>a) On CompuServe you are not limited to only one online and one offline interface. There're various online-readers out there, as well as many offline readers. Some like Virutal Access also allow access to newsgroup in the same pass.
>
>b) We have a forum archive available for download going back to September 1997. And if there's the demand we can post older archives as well. The archives are in DBF format unencrypted and read records are not marked as deleted. This archive is free and was never intended to appear on a commercial CD.
>

Exactly, you need to download that stuff. On the UT, it is available as if it were posted yesterday. I only bring up this fact because the availablity of CIS archives is seen as some sort of advantage. I counter with the fact that the UT has every message from day 1 on line. If I have to choose between having to download an archive or having the ability to go on line and pull up messages immediately, I will choose the later.

In summary, I am not disputing the availablity of certain features associated with CIS. However, two points are important:

1. Often, the solutions come by way of 3rd party providers which often entail an additional cost.
2. These "features" are considered to be an advantage of CIS over UT by some. This is the point I am disputing.

>c) I've half a dozen folders for messages in addition to store messages in DBF files. How much you can manage depends on the software you use. Since most software allows you to export files into a FBD format, you can do it any way you want, even store them on a SQL server, passing them back as an XML file and displaying them on your intranet, if you want. :)
>

You can have as many on-line folders on the UT that you like. Again, the UT has an offline reader that can archive messages locally if that is what you like. Since everything is online here, I don't see the need to rely on archive mechansims...


>d) In CIS I can search messages in every range, not only in steps of half a year and the are shown in any order I want, not in a strange order that partly bases on the time.
>

How about a calendar search interface like the UT? I guess a 3rd party has created something similar. However, you will not find this feature in the native CIS interface...

>I remember well the discussions you had here about providing _facts_ in messages and not guessing, especially when MVP makes comments and remarks. I'd like to ask you to follow your own rules and don't make unqualified comments about CompuServe. Please don't take this offensive, the last thing this forum needs is another flame war. There have been to many in the past.
>

Yes, I remember those posts as well..< bg >. And, I don't dispute the facts you enumerate here. Rather, I am disputing that what you bring forth are 'advantages' of CIS over the UT. As far as I am concerned, it is more a discussion of religion. Folks like CIS because they like CIS. Folks like the UT because they like the UT. Folks like both because they like both.

Pitting one interface against another is a flawed argument since CIS must rely on 3rd party products to achieve parity.


>Please let come to a constructive way of handling our fora. On CompuServe I don't keep telling people how bad I think the UT is, and if I think that a message has a better chance to get a reply here I point them to the UT. While I can't expect you to do the same, but...
>
>BTW, I just found this thread and I'm currently going through it. If you have taken back any of your comments in another message, I apologize in advance.
>
>Christof
>Sysop in MSDEVAPP