUA accustom users:

1) How to get to that checkbox (I don't see why this is needed
in the first place).

2) Use LocalHost for the new NNTP account in your MUA if the NNTP
Bridge Server is installed on the same machine or use the
computer host name if located on another machine.

>> I'm going by what it says in the bridge login box:
>>
>> You are logging into (Microsoft Forums NntpBridge) which is
>> not a Microsoft developed application.
>>

> I hadn't noticed that before and have asked MS for an explanation. Will
> get back to you. I certainly got the idea that the bridge was developed
> in-house at MS.


Please also find out the issue with the API. These people are using a
port 80 web server request. See my post to Geoff.

>> Finally, I don't see any merging of the existing NNTP forums with the
>> MS Web Forums. Was that suppose to be the case? I don't see it.
>>
>
> No, for example I listed the equivalent MFC forum for this newsgroup, no
> attempt will be made to merge the content or community of this one.


I see that now, so it nullifies their concern of context abuse caused
by these newsgroup. The impressive I had was they were merging,
after all, its illogical to have two different message database? :)

>> If that was not the case, then I don't see any reason why they can
>> continue to sponsor NNTP servers with the current open NNTP newsgroups
>> and continue to allow it to be USER/MVP supported. If Microsoft
>> doesn't want to allow their employees to participate in the newsgroups
>> anymore, then fine, don't allow them. Its not like they are have any
>> high participation rate anyway. But that shouldn't be a reason to
>> stop offering the long time NNTP based microsoft newsgroups.
>>
>
> I hadn't heard the primary mover was stopping MS employees from
> contributing. I had heard the current NNTP news servers had something
> to do with some discontinued Exchange product, and while those could
> have been replaced, there are other advantages to MS of moving to
> forums.


I see, its funny, we did it the other way. We once supported Exchange
gateway for our backend storage system so that outlook users can see
the server side conferences as FOLDERS on the client side.

http://santronics.com/products/winserver/Exchange.php

but we no longer develop it since the advent of the RFC based MUA. We
replaced it with our NNTP Server so that all conferences, mail forums,
etc can be exposed as

Real Newsgroup (Unmoderated)
Real Newsgroup (Moderated)
Locally Published Newsgroup

with the latter, any can of mail conference can be used, including
mailing list, private, public or both local or email, etc, including
other network mail, such as the old Fidonet or QWK.

Its just MAIL and we are the EXPERTS at it! :) The only thing we are
behind with is the opening up all all the private stuff for sharing
and producing more group ware results (like me seeing all your
messages at MS Forums).

> First, people who ask questions (as opposed to answering a ton
> of them) find the web interface easier. (True enough, no need to deal
> with an NNTP client.)


I agree, but its not a matter of the interface, but how the server
offers these features. Our mail software is inherently FOR YOU to
quickly login, get your information and out. You don't need alerts,
when you login, you see your "New mail (virtual) Inbox" virtual in the
sense that its a collection of all your direct messages from email
plus all the forums you participate in.

The debate with us that the topical display (FORUMS) is a poor way to
communicate for MOST users. Its a debates because more customers are
wanting this style, but I believe its the OPERATORS that are saying
this, not the users.

In other words, the FORUMS view is not optimal for the casual users.

That said, I do like MS FORUMS approach that was changed several times
over the last 5-6 years.

Now, I just finishing selecting my favorites forums about 8-10 of
them, and I will browse them went I want to, but when I login in,
foremost, I am interested in MY MAIL first, people who write to me or
as part of a thread.

> Second, MS has clearer ownership of property and

> might leverage it on Bing (and hide it from Google, or something).


Thats a farce. The ownership question is not locked in stone. They
can write it all the TOS they want - it is not locked. They might own
the PAPER, but not what I write on it, that is still a copyright as
good as I am writing this message right now. Just consider also raises
new Liability issues for Microsoft if they wish to claim context
ownership - not I didn't say what they can do with it, and even then
there are limitations.

