From: dkrohn@bgrsu0.er.usgs.gov (Krohn)
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.khoros
Subject: (none)
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:59:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: pprg.37313


       RESPONSE TO KHOROS AS AN OPEN SYSTEM - 5 APR 92

John:
    I think we, the Khoros users, are grateful for what you have
given to the Network Community. We share your concerns about the
fate of the Khoros group.  My comments are only offered as points
of discussion and are not meant to be critical in any form.
     First off, we know the problem is bigger than just Khoros. 
These lean times are demanding extremely creative and careful
solutions. GRASS is an equivalent open system GIS put out by the
Corps of Engineers.  At their latest conference, they had a
brainstorming session on this topic as the Corps must reduce its
support for GRASS.  I think it would be wise of Khoros to look at
how the other opens systems are coping and look for duplications of
effort as ways to economize.  I believe there is a competition or
at least a "Not Invented Here" attitude toward the other open
systems on the net. This is healthy to a point, but needs to be
kept in balance.  The USGS is hosting the next GRASS conference in
Spring of 93.  Would you want to participate??
     Secondly, I do not think it is practical to go to the net for
funds.  You are reaching the wrong audience.  So far the only
presidential candidate who has utilized a computer network has been
Jerry Brown; he has a $100 limit.  It is important to remember that
NSF 's funding for the Internet is not guaranteed and can change
the whole concept of open systems.  Where the net can payback is in
ideas.  Ideas have value, but unfortunately do not pay the rent. 
Time also has value.  One of my ideas is to have an abridged  "Best
of Khoros" version to cut down on the massive dialogue in the
newsgroups.  This would be a great contribution for a cash starved
group.  Danielle's and Mark's recent reply on the philosophy of
cantata was well-written and exemplary.  Neil Bowers is making a
contribution with his questionnaire and compilation of formats. 
     Third, I would like to see Khoros focus on a tighter concept
and a code base.  I don't think it is practical to be all things
for all people.  With Composer, I think it is possible to set up a
smorgasbord on the net for all the specialized algorithms that
people want and need.  The base should embody the core flow-
visualization concepts in Cantata and Composer and provide the
visualization tools that make the software attractive.  This
tightening would make it potable to smaller systems and other forms
of distribution.  I think the trend of patch 5 to be *very large*
and have compilation problems is not a good omen.
     Fourth, I think we need to concentrate on our strengths.  What
Khoros can offer, which no other vendor can match right now, is
experience with the network.  I think the work with distributed
processing is seminal.  I would like to see emphasis again placed
on Concert, which is now I understand still under development. 
These type of network facilities are going to attract users who do
have other options.  The past history with the private sector might
have been shaky, but I think we can learn lessons from that
experience.  We need to create better visibility by looking at
people who do not yet even understand the concept of open systems.
This is the population we need to move, both as a base for
Khoros and as a way to preserve the Internet itself.

Hope this helps.  Please feel free to respond:  dkrohn@usgs.gov
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.khoros