From: brewster@Think.COM (Brewster Kahle)
Subject: WAIS-discussion digest #47: How to get the ball rolling
Organization: Comp.Center (RUS) U of Stuttgart, FRG
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 22:25:39 GMT


       Forum On Wide Area Information Servers and Electronic Publishing
                              Brewster Kahle
                 

Contents:
     New Education Database (walters@pc.bitnet)
     FYI: gopher to WAIS gateway ("Mark P. McCahill" )
     Your view of electronic book copying issues seems badly reasoned. (Bob Weiner)
     Re: Will electronic books supplant paper ones? (Bob Weiner)


New servers (219 total, 26 new since March 22):

 cs-techreports.src
 israel-info.src
 eric-digest.src
 india-info.src
 indian-classical-music.src
 machos-bibtex-zenon-inria-fr.src
 directory-zenon-inria-fr.src
 utsun.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp.src
 uunet.src
 uxc.cso.uiuc.edu.src
 midwest-weather.src
 neuroprose.src
 rfc-index.src
 current.cites.src
 domain-contacts.src
 file-archive-uunet.src
 finding-sources.src
 fj.sources.src
 comp.dcom.fax.src
 cica-win3.src
 cicnet-directory-of-servers.src
 bit.listserv.cwis-l.src
 network-tools.src
 comp.doc.techreports.src
 bit.listserv.pacs-l.src
 news-conf.src
 ascd-education.src
 com-priv.src
 comp.lang.tcl.src
 stis.src
 quake.think.com-ftp.src
 zen-internet.src
 sun-wais-ftp-unc.src
 archie.au-amiga-readmes.src
 archie.au-ls-lRt.src
 archie.au-mac-readmes.src
 archie.au-pc-readmes.src
 au-directory-of-servers.src
 bib-cirm.src
 bibs-zenon-inria-fr.src
 cm-zenon-inria-fr.src
 disco-mm-zenon-inria-fr.src
 lp-bibtex-zenon-inria-fr.src
 meval-bibtex-zenon-inria-fr.src
 ra-zenon-inria-fr.src

-brewster

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1992 11:38:48.51 MST
From: walters@pc.bitnet
Subject: New Education Database

I am please to announce a new WAIS database.  We are working with ASCD to
provide copies of articles which appear in Educational Leadership via
WAIS.  If you have any questions, please contact Jim Walters (walters@pc.maricop
a.edu).
 
Following isa description of the database:
 
      :server "pc2.pc.maricopa.edu"
      :ip-number "1140.198.16.12"
      :database-name "EDUCATION"
      :cost 0.00
      :cost-unit :free
      :maintainer "walters@pc.maricopa.edu"
      :description
 
      EDUCATION contains copyrighted articles  from  _Educational
Leadership_ published by ASCD. This WAIS index is provided by Phoenix
College  ( Maricopa  Community  College  District ) and  ASCD  on  an
experimental  basis and is scheduled to disappear in July, 1992. This
database  includes the majority of articles published in the last two
years. Some of the articles contain scanning errors we  have
not yet been able to efficiently correct.
      These articles are copyrighted and are the intellectual property of
ASCD and the authors.
      Please  address any  comments or  questions about this index to
Billie Hughes (bhughes@pc.maricopa.edu) or Jim Walters
(walters@pc.maricopa.edu).
 
It is Registered as ascd-education.src.
 
Enjoy,
Jim Walters

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 22 Mar 92 18:43:50 CST
From: "Mark P. McCahill"  <mpm@boombox.micro.umn.edu>
Subject: FYI: gopher to WAIS gateway

In the most recent release of the unix Internet Gopher software there is a 
software gateway that takes internet gopher protocol queries and submits them 
to WAIS servers and then transates the WAIS server's responce into gopher-ese.
This means that gopher clients can now access WAIS servers. The software is 
available via anonymous ftp from boombox.micro.umn.edu in the /pub/gopher 
directory. We added a complete list of WAIS servers to the "Other Information 
Servers" section of gopher; it is now painless to access WAIS from gopher. 

Mark P. McCahill
gopherspace engineer
Computer and Information System
University of Minnesota
(612) 625 1300 (voice)
(612) 625 6817 (fax)
mpm@boombox.micro.umn.edu

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 24 Mar 92 22:08:00 -0500
From: rsw@cs.brown.edu (Bob Weiner)
Subject: Your view of electronic book copying issues seems badly reasoned.