Furthermore, all google needs to do is create a silly account and hack
the bridge http port 80 calls and reverse engineer what I will presume
is an XML based exchange of mail. I guarantee you this will be among
the first things done by many if only to automate the process and/or
to create new or continue with existing service bureaus, which also
raises another issue of Anti-trust of microsoft wishes to play games.

> Third, NNTP doesn't support things like ratings, moderators, marking
> answers, points, moving of threads, etc. (The value of such things are
> debatable, but no denying NNTP doesn't support them.)


Not quite David.

The value of such things are rich and long sorted. NNTP protocol is
RFC 5322 based (formerly RFC 2822, new one updated last year) and X-
headers can be used for proprietary exchange information.

We do it.

The problem is the MUA (Mail User Access) agents need to be updated to
support such things and as history has it, when MICROSOFT begins to
supports such things, the industry do tend to follow the big gorrilla.

So IMV, it was a matter of incompetent on the part of someone that
simply doesn't know such technology that existed since the day 1. A
guy locked in his brain that WEB is the only way when in fact, it can
have long term strategic issues if not considered right.

But it will take the "Microsoft" to do such things for MUAs to follow.

We have that issue right now with DKIM, a new message authenticity
system. No Microsoft, hence no widely adopted incentive to change MUAs
to support it.

The reason however, is the issue that many (including myself) believe
that online centralization, like it all started, is making a comeback
and is where we should be going to solve many of the exploitation
issues, and also increase the leveraging of user information.

But most of that is just a matter of logging in users and that can be
done with any online or offline system. Leveraging the newsgroups
information was possible - google proved it.

>> People, if we really want this then we need to find out if Microsoft
>> is open to keeping the NNTP servers active but that might mean on
>> proposing how they be managed.


> I don't believe they are, this has been a battle (with MVP's championing
> NNTP) for several years, and it looks like we have lost.
>
> But at least our cries have netted the NNTP Bridge, which I think
> everyone will agree is small condolence but better than nothing.
>
> I will miss this newsgroup. The equivalent forum is lacking in
> community spirit (though that may improve as hopefully all of us migrate
> there).

The only good solution is an API. The storage is really a non-issue.
NNTP too because people can write bridges. And this one does seem to
do the basic job.

But they have solve nothing. The only real way to do what they want
is a complete lock out, one portal only using encryption (SSL). But
that will create all cans of issues unless the portal is highly
customizable and does not require javascript.

The other (or alternative) solution is to offer a NATIVE GUI, which
can be also part of the VS IDE support. WPF or Silverlight are good
candidates. In fact, I just used Chrome to create an application
shortcut for the MSDN forum and it is pretty fast.

A native GUI might also be required if EOLAS are able to enforce their
new patent on WEB 2.0 embedded activity. So far I don't see much on
MSDN Forums (once they do, EOLAS went after them for the tune of $504
MILLION and won once before, they will do it again).

So to do it right, an API even if it requires authentication, is what
needs to be done to address all issues.

I see all kinds of problems for Microsoft if they don't offer an API
and only make it exclusive to one vendor.

Note, this is all an opinion, but I feel pretty strong about it.

--
HLS

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:40:56 PM5/5/10
to
Sadly, it appears that the NNTP servers will be shut down, and NNTP will simply not be
supported. The problem seems to be that if it isn't invented by Microosft, it doesn't
count.
joe

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:42:18 PM5/5/10
to
If they opened up the API, then vendors like Forte and others could build interfaces to
it. But that smacks of an Open Standard. Horrors!
joe

Joseph M. Newcomer

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:45:00 PM5/5/10
to
I've been using newsguy.com for several years and have had very few problems with the
service. Occasional outages, less than a couple hours, no big deal. Highly reliable,
high bandwidth. The forum interface looks like something designed by a third-grader as a
semester project.
joe

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 9:49:22 PM5/5/10
to
Geoff wrote:

>> People, if we really want this then we need to find out if Microsoft
>> is open to keeping the NNTP servers active but that might mean on
>> proposing how they be managed.
>
> Why all this discussion? Bridged or not, the web forums will be
> proprietary to MS and controlled by them. I see this as mostly a move
> to exclude Google Groups from participation in the forums and a
> closure of the support system from a global resource to a private one
> that MS can censor or close at their discretion.


