Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Hosting Service Closes 3000 Blogs Without Notice

Posted by timothy on Tue Jun 15, 2004 09:34 PM
from the and-such-small-portions dept.
marmoset writes "Citing the high costs of running the free service, performance concerns, and health problems, Dave Winer closed down the weblogs.com hosting service without any prior notice. As many as 3000 sites are now inacessible, and the users who want to transfer their data elsewhere have to ask (politely) for it to be exported. As might be expected, reactions range from understanding to enraged. Netcraft has a report, too."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Not a Troll (for once...) (Score:5, Funny)

    by imadork (226897) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:36PM (#9437894)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    So, netcraft confirmed that *weblogs are dying?
    • New Word Coined! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Rick and Roll (672077) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:23PM (#9438265)
      "ogs" - which refers to all types of online journalism, including:

      1. blogs
      2. plogs
      3. moblogs

      Note: I decided not to call them "logs", because that word has already gained use online and offline, so we need a way to distinguish which ones are online.

      [ Parent ]
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BodyCount07 (260070) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:36PM (#9437898)
    (http://blog.thetechnonaut.com/)
    The real question is whether or not this is allowed in the TOS. If it is, well than, that's how the cookie crumbles, users should have been making backups.

    If it is not allowed by the TOS than users have a right to be outraged.
    • Re:TOS by saihung (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:38PM
      • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

        by EvanED (569694) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [denave]> on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:45PM (#9437978)
        "It would've cost him so much to give people a couple of days to get their shit in order?"

        Actually, maybe. I don't know his hosting situation, but if even a quarter of the people had gone to back up their posts, that's a significant amount of extra traffic. Notice would have probably been have to be given out at least a week in advance to avoid a massive rush.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

          by JPriest (547211) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:07PM (#9438149)
          (http://www.teaparty07.com/)
          Yes, but that cost would likely be offset when people read that only the free accounts were nuked. Non-free accounts were not nuked, so many of the free users probably would have been willing to pay to upgrade their service in order to keep it.
          [ Parent ]
          • There are no paid accounts (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Wesley Felter (138342) <wesley@felter.org> on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:39PM (#9438708)
            (http://felter.org/wesley/)
            Dave Winer says "I don't want to start a site hosting business." As far as I can tell, there is no way to "upgrade" to keep a weblogs.com site; the best you could do is move to a different provider.
            [ Parent ]
          • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

            by _KiTA_ (241027) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:58PM (#9438830)
            (http://www.nwinfo.net/~mcantrell/)
            Obviously you're new to this whole intra-web thing.

            People don't pay for stuff they get for free. If he had announced that he was closing free accounts, they would have slammed him HARD while they backed up their stuff, then ran off and found a new free host to mooch off of and left him high and dry with an outrageous bandiwdth bill.

            You think he wasn't pushing them to try and get them to sign up for pay accounts already? The number one rule of the internet -- users are absolute resourch leeching mooches.
            [ Parent ]
            • Re:TOS (Score:4, Interesting)

              by sql*kitten (1359) * on Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:58AM (#9439619)
              If he had announced that he was closing free accounts, they would have slammed him HARD while they backed up their stuff, then ran off

              It depends on how much effort was involved, not just to export the data and import it somewhere (performing whatever conversion is required) but to communicate the new URL to everyone.

              A modest fee would most likely have been paid, especially if new functionality came with pay accounts. Look at Livejournal - you can sign up for free, but paying users get more features. In fact Slashdot could learn a lot from Livejournal.
              [ Parent ]
              • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

                It depends on how much effort was involved, not just to export the data and import it somewhere (performing whatever conversion is required) but to communicate the new URL to everyone.

                A modest fee would most likely have been paid, especially if new functionality came with pay accounts. Look at Livejournal - you can sign up for free, but paying users get more features. In fact Slashdot could learn a lot from Livejournal.

                I run a free/paid email service - vfemail.net. You're welcome to monitor the main page and watch the number of free subscribers vs paid subscribers, but the paid users are pretty steady at 28 - while the number of free signups has just crossed the 10,000 mark :/.

                People are cheap. If it wasn't for Google ads, I'd be dead in the water.