> 
> From: Kurt Thearling <kurt@Think.COM>
> Subject: ebooks
> Date: Sun, 8 Mar 92 19:49:35 EST
> 
> Dear Wais-ers:
> 
> I have been thinking about the area of electronic libraries and electronic
> publishing for a couple years and am in the process of getting all of my
> thoughts together in the form of an essay.  I was hoping that the readers
> of this list might be willing to comment on my ideas.
> 
> 
> 
> My interest in this area began a few years ago some colleagues and I
> developed (for Apple) a PC design which we thought would be prevalent in
> the year 2000 [TABLET: A Computer for the Year 2000, CACM, June 1988].  Our
> basic premise was that computers of the future would function like an
> electronic book (ala Alan Kay's Dynabook).  Two major components in our
> design were high-bandwidth communication channels and credit card sized
> mass-storage devices.   
> 
> In presenting our design to audiences around the country, there was only
> one question that we could not answer (advances in technology could answer
> every technical question).

I doubt this is true in any serious way.  Saying that someday adequate
technology will be available does not answer questions.  It seems that screen
resolution matching print resolution, duplicating the feel (size, paper grain,
color spectrum, lack of power) of books, and matching the raw visibility of
paper books stacked on shelves are all nearly impossibly far away.  People will
not give these things up without a fight, regardless of what added benefits
electronic books offer.  Thus, publishers will have no incentive to stop
producing printed versions.  Electronic books will supplement rather than
replace paper in many domains.  In technical domains, where literature is
continually updated, it is easy to see why electronic versions are replacing
paper versions quickly.  This says nothing about the more general publishing
vehicles which are never updated once published.

During this past decade many people assumed that VCRs and tape rentals would
spell the end of the movie theatre business.  They ignored the abundant
evidence that people enjoy leaving their homes for entertainment purposes, that
they like to see things in high resolution, on large screens, with high quality
sound, none of which could they easily get at home.  What did happen is that
theatre owners had to improve their facilities to provide up to date
projection, sound systems and more comfortable surroundings, just to stay
competitive with what could be delivered at home.

We can see the same thing happening in publishing.  Successful companies will
produce higher quality offerings by being more selective in the manuscripts
they select, the editing they do, the papers and graphic designs they use and
so forth.

>  The question was basically, 
> 
> 	"What is the economic incentive for a writer/publisher to
> 	produce new books since electronic versions could be copied with 
> 	ease?"
> 
> Over the past couple years I have thought about this question and have come
> up with the pessimistic answer: Nothing.  Except, as I discuss below, in a
> limited framework.  
> 
> The problem with books is that they are static.  Copy protection is useful
> for protecting programs since the dynamics of programs are the source of
> economic value.  Simply saving the static images created by a program will
> not give you the functionality of the program.  Adding dynamics to books
> will greatly enhance the inability to make copies.

I submit that this analysis, too, is highly flawed.  Many programs today are
unprotected.  Many are copied unlawfully.  Each copy works just like the
original.  Yet the commercial software industries thrive.

Statics and dynamics have nothing to do with this.  The software model
precisely applies to electronic books because both are nothing more than
digital information than can be perfectly duplicated.

The issues are both social and market-driven.  There is no value
in wondering whether some people will make illegal copies because they will.
The question that existing organizations want to know is whether they could
support a profitable market under these conditions.  Will other people pay
for items that can be copied illegally if industry delivers cost-effective,
quality material in a timely fashion?

Software and other markets suggest a resounding, yes.  The fact that
an act is illegal will dissuade many, especially when the cost of access
is quite reasonable, as it is in say, the video rental market.  (How many
people bother to ask their friends to lend them a rented tape so they can
watch it?  Most who do probably get a, "Go rent the damn thing," response.

So as long as the publishing market adapts to prevailing views on value and
cost-effectiveness, which are sure to shift with the emergence of more and more
electronic media, and markets almost always do adapt, then there is no reason
to believe that writers and publishers will lose their economic incentives to
produce.

Undoubtedly, fights will arise, however, as people begin to demand information
in electronic forms, e.g. their newspapers, and publishers refuse.  It is
likely that such refusals will generate much higher levels of illicit
transmission than any sort of cooperation would.  After a transition period,
such problems will shrink and markets will again stabilize for a period.