I agree that a silly attempt to lock out google might be seen, but all
GOOGLE needs to do is create an account and reverse engineer the
bridge HTTP request and response.

> The microsoft.public.* groups exist on NNTP servers around the globe
> whether or not the Microsoft NNTP servers exist or not. Unless
> Microsoft is prepared to make demands on those providers that the
> groups be deleted I see no reason to abandon use of the groups on
> other servers.


I been the primary host is Microsoft, in other words, GOOGLE and
others has to start somewhere to get the original source and then you
might have other mirrorings.

If MS stops the NNTP servers, I also will think they will not any
other kinds 3rd party branding using their name sake for non MS
newsgroups.

So it is interesting question that probably will be played out after
the servers is stopped. They may feel that there will be some legacy
time, 1, 2 or 3 years.

But consider that is there are an industry that make their living on
Microsoft groups and Microsoft does not provide an avenue for theirs
3rd party service bureaus, don't be surprise when one of these
proprietors wake up one morning and see their profits are seriously
down and call their lawyers when Microsoft denies them access to have
an automated exchange system - its called anti-trust or even tortious
inference.

It doesn't sound like they really though this through. I'm saying
their only option is an API to resolve this pending disruption that I
don't believe many will realize until it actually happens.

--
HLS

Hector Santos

unread,
May 5, 2010, 10:14:46 PM5/5/10
to
Joseph M. Newcomer wrote:

> Sadly, it appears that the NNTP servers will be shut down, and NNTP will simply not be
> supported. The problem seems to be that if it isn't invented by Microosft, it doesn't
> count.


The MS NNTP Bridge is a 3rd party tool. It wasn't developed by
Microsoft. Go Figure. :)

I think it should be noted that Microsoft is not the only vendor that
people have to deal with. The main reason for MUAs is that it allows
one the ability to have one mail reader/write for most, if not all, of
their communications needs in dealing with technical support issues.

Microsoft is breaking this mode with an exclusive MUA method. The
bridge is the only redeeming value so all they really need is to
expose and API - the hell with OPEN STANDARDS if its requires a
committee, that takes too long and always seems to gets watered down.

They just need to dedicate one employee for 2-3 months to write up the
WEB service/REST/XML specification.

BTW, according to the stats on the equivalent MFC forum, it has a 28%
response rate (response to no responses), where here I am seeing
nearly 100%. Go Figure. :)

--
HLS

David Scambler

unread,
May 6, 2010, 2:23:52 AM5/6/10
to
Joseph M. Newcomer <newc...@flounder.com> wrote in
news:3hi1u517hmbrh029m...@4ax.com:

> This is sad. What is worse, they have an "NNTP bridge" mechanism (I
> found it on http://connect.microsoft.com/MicrosoftForums ) that is
> supposed to let us use our professionally-designed and

Speaking of adult supervision, who taught the nntp bridge folk to write an
english sentence?

"In developing this application, our team's goal is to enable a way for our
customers out there who wants to participate in the Microsoft Forum
communities, but does not yet find themselves comfortable with the
transition from the newsreader interface to the Forums Web interface."

Hector Santos

unread,
May 6, 2010, 7:38:48 AM5/6/10
to
Goran wrote:

> On May 5, 3:22 am, "MP" <mpNoS...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Microsoft said it plans to end support for more than 4,000 old-style

>> newsgroups starting next month, pushing users instead to discussion forums


>> such as those found on the Microsoft Answers, TechNet, and MSDN sites.
>>

>> Although venerable, Microsoft said that so-called NNTP newsgroups are past


>> their time in terms of being usable and secure.
>

> I don't like this one bit. As Joe said, a dedicated NNTP client beats
> the hell out of any "forum" software. That's one reason against the
> decision. Another is that some people (me included) are accessing this
> through Google Groups (and I am sure that there are other sources). I
> prefer the format, for familiarity, for one, and also, I don't care
> logging on with a Passport account (I have one that I don't use much).
>
> Perhaps I'll just stop coming here. Oh well.
>
> Goran.


