----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffery Rehm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:21 PM Subject: Re: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Sending Through Gateway Host
> I have an account with a provider that is a 'pure' ISP that I've had pretty > much since they formed back in the early eighties. The only thing they have > in place is that they have blocked access to newgroups that promote child > pornography, you must authenticate to access newsgroups, and you must > authenticate to relay mail if you are not connected via their circuits. > > Now in the last few years, they felt a responsibility to try to curtail some > of the spam their users were receiving and to also provide virus scanning > for their subscribers that use email accounts hosted by them. From the > start they provided the anti-spam service for free. The AV was an > additional 2 bucks a month for about a year and now they are providing that > free also. > > The cool thing is the subscriber has total control over their anti-spam and > anti-virus. If they don't want it they are not required to use it. If they > do want it, they control the level they want. The ISP does not dictate what > the customer can do, nor do they impose restrictions based on what THEY feel > a customer needs. They have dial-up in major cities, which works for most > travelers. > > But, for some reason I cannot get business customers to switch to them for > dial-up use by traveling employees. It is not an issue of the ISP not > having local dial-up numbers where these people spend most of their time. I > sense it is more a matter of this ISP not having a certain 'branding' and > they are looked upon as a mom & pop operation, which they really are, but > you wouldn't know it based on the level of service they provide. Generally a 'Mom & Pop' business gives better service at a higher price. The mentality of the AOL's of the world is that they can give cheaper service because they make it up in bulk, and they can have a lower level of service because even if they lose a few customers they have plenty more. > > It's is funny how this ISP can operate they way they do and not have to > impose the unjustifiably draconian measures of other major providers. They > may lose some 'lemmings' to the major providers because you need to know how > to use a browser with ISP's such as this, but they probably gain a few > customers that have risen from lemmingville and have actually decided to > learn how to really use the resources of the Internet instead of letting a > bunch of empty suits lead by the nose with butterflys and little yellow > guys. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Sanford Whiteman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Jeffery Rehm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 20:24 > Subject: Re[2]: [IMail Forum] Sending Through Gateway Host > > > > > Bottom line is that providers stupidly want to protect themselves at > > > the expense of customers. They bank on thinking that the majority of > > > their customers are regular old dumb residential types that won't > > > know the difference, and unfortunately they are right. But, legit > > > businesses are treated the same way unless they generate enough > > > revenue that the ISP will make exceptions for them. > > > > The conventional wisdom is that, whether or not a business is > > "legit"--there are plenty of one-person shops that are well-run, > > ethical, etc.--a business that wants to communicate reliably from > > multiple locations must pay for "corporate" service levels from an > > appropriate provider, despite common price-gouging for the services > > that are actually in use (which in many cases are actually fewer in > > number than the services used by individual customers: a corporate > > user likely wouldn't use their @earthlink.net accout, their > > www.earthlink.net/username web page builder, etc.). > > > > The alternative to seeking out a provider that explicitly uses the > > "corporate" or "business" buzzword is to find one that offers > > unrestricted access to all subscribers, more in tune with the old > > Utopian model. I prefer to use one of these full-service providers > > whenever possible, since I generally find that model more ethical. Yet > > you often end up paying more for more honest service, and can't always > > find it. > > > > In both cases, it's *you*, the informed consultant, providing > > value-added IT services by finding an appropriate provider for your > > customer. The problem is when you're not even given a *chance* to do > > this because ELN or AOL has blitzed the lemmings with marketing, and > > you're left fumfering, "You should have let me tell you so...." That > > always sucks. Maybe someone should syndicate a few different "white > > papers" (rather than the usual greenscreen techie rants, and ones that > > definitely don't use the word "lemmings") so businesses of all kinds > > can see how wrong these providers are for them, and make sure they're > > linked to by lots of independent consultants, rather than directly by > > ISPs, whose motives would be suspicious. > > > > -Sandy > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Sanford Whiteman, Chief Technologist > > Broadleaf Systems, a division of > > Cypress Integrated Systems, Inc. > > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ > > > > > To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html > List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ > Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/ To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/ Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/