> Hyperbooks will be a first step.  This will not prevent copying but it will
> make it more difficult (since the hyperlinks will have to be created).
> Another way to add dynamics is to mix video and audio with the text.  There
> will undoubtably be ways to copy the audio and video but again, it will make
> copying more difficult for the book pirate.  The key to protecting books will
> be in combining programs and books.  Things like Mathematica notebooks are
> one way to do this.  Example equations in a book will be dynamic allowing the
> reader to modify parameters and see the result computed for them. In addition
> to making pirating more difficult, allowing interaction between a user and a
> book will make learning more fun (and easy).

Since you dismissed copy protection earlier, we have simply this.  In order for
publishers to mass produce any kind of book, they have to make it easy for
their own copying purposes.  This in turn makes it just as easy for people who
have the copying equipment.  Without encoding schemes or strange display
requirements, you are talking digital to digital copying regardless of media
form.  So again, static v. dynamic mediums become irrelevant except with regard
to storage or memory space required.

> The problem will be for books that remain static.  I do not think that
> technology will easily solve this problem (i.e., prevent copying).
> Societal attitudes (including legal remedies) may be the solution.

Of course morals, laws and again, market dynamics will resolve these
issues.  Technical people too often assume that because something is
possible, it will quickly become the de facto law of the land.  Again, history
does not bear this out.  Does anyone presume that because world-obliterating
nuclear missiles *can* be launched that they will annihilate the world
tomorrow?  No, but it is a risk that we must live with.  Risks in themselves
are not generally interesting to talk or write about unless their probabilities
(or perceived probabilities) are high.

I would say there is virtually no evidence that points toward:

	the elimination of paper;

	the elimination of for-profit writers or publishers;

	a difference in copying behaviors vis-a-vis static and dynamic mediums.

> Technology may play a role in this (e.g., tagging each individual document
> with subtle differences which might identify the source of illegal copies -
> but then technology could also help defeat such measures).  But my overall
> attitude toward mass market publications remains pessimistic.

You should take another look at the mass market.  Travel to grammar schools,
rural areas, slums, coffee shops, check out market surveys from malls,
supermarkets and television viewers.  Those institutions serve the mass
market and likely will provide a very different picture of non-embedded
computer penetration and how long electronic books will take to even begin
to stand side by side with paper media.  (Remember to ask how many people have
done a DowQuest search versus a dictionary word look up.) 

> I'd like to hear any comments you might have on my ideas.  I'm in the
> process of writing them up fully as a technical report and anything you
> might have to say would be appreciated.
> 

I obviously think the slant of your report should change dramatically.

Let me know if anything I said is unclear.

I should add that I found Brewster's electronic reading room paper to
be far off the mark also but did not have the time to write an adequate
reply.  We have to look deeper and really understand the many facets
of the media we are trying to replace before we say that we have something
better and long before we presume that ours will come to dominate over the more
traditional media.

Bob

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 25 Mar 92 17:20:02 -0500
From: rsw@cs.brown.edu (Bob Weiner)
Subject: Re: Will electronic books supplant paper ones?

Kurt Thearling <kurt@Think.COM> writes:

>> My interest in this area began a few years ago some colleagues and I
>> developed (for Apple) a PC design which we thought would be prevalent
>> in the year 2000 [TABLET: A Computer for the Year 2000, CACM, June
>> 1988].  Our basic premise was that computers of the future would
>> function like an electronic book (ala Alan Kay's Dynabook).  Two
>> major components in our design were high-bandwidth communication
>> channels and credit card sized
>> mass-storage devices.   
>> 
>> In presenting our design to audiences around the country, there was only
>> one question that we could not answer (advances in technology could answer
>> every technical question).

rsw@cs.brown.edu (Bob Weiner) writes:

> I doubt this is true in any serious way.  Saying that someday adequate
> technology will be available does not answer questions.  It seems that
> screen resolution matching print resolution, duplicating the feel
> (size, paper grain, color spectrum, lack of power) of books, and
> matching the raw visibility of paper books stacked on shelves are all
> nearly impossibly far away.

kt> It looks like I didn't make my comment clear enough.  In our paper
kt> we made predictions as to what we thought would be technologically
kt> possible in the year 2000.  Technical details such as communication
kt> bandwidth, memory capacity, screen resolution, and power usage all
kt> were part of the prediction.  The questions we were asked during our
kt> talks involved those sorts of issues.  We did not make wild
kt> predictions requiring unreasonable advances in technology.  I feel
kt> that we were fairly conservative in our estimates.  Given recent
kt> public announcements in these areas, I think we were right on track.