Well, now that I am more aware of the fact there were never any
merging of the two storages for what? the past, 3-4 years, the impact
should be a lot less.

When the transition from made from CompuServ to NNTP, the benefits
were immediately obvious:

1) No CompuServ account fees

2) No Dialup required

3) MUA like Outlook Express provided a better view, there was
hardly any good MUA for CompuServ, the few out there was
very poor. They were True Offline Mail technology where
it connected, check for uploads, check for downloads,
disconnected, you read, you responded, reconnected and
repeated the cycle.

and of course, on the down side:

4) It increased anonymous posting and spam.

But microsoft always had their own BBS installations too. Let me
lookup if they were once our customers ....... HA!

CID REGNO DATE CONTACT CORP, CITY, STATE
##### 90-01### 1990-08-27 Stu ######## Microsoft, Kirkland WA
##### 88-00### 1992-11-02 Lincoln #### Microsoft, Naples, ME
##### 93-02### 1993-04-20 Joseph ##### Microsoft, Irving T#
##### 93-03### 1993-08-09 Bill ####### MicroSoft, Irving T#
##### 93-04### 1993-08-12 Jason ##### Microsoft, Bellevue WA
##### 93-09### 1993-12-21 Dave ##### Microsoft, Redmond WA
##### 94-03### 1994-10-17 Brian ######## Microsoft, Redmond WA
##### 94-01### 1994-05-23 Hannes ######### Microsoft, Charlotte NC
##### 95-07### 1995-02-10 Mike ###### Microsoft, Kent WA
##### 96-08### 1996-01-02 Randy ##### Microsoft, Dallas T#
##### 96-01### 1996-04-15 Kristen ######## Microsoft, Redmond WA
##### 96-02### 1996-05-06 Archie ###### Microsoft, Irving, T#
##### 07-05### 1996-11-21 Chris ######## Microsoft, Redmond WA

Long time ago! They had the DOS version and finally ended up with the
1996 Windows Version. I'm sure some were for either direct dialup
support for customers or employees (Early Work From Home) and also
testing at least with the Windows version.

Anyway, I honestly felt there was merging the MS Forums with the MS
NNTP newsgroups. I'm surprise to realize they were not. Its a step
backwards back to their own centralize "BBS" installation but this
time with more flexibility to render dynamic displays, plus users
bandwidths are higher and almost guaranteed to have a connection to
the net.

Thats good, but if anything, the MS Forums site will be in a constant
flux as they improve it for the "social thing." And IMO, it is not
very friendly, and their dependency on cookies and javascript makes it
harder to get it right. Expect offloaded native GUI desktop clients
to be available soon enough.

My advice to them is to publish an API and allow the new industry from
here on out to write better or custom interfaces. Otherwise, it will
be a constant cost burden to them and no doubt, someone will reverse
engineer it, so take control of that by getting releasing an API.


--
HLS

David Ching

unread,
May 6, 2010, 10:23:54 AM5/6/10
to
"Hector Santos" <sant...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:u5Ul6CR...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Expect offloaded native GUI desktop clients to be available soon enough.
>
> My advice to them is to publish an API and allow the new industry from
> here on out to write better or custom interfaces. Otherwise, it will be a
> constant cost burden to them and no doubt, someone will reverse engineer
> it, so take control of that by getting releasing an API.
>

Microsoft originally had a Windows client written in WPF and in fact it is
still available but probably doesn't work because it hasn't been updated to
the latest forum API's: http://msdnforumsclient.codeplex.com/

They abandoned this and then focused on the NNTP Bridge. This is in light
that people were complaining the UI was inferior to popular NNTP
newsreaders. So for once Microsoft listened and gave what was asked for: a
way to re-purpose NNTP newsreaders for use with the MS forums.