                [ Parent ]
              • Re:TOS by autopr0n (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:00PM
              • Re:TOS by sql*kitten (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @08:09AM
              • Re:TOS by joshmccormack (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:14AM
              • Re:TOS by dasmegabyte (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:27AM
              • Re:TOS by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:10AM
              • Re:TOS by sugarmotor (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:57AM
              • Re:TOS by mnemex (Score:1) Thursday June 17 2004, @01:35PM
              • Re:TOS by Havokmon (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @02:06PM
              • Re:TOS by Havokmon (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @02:09PM
              • Re:TOS by Havokmon (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @02:12PM
              • Re:TOS by sugarmotor (Score:1) Thursday June 17 2004, @03:09PM
              • Re:TOS by Havokmon (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @04:22PM
            • A Little Perspective... (Score:5, Informative)

              by reallocate (142797) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @07:29AM (#9440562)
              As he's said (just in case, you know, a few Slashdotter's don't actually know what they're talkng about because they don't read anything beyond /.'s well-spun lede), the blogs were hosted on servers belonging to Userland, the California corporation Winer founded but left two years ago after heart bypass surgery. Userland apparently recently cleaned its corporate house, letting go of several activities and interests that they were supporting but which do not, and will not, bring in any revenue. That included the blogs.

              Winer seems to have wanted to migrate the blogs to Cambridge, Mass, where he is now a visiting fellow at Harvard. However, when he loaded up a server with the blogs, it turned to molasses. (If memeory serves, they run on a Windows server.)

              The obvious solution was to buy more hardware and spread the blogs among several servers. I can't really blame Winer for not doing that: He'd become a defacto freebie hosting service (there are no ads on these free sites, so no chance for any revenue); he'd need to hire staff to perform the migrations and manage the servers (his comments clearly indicated that the doctors have told him to stay away from the stress of programming and admin'ing); and he's about to leave Harvard and move elsewhere.

              As far as the TOS goes, I once briefly used another free Userland/Winer blogging facility and, I believe, those TOS clearly indicated that there the sites were hosted, in effect, at the pleasure of Userland. They made no claims about support, uptime, or lifetime.

              That said, the notice to the users was very abrupt. We don't know if this had been in the works for weeks or for hours. If the decision to take down the sites was made weeks ago, then the notice to users should have been given weeks ago. If the decision was made abruptly, everyone was left holding the bag.

              Perhaps a better solution would have been for Userland to send out the shutdown notices and for no one to make any attempt to keep the sites alive.
              [ Parent ]
            • Re:TOS by meepzorb (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:13PM
            • Re:TOS by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:25AM
            • Re:TOS by 13thirteen (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @10:02AM
            • Re:TOS by hesiod (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:08AM
              • Re:TOS by Cromac (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @01:12PM
                • Re:TOS by hesiod (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:57PM
              • Re:TOS by hesiod (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @08:22AM
            • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
        • My guess at what happened (Score:5, Informative)

          by 0x0d0a (568518) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:30AM (#9439524)
          (Last Journal: Sunday October 03 2004, @04:03AM)
          So, as far as I can tell from the discussion, he tried running stuff on his own server for a bit instead of Userland. I'm going to guess that his bandwidth usage for this month exceeded whatever he purchased for the month -- this would explain why he's refusing to provide any access until the first of next month, when he's sending people's blogs back to them.

          Of course, that doesn't explain why he'd use an audio message to get the word out.
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:TOS (Score:5, Informative)

          by gl4ss (559668) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:59AM (#9440222)
          (http://--/ | Last Journal: Monday December 09 2002, @05:12PM)
          well, the guy certainly has no problems linking to an AUDIO POST hosted on HARVARDS EXPENSE.

          he just created something he doesn't want to a) take care of b) give to somebody else.

          -

          [ Parent ]
      • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

        by TeraCo (410407) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:46PM (#9437983)
        (http://slashdot.org/)
        Well, it's easy to talk about costs when they aren't YOUR costs to be paying, isn't it.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:TOS (Score:5, Insightful)

          by squidinkcalligraphy (558677) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:41PM (#9438382)
          (http://ourpublictransport.org/)
          And it's even easier to talk about costs when you are part of the force that is increasing them as we speak: I refer to the slashdot effect.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:TOS by Lord_Dweomer (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:11AM
        • Re:TOS (Score:5, Interesting)

          by prockcore (543967) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:46PM (#9438750)
          Well, it's easy to talk about costs when they aren't YOUR costs to be paying, isn't it.

          The company I work for used to be an ISP (as well as many other things). We decided the ISP (dialup and DSL) wasn't making money so we sold it.