I don't see any conflict here with my above statements.  If you were
conservative in your estimates, then you clearly don't expect ebook
delivery platforms to surpass all of the traits that paper books have,
but only to offer interesting new possibilities.  This leaves the
likelihood of parallel markets wide open.

kt> As far as duplicating the feel of a book, I think that psychology
kt> will be as important a factor as the technology.  Size is relatively
kt> easy.  Color spectrum and screen resolution are moving along as
kt> expected.

You need about 2000 squared dots per inch to rival medium grade print
quality.  High being about 5000 squared, as I understand it.  I don't
think screen resolution densities are moving at all like microprocessor
speeds, leaving this as a big what if.  Then when you want photo quality
color, you need your 24-bit pixels, right?  Sure memory densities can
grow by leaps and bounds but power consumption will still be a problem
and radio bandwidth demand, if you are talking wireless, go anywhere, on
demand delivery, will far outstrip supply for as long as anyone can
reasonbly see today.  Potential multimedia traffic over wired gigabit
networks being planned could also quickly outstrip supply.  What kind of
evidence can you offer that technical advances will remove these
limitations, say within the next 50 years?

> I'm not sure of what you mean by "lack of power" though.

Paper books don't draw power, is what I meant.

> People will not give these things up without a fight, regardless of
> what added benefits electronic books offer.

kt> I agree.  There are always people who are unwilling to make use of
kt> new technology.  They are the same people who cling to vinyl rather
kt> than switch to CDs because they don't like change.

No, these are the people who see a vehicle that offers a certain
multi-dimensional level of quality who do not want to downgrade in those
dimensions to upgrage in others.  With CDs, pretty much every serious
dimension improved in quality.  With electronic books or WAIS-type
delivery, you have wondrous decreases in quality in many dimensions such
as those above.  This is what I mean people will not ignore and will not
give up, regardless of how much they love or hate change.

> Thus, publishers will have no incentive to stop producing printed
> versions.

> Electronic books will supplement rather than replace paper in many
> domains.  In technical domains, where literature is continually
> updated, it is easy to see why electronic versions are replacing paper
> versions quickly.  This says nothing about the more general publishing
> vehicles which are never updated once published.

kt> I think technical publications have the most potential for
kt> improvement due to electronic publishing.  Data could be included
kt> directly in the paper.  References could be linked in.  Corrections
kt> could be applied retroactively.  Simulations could be shown in their
kt> entirety.

Agreed.

> During this past decade many people assumed that VCRs and tape rentals
> would spell the end of the movie theatre business.  They ignored the
> abundant evidence that people enjoy leaving their homes for
> entertainment purposes, that they like to see things in high
> resolution, on large screens, with high quality sound, none of which
> could they easily get at home.  What did happen is that theatre owners
> had to improve their facilities to provide up to date projection,
> sound systems and more comfortable surroundings, just to stay
> competitive with what could be delivered at home.

kt> But when you take inflation into account the studio revenues have
kt> decreased during the '80s.  In addition to VCRs, cable has eaten
kt> into their revenues.

Obviously, parallel markets produce increased competition and can lower
producers' revenue stream.  I don't see this as saying anything about
whether or not one medium will overtake another.

kt> As far as improving their facilities, this is absolutely untrue.  I
kt> know of only one world class movie theater on the East Coast these
kt> days (the Ziegfield in New York).  Most of the the quality theaters
kt> have either been shut down or cut into pieces.  The quality of the
kt> the movie going experience has declined drastically in recent years
kt> (this from a person who has seen upwards of 300 films in a year).

Certainly, throughout the decades, the basic ambience of theatres has
gone downward, but this reflects upon the patrons as much as the owners.
Mores and general public behavior has also gone downward.

I still suggest that those many theatres have improved that which they
can control (mostly the technicalities) in an effort to be more
competiti  Some do cutback, as the airlines have done, to make their
offering lower in cost (or the same in cost) in efforts to maintain
their revenue bases.  Such strategies show little long term success,
forcing businesses into eventual quality improvement.