The problem now is the Bridge still has issues with popular NNTP
newsreaders, notice how they have "tiers" of support for various newsreaders
with the Microsoft newsreaders being in the top tier. Even the top tier
newsreaders have issues, the main one getting a lot of noise esp. by our own
David Wilkinson is the "mismatched subject and body" problem. As well,
users are now saying, "well since this is NNTP why doesn't MS host the NNTP
server instead of me running it locally. I don't want to install new
software on my PC. And the bridge doesn't work on the Mac." So the bridge
is not perfect and may not ever be due to mismatches between NNTP and the
forum back end.

All this to say: it will be some time before MS opens the forum API's to
3rd parties, if ever.

-- David

Hector Santos

unread,
May 6, 2010, 11:04:06 AM5/6/10
to
David Ching wrote:

I'm currently doing research and I believe it is all already available
with Microsoft Live SDK. However, the REST protocol my not be well
established yet. Its not like impossible to reverse engineer, in fact,
its quite simple, just hover your mouse over the URL to see the common
pattern to access a forums list, a forum, a topic, a message, etc and
GET the request, and parse the result. I'm sure there is a URL option
that defines the output forum, like XML or RSS.

But overall, with the diverse nature of users, technically, there
should be no problem here. They need experts! I hope this isn't new
pet projects for a few employees that have to learn on their own what
long understood all the framework issues. You need a "CZAR" that
oversees all the different angles.

We do it with a centralized backend storage with multiple interfaces:

Console Interface (supports the "Extras")
Native GUI desktop interface (supports the "Extras")
Web Interface (supports the "Extras")
POP3 interface (RFC 2822 format)
NNTP interface (RFC 2822 format)
Microsoft Exchange for Outlook (RFC 2822 format)

and we are working on IMAP:

IMAP interface (RFC 2822 format, supports "some" extras)

(pondering, did I miss any?)

Anyway, this is only all possible with a common API.

Microsoft can actually make a big play here by offering RFC 2822
eXtended headers to help support the "Extras" because right now RFC
based MUAs do not support any eXtended headers. We keep talking about
it for all kinds of new MUA interface needs but there is no real push
because there is no big SOURCE of information to invest in this
development. Web rendering is the only real solution but there is no
common MAIL structure for all other than RFC 2822. But if we are just
talking about Microsoft, I can guarantee there will be a market for
MUA vendors to support "Microsoft Mail Extensions." That is all it
often takes when the big gorilla to support new ideas.

The MS NNTP bridge developer can expose this information itself and
the clients can do it. Or even the MS NNTP Servers if they choose to
keep it.


--
HLS

Hector Santos

unread,
May 6, 2010, 11:41:08 AM5/6/10
to
After reviewing David Threadwell video discussing Live Services, this
is all possible with the Live Framework.

So we are talking about the exposure of the API via a simple layer for
clients to use, including MUAs. This presents new market
opportunities for RFC based MUAs to begin to implement new products.

This also presents a new market opportunity for a "Wildcat! Live
Exchange" <tm> for us to integrate into our Application Server.

So folks, this is not really much about the discontinuing of the
Microsoft NNTP Servers but rather promoting a push for Microsoft
product users to the preferred centralized Live "network" and storage
of data. I personally do not see a reason why that should be lost
other than not having more control of the input side of it, but
starting with a new controlled and single source storage/cloud of
information is probably not a bad idea.

The key is access.

I don't think people should sweat it much. If NNTP access is still
preferred with their favorite MUA, the current bridge is a start, but
I am very sure that will be other gateway software made available
using the Live Framework SDK.

I just hope that Ozzie doesn't get the idea that they should TAX users
or providers who accessing the information. Remember, that is still
always part of the equation. Many software, like our product offers
the accounting for such activity but it is very limited usage today.
It only worked well for special trade services where end-users have no
choice to pay extra fees for different tiers of technical support
services.

--

David Ching

unread,
May 6, 2010, 12:29:33 PM5/6/10
to
"Hector Santos" <sant...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uLsiVKT7...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> After reviewing