          But we had the common courtesy to set up forwards for all 30k of our subscriber's email, and keep their personal websites up and home directories for over a year.

          Even to this day, we still host local non profits' websites for free (we don't accept new ones, but we'll continue to host the ones we did accept back in our ISP days)
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:TOS by TeraCo (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @01:22AM
            • Re:TOS by Ulven (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:30AM
              • Re:TOS by slimak (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:01AM
            • Re:TOS by stephenbooth (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @04:56AM
              • Re:TOS by TeraCo (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:47AM
              • Re:TOS by stephenbooth (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:49AM
              • Re:TOS by TeraCo (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @04:12PM
              • Re:TOS by stephenbooth (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @04:56PM
              • Re:TOS by TeraCo (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:36PM
          • Re:TOS by dasmegabyte (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:35AM
            • Re:TOS by operagost (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:51AM
              • Re:TOS by dasmegabyte (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:35PM
            • Why didn't you sue them? by autopr0n (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:08PM
        • What TOS??? by Roadkills-R-Us (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:53AM
      • Re:TOS by big tex (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:47PM
        • Re:TOS by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:00PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:TOS by DNS-and-BIND (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:23PM
        • Re:TOS by Anonymous Coward (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:59AM
          • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Common courtesy? by jcr (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:56AM
      • Re:TOS vs common courtesy (Score:4, Interesting)

        by otisg (92803) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:01AM (#9439632)
        (http://www.simpy.com/ | Last Journal: Tuesday April 15 2003, @12:58PM)
        "Only in such a sick culture could the terms of a contract take precedence over common courtesy. It would've cost him so much to give people a couple of days to get their shit in order?"

        You can also look at TOS vs. common courtesy the other way around:
        No matter what the TOS said, if you are/were getting free service, and this service is provided by an individual whose circumstances have changed and are outside his control, use your common courtesy and accept that your blog is now gone.

        Like other have said:
        1. if your blog is so important, why didn't you back it up?
        2. why trust an individual (or a company) with your precious data and trust them with the only copy of your data
        [ Parent ]
      • Re:TOS (Score:5, Interesting)

        by transops.net (752062) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:44AM (#9440175)
        (http://www.transops.net/ | Last Journal: Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:03AM)
        Let me begin by saying I understand the emotion behind your comment. This is a really sad turn of events for anyone who hosted an active blog on Dave's network. That said, let's look at this from a capitalist (take the emotion out of that word, just focus on its abstract definition) perspective.

        Dave Winer has provided a portion of his network resources to the Internet community at large for several years, manifested by our (now terminated) ability to host a blog for free on his systems. Note that I'm not attempting to portray Dave as an altruistic fellow, although I do in fact think he's a great guy. We can't escape the fact that he achieved a significant amount of promotion for Manilla in trade for our no-cost use of his system. I guarantee you that over the term of the arrangement, he gained far more from the deal in mindshare than he spent in bandwidth.

        Unfortunately, nothing in this world is static. People are still getting older, stocks go up and down, and Dave's life (both personal and business, however little separation there may be between the two) isn't exempt from this rule. Before we rush to cry foul at his decision, let's look at some background information:

        (1) Dave Winer is widely recognized as an Internet communication pioneer, having been an early designer of a useful system for letting people people manage online content. Depending on your current needs and budget, there may be better products out there, but his company's work remains relevant.

        (2) The whole Manilla concept borrowed from earlier ideas, and became a model that others would follow in turn when they developed other CMS environments. This indicates a protracted period of skilled effort on Dave's part. Which leads us to the conclusion that...

        (3) Dave Winer is most likely an intelligent man who shows every sign of continuing to live in a fair manner. His recent statements on the issue at hand seem well thought out and polite, which leads me to believe the health problems he references aren't related to mental disease. If his mind is still intact, he probably had very good reasons for forgoing public notification. We should remind ourselves that...

        (4) Although the TOS for this hosting most likely hold the responsible parties harmless in the event of service discontinuance, there is always the possibility of some squirrely blogger getting notions of litigation in a moment of emotional weakness. Unspecified damages for emotional pain and suffering due to inability to dredge up the past by perusing their blog, or some other such title. It's unlikely. but possible for America's rather litigious populace. Remember the Fast Food Makes Us Obese lawsuits.