>>  The question was basically, 
>> 
>> 	"What is the economic incentive for a writer/publisher to
>> 	produce new books since electronic versions could be copied with 
>> 	ease?"
>> 
>> Over the past couple years I have thought about this question and have come
>> up with the pessimistic answer: Nothing.  Except, as I discuss below, in a
>> limited framework.  
>> 
>> The problem with books is that they are static.  Copy protection is
>> useful for protecting programs since the dynamics of programs are the
>> source of economic value.  Simply saving the static images created by
>> a program will not give you the functionality of the program.  Adding
>> dynamics to books will greatly enhance the inability to make copies.
>
> I submit that this analysis, too, is highly flawed.  Many programs today are
> unprotected.  Many are copied unlawfully.  Each copy works just like the
> original.  Yet the commercial software industries thrive.

kt> These are decisions that the individual companies make.  They might
kt> figure that using copy protection might cost them more business than
kt> not using it.  It probably depends on the specifics of the software.
kt> One thing to consider is that programs are used repeatedly.  Many
kt> books are read only once (by the purchaser).

> Statics and dynamics have nothing to do with this.  The software model
> precisely applies to electronic books because both are nothing more
> than digital information than can be perfectly duplicated.

kt> You don't seem to understand my point.  A book is nothing but a
kt> bunch of dots on a page.  You can make a copy of the book by taking
kt> a picture of the pages.  The same is true for video (it is simply a
kt> very long book).  The individual images are static.

kt> On the other hand, the image produced by a program is fleeting,
kt> lasting only as long as the user desires.  Changing the inputs
kt> changes the image.  Contrast this with a book of specific images of that
kt> building.  Those images could be copied with ease.

So, if I understand your thesis, it is that copy-protection is all that
will save the software industry from immenent destruction and that,
though copy protection would be useful for book publishers, they have
even less of a chance of seeing their markets disappear due to ease of
nearly perfect reproduction of their offerings.

> The issues are both social and market-driven.  There is no value in
> wondering whether some people will make illegal copies because they
> will.  The question that existing organizations want to know is
> whether they could support a profitable market under these conditions.
> Will other people pay for items that can be copied illegally if
> industry delivers cost-effective, quality material in a timely
> fashion?

kt> The factors which will influence this are the cost of the source
kt> material, the cost and quality of the copies, and the amount of
kt> effort required to make the copy.  The reason that there are not
kt> more Xerox copies of textbooks out there is 1) It is a time
kt> consuming process, 2) It is relatively expensive (on the order of 10
kt> cents per page), and 3) The quality of the copies is dramatically
kt> inferior to the original.

This is what I countered with the nuclear example further down.
Technical possibilities do not equal social realities.  But this is
precisely what you are pushing. {Most programs are unprotected today but
more and more businesses are eliminating illegal copying simply because
the potential economic sanctions and social standards dictate thaty they
do so.  The technical possibility is that they duplicate every program
freely, but we don't see this happening.

On the consumer side, the cost of software has generally not come down
to bearable consumer levels, so one sees widespread copying.  This
represents a temporary market instability, as I pointed out in my first
response.  The telecommunications industry provides a more stable model
under which business use subsidizes lower consumer rates{

kt> Electronic copies will of books will make all three of these points
kt> relatively unimportant.  The effort to make a copy will be reduced.
kt> The cost will be almost zero.  The quality of the copy will be
kt> nearly identical to the original.

kt> But, if the original is cheap enough these factor will not come into
kt> play.  Newspapers are not bootleged because the original costs only
kt> a quarter.

We seem to agree here.  If market demands are served, publishers can
still make money and carry on their business.  But I believe they can do
so in both the new and old media because they will offer different
benefits.

kt> I don't dismiss copy protection.  I think it works.  I'm not sure
kt> why you thought I said this.  There is a constant co-evolution
kt> between copy protection schemes and ways to get around them but at
kt> any given time I think that workable schemes will exist.

>> The problem will be for books that remain static.  I do not think that
>> technology will easily solve this problem (i.e., prevent copying).
>> Societal attitudes (including legal remedies) may be the solution.
> 
> Of course morals, laws and again, market dynamics will resolve these
> issues.  Technical people too often assume that because something is
> possible, it will quickly become the de facto law of the land.  Again,
> history does not bear this out.  Does anyone presume that because
> world-obliterating nuclear missiles *can* be launched that they will
> annihilate the world tomorrow?  No, but it is a risk that we must live
> with.  Risks in themselves are not generally interesting to talk or
> write about unless their probabilities (or perceived probabilities)
> are high.

kt> I don't think that nuclear missiles are a good analogy to the
kt> situation with electronic books.  In my opinion a better analogy
kt> would be with audio tape copying.

