At 9/30/03 9:05 AM, Christopher X. Candreva wrote: >I hope this teaches people to read things carefully before goings nuts and >starting rumors. > >I notice people were quick to jump on OpenSRS's back, but not to apologize >when it turns out they were wrong.
I'm one of those who jumped on OpenSRS's back by saying that I wouldn't tolerate it, and I see your point. However, while I appreciate Jacqueline's clarification, I don't think anything that's been said was "wrong" in the larger sense. It's not as if the Web hosting issue is a rumor that came completely out of the blue, after all. It has come up repeatedly in the past, and Tucows has never said they won't do it in the future, as far as I know (I'd be happy to be proven wrong). And I have a deep skepticism on this issue: after close to four years with OpenSRS, it pains me to admit that I don't fully believe that Web hosting isn't under consideration, despite the denial. (Heck, Blogware is a form of Web hosting, really.) My lack of trust may mean I'm a complete jerk who should be ignored... but it's also possible that it's useful feedback for Elliot and Ross to take note of: a sign that something's wrong here. I don't think my mistrust is irrational. After all, Tucows introduced e-mail service over exactly the same kind of objections, after originally saying that they had no intention of offering services that compete with their original target market (the small-to-medium technically knowledgeable ISP who needs things like domain registration, secure certificates, payment gateway services, etc.). The introduction of turnkey e-mail, and the future introduction of Blogware, are a fairly clear move towards providing services that are traditionally offered at a retail level, being sold by Tucows (as I mentioned) by what amounts to little more an affiliate program. And I'm appalled that resources were taken off the SF project to develop Blogware -- Ross, have you not noticed recently how awful the "standard" code is? Sorry to be harsh, but it's true; it was not designed well in the first place, which was understandable given the circumstances of the OpenSRS launch, but it's gotten much worse over the last four years instead of better. It's well-nigh impossible to customize in any serious fashion, as medium ISPs will probably want to do. The SF project was supposed to solve this. Okay, that paragraph is a little off-topic (got sidetracked into a rant; sorry). But these decisions are all symptomatic of the same thing: a lack of focus on the desires of the original target market (i.e., me -- hence my whining). Of course, companies and markets change; I can certainly see how OpenSRS could decide to focus on new markets, making more money by doing so, and can't blame them if that's the case. It does mean they're competing with me more than ever, but it's happening gradually and I haven't yet decided that the services offer enough competition to hurt my business (although I may one day reach that point: Blogware is a further little push in that direction). But Web hosting? That would push me over the edge without a second thought. I think it's useful for Tucows to keep that in mind, whether this particular survey is about introducing it or not. (If Tucows would say that they will never offer Web hosting services to resellers, I'll gladly shut up about it forever and apologize for impugning their motives.) -- Robert L Mathews, Tiger Technologies