        Remember, attorneys always give the same opening advice to their clients: Never admit culpability, and try not to say anything at all without first passing it through Big_Law_Firm.pl for content filtering. Even then, it's usually best to use Pricey_PR_Group.php to speak publically about your actions. Reference the Santa Cruz Operation for mastery of this art.

        To sum it all up, let the inner Libertarian (no emotion, just the concept) in you shine by Making Daily Backups of anything important. A few lines of bash or perl scripting with a dash of UNIX utils can prevent years of therapy and rehab. As an added bonus, you get the ability to feel good about yourself by contributing your techniques to the community while you deposit checks from your clients who just *love* your new online backup service.

        Thus, personal responsibility helps us keep smart people out of the field of dentisty by preventing excessive gnashing of teeth. Less demand in that field equals more folks to give us free hosting services, right? More personally, since everyone wants to feel special in their own way, I feel special knowing my dentist doesn't feel inspired to name his next luxury car after me. It ain't much, but anything that helps me sleep better is well worth the effort.

        [ Parent ]
        • Business by simpl3x (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @10:57AM
      • IANAL, but its not a contract by mekkab (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @08:44AM
    • Re:TOS by big tex (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:41PM
      • Re:TOS by Aneurysm9 (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:03PM
        • Re:TOS by werfele (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:24PM
          • Re:TOS by Aneurysm9 (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:34AM
            • Re:TOS by werfele (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:34AM
        • [OT] Your sig... by NuclearDog (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:43PM
      • Re:TOS by Monty845 (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:07PM
      • Re:TOS by harlows_monkeys (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:17PM
        • Re:TOS by Fnkmaster (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:18PM
          • Re:TOS by tf23 (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:34AM
      • Re:TOS by bobbagum (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:10AM
      • Re:TOS by jcr (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:53AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:TOS by hachete (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:56AM
        • Re:TOS by WoodstockJeff (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:18AM
        • Re:TOS by mcmonkey (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:31AM
          • Re:TOS by hachete (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @09:54AM
    • Re:TOS by SanityInAnarchy (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:12PM
      • Re:TOS by fwarren (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @01:01AM
        • Re:TOS by Kombat (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @08:40AM
          • Re:TOS by geoffspear (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @10:16AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:TOS by spacecowboy420 (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @01:54AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Backups (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:37PM (#9437902)
    Why would you trust any hosting company to keep the only copy of your data, if it were all that important to you?
    • Re:Backups by SanityInAnarchy (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:14PM
      • Re:Backups (Score:4, Insightful)

        by el-spectre (668104) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:54PM (#9438445)
        (Last Journal: Tuesday December 30 2003, @07:21PM)
        Well, in that case you shoulda kept it on floppies or something.

        Losing stuff w/o backups sucks. We've all been there. Still, if you know better and don't do it, you're not gonna get much love from slashdot.
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Backups (Score:5, Funny)

          by mopslik (688435) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:54PM (#9438807)

          Suppose I've got terabytes of data...

          Well, in that case you shoulda kept it on floppies or something.

          Please insert disk 457,982,221,010 of 695,763,100,218 to continue...

          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Backups by mrscorpio (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:12AM
          • Re:Backups by amaiman (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @07:54AM
          • Re:Backups by el-spectre (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:52PM
        • Re:Backups by fiaworldrally (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @01:28AM
      • Re:Backups by jjsoh (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:46PM
      • Re:Backups by sql*kitten (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:24AM
        • Re:Backups by Grrr (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:46PM
      • Re:Backups by adamofgreyskull (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:26AM
        • Re:Backups by Lordrashmi (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @08:45AM
      • Re:Backups by klaricmn (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @08:36AM
      • Re:Backups by silicon not in the v (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:53AM
      • Re:Backups by WuphonsReach (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:03AM
      • First rule of backups. by Big Sean O (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:53PM
      • Re:Backups by Gilmoure (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @10:21AM
      • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Backups (Score:5, Interesting)

      by stilwebm (129567) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:15PM (#9438208)
      The users have varying level of backups, but the biggest issue is that no one can find the new blog now. The weblogs.com domain was integral to these blogs, much like blogger.com, typepad.com, etc. The weblogs were found at hostnames like booknotes.hammock.com, rex.weblogs.com, delphi.weblogs.com, etc. Users very much could have used an opportunity to say what their new URL was. Dave Winer decided that was too much work [harvard.edu] [MP3 audio post he made].
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Backups by ameoba (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:30PM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Backups by Anthony Boyd (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:50PM
        • Re:Backups by elemental23 (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:53PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Backups (Score:5, Funny)

