Re: Network Abuse by Netscape? -- Was: Mosaic replacements, etc...
Lou Montulli (email@example.com)
Thu, 27 Oct 1994 11:47:12 +0100
On Oct 25, 5:14pm, Robert Raisch wrote:
> Subject: Re: Network Abuse by Netscape? -- Was: Mosaic replacements, etc..
> Thanks Marc for pointing out my error. However, if I were to change the
> default setting in Netscape's ini file to 50, for example, would that
> have the expected effect?
> Have you any statistical data on the effect this retrieval strategy has
> on network resources?
You seem to be missing the point Rob. The total amount of traffic
remains the same. On a reasonably busy network the differences
in the retreival tactics balance out and there is no difference
in the overall traffic patterns. If anything, MCOM is helping the
situation by introducing JPEG image compression to dramatically
decrease the total amount of bandwidth needed. You should be yelling
at the other Web browser writers for not doing anything to reduce
the total amount of bandwidth needed and applauding us for our committment
to help low bandwidth customers.
You also overlook the fact that Netscape's caching mechanism is far superior
to that of X Mosaic and similar browsers. Did you know that X Mosaic
retransfers a document every time you click on a link regardless of
whether or not the document has been cached or has changed?
Netscape simply asks the HTTP server is the document has changed and
DOES NOT retransfer the document if it hasn't. In the next release
Netscape will have a persistant disk cache that will dramatically
decrease the total bandwidth requirements. So if anything, Netscape
helps you as a provider provide more information with lower bandwidth
Lou Montulli http://mosaic.mcom.com/people/montulli/
Mozilla Development Team It's spelled 'Netscape', it's pronouced 'Mozilla'