OK.  Does anyone believe that because consumers could make perfect
copies of audio tapes, say with DATs, that the music industry would die?
I don't think there would be many well informed yes votes.  You could
argue that this is precisely why the music industry has lobbied against
consumer-level DAT reproduction, but this is a fear of revenue erosion,
not extinction.  The two are very different.

kt> But in that case there is still
kt> some loss of quality.  It happens all of the time despite the fact
kt> that it takes 45 minutes to copy 45 minutes worth of music.  Imagine
kt> if it could happen in 1/100 of a second over a network.

This is a good point and precisely the one that so much of industry is
afraid to deal with today, thus we see a huge number of legal barriers
being erected to try to maintain the status quo as it relates to
intellectual property rights.  These rights will undoubtedly change as
people become more attuned to the social benefits that freer exchange
will permit.  This just means that industries will have to adapt to a
different client, not that their roles will go away.  People will still
be willing to pay for good design, excel{ent editing and so forth.
Payment may come on a more custom basis than it does now, but there will
still be many profitable areas available.

> I would say there is virtually no evidence that points toward:
> 
> 	the elimination of paper;
> 
> 	the elimination of for-profit writers or publishers;
> 
> 	a difference in copying behaviors vis-a-vis static and dynamic mediums.

kt> The first two are clearly market driven.  It all depends on how the
kt> new technology is accepted by the public.  But these will be
kt> non-linear economic processes.  The feedback will be positive.  In
kt> the same way that CDs killed vinyl, the electronic medium can kill
kt> paper.  I have no doubt that it will, eventually.  The rate at which
kt> this will be accomplished depends on many factors, and I don't claim
kt> to know them all.

This seems like saying AI will replace workers.  I don't know when but I
know it will.  If you can't say anything about the time scale and what
other co-related events will occur, e.g. workers will shift to non-AI
controlled markets, then who cares?  The extreme fuzziness makes it
a non-issue.

kt> The third point is still something I feel very strongly about.  If
kt> you still don't understand what I mean, let me know.  This is
kt> probably the key point I would like to get across.

kt> [Here's another example of static vs. dynamic.  Consider a static
kt> electronic book which describes AM modulation.  Copying it would be
kt> simple.  Now consider a Mathematica Notebook which covers the same
kt> subject.  The program underlying the notebook allows a user to vary
kt> the carrier frequency and show how this influences the waveform.
kt> Again it would be possible to make a copy of individual images in
kt> the notebook.  But it would not be possible to copy the dynamic
kt> behavior of the notebook (assuming that you believe that some form
kt> of workable copy protection exists).  A copy of the notebook would
kt> not allow a user to vary the frequence.  They would be able to see
kt> only the one image that was captured.]

Again, explaining what can be doesn't say much about what will be.  You
can't rely on explaining technical possibilities into to extrapolate to
social realities.

kt> Technology may play a role in this (e.g., tagging each individual document
kt> with subtle differences which might identify the source of illegal copies -
kt> but then technology could also help defeat such measures).  But my overall
kt> attitude toward mass market publications remains pessimistic.

> You should take another look at the mass market.  Travel to grammar
> schools, rural areas, slums, coffee shops, check out market surveys
> from malls, supermarkets and television viewers.  Those institutions
> serve the mass market and likely will provide a very different picture
> of non-embedded computer penetration and how long electronic books
> will take to even begin to stand side by side with paper media.
> (Remember to ask how many people have done a DowQuest search versus a
> dictionary word look up.)

kt> I agree that many people will not accept the new technology (either
kt> because they are uncomfortable with it or because they cannot afford
kt> it).  But the kids who are being brought up on Nintendo and PCs will
kt> embrace it.

Dealt with at the start of this message.

kt> Dowquest will start replacing a dictionary when it becomes easier to
kt> access Dow Jones rather than waking across the room and grabbing a
kt> dictionary.  Right now it takes a while to turn on your computer,
kt> log into Dow Jones, and then ask your question.  High bandwidth
kt> over-the-airwaves communication channels added to notebook computers
kt> will soon start to eat away at the dictionaries advantage.

The cost differentials will remain for as long as I can see because of
the R&D costs for the electronic solutions.  I still have to buy a
computer which costs me on a per query basis and also draws power that I
have to pay for when all I want to do is lookup a word in the pocket
dictionary I got at the sidewalk bookstore sale for $1.50.

kt> Thanks for the comments Bob.  I think as more people challenge my
kt> ideas, they will become clearer and more pointed.

I enjoy the exchange also.

Bob

------------------------------

End of WAIS-discussion Digest 47
************************

-------
Xref: sparky alt.wais:493 alt.hypertext:390