      by ziggy_zero (462010) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:30PM (#9438665)
      The real question is, where are bloggers going to go to whine about this????
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Backups by l810c (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:07AM
        • Re:Backups by Paleomacus (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @07:53AM
    • Re:Backups by jesterzog (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:07AM
      • Re:Backups by WuphonsReach (Score:2) Thursday June 17 2004, @10:56AM
    • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Backups? by Insomnia (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:37PM
    • Re:Backups? by Cyb3rBull3ts (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:41PM
    • Re:Backups? by Insomnia (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:26AM
      • Re:Backups? by Insomnia (Score:1) Saturday June 19 2004, @06:26PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Newsflash... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WIAKywbfatw (307557) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:37PM (#9437908)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday September 06 2005, @12:39PM)
    When your data is on someone else's servers, and you don't have any of that data properly backed up, then you are completely at their mercy when it comes to being able to use it or losing it entirely. This is especially true when the service that they are supplying is being provided for free.
    • Re:Newsflash... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by pongo000 (97357) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:49PM (#9438015)
      Now imagine this was SourceForge...
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Newsflash... by pipingguy (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:35PM
    • Re:Newsflash... (Score:5, Insightful)

      I pay for hosting, and I still do backups at least once/week (mainly for the database backups). Anyone who keeps anything on the 'net should know that its an unstable place, and thing can dissapear at a moment's notice. I don't trust anything to be kept securely to the web, and no one else should either.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Newsflash... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by LostCluster (625375) * on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:20PM (#9438595)
        Anything on a web server is most likely on a hard disk... And hard disks are considered stable because their data doesn't disappear when the computer is powered down or reboots, but they don't last forever. All HDs have moving parts, and eventually some part of that drive will fail physically making your data nearly inaccessable. It's not a question of if but when. It will happen. Expect it to happen about 4-5 years after the drive first put into service. You should see this coming, not be caught unexpectedly by it.
        [ Parent ]
    • Re:Newsflash... by rjamestaylor (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:37AM
    • Re:Newsflash... by silicon not in the v (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:56AM
    • Re:Newsflash... by abertoll (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @04:09PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Umm... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dotslashconfig (784719) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:38PM (#9437912)
    So let me get this straight... He didn't know even 1 day in advance that rising costs and other technical/logistical difficulties were going to force him to shut down service? That seems rather ridiculous and is a huge oversight on his part. To not even warn people that he was having difficulties... it's mind boggling. I'm sure someone would have come to his aid, or at least tried to organize a fund to assist in maintaining service.

    Honestly, though... to not see this coming even a few days in advance? That's very disappointing.
    • Re:Umm... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by EvanED (569694) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [denave]> on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:39PM (#9437934)
      If he was having problems already I'm not sure a mad rush of 3000 people trying to back up their data would have exactly helped...
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Umm... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by dotslashconfig (784719) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:47PM (#9437991)
        What I mean is... if he'd given people a little more time to examine the situation - even a week would have been sufficient - people who liked his service might have tried to set up a fund-raising activity of some variety. I'm sure his users wouldn't have minded contributing a dollar or two in order to continue service.

        People just needed a small amount of time to prepare, even if they wouldn't have the chance to back up their data.

        In my experience, people tend to react more favorably towards disappointing situations if they have fair warning. People are a little more understanding if they have the chance to react to this news, as opposed to suddenly just seeing their information disappear.

        That's why "trading curbs" were implemented on the New York Stock Exchange. People needed time to react to news that could potentially cost them money/time. It's a lot easier to deal with losses if you either see them coming, or are given a fair chance to recover from drastic swings. (A little off-topic, but I think this relates).
        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Umm... by EvanED (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:52PM
        • Re:Umm... by DNS-and-BIND (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:25PM
          • Re:Umm... by allism (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:39PM
            • Re:Umm... by dasmegabyte (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:44AM
            • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
        • Re:Umm... (Score:5, Informative)

          by sakusha (441986) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:50PM (#9438419)
          Fundraising isn't the issue. Winer's a millionaire, he just sold his house in CA. According to the Wired Magazine biography of Winer, he paid $2 million for a house in an exclusive neighborhood, next to Joan Baez's house. Winer is sitting on millions of bucks, it's not like he couldn't afford to pay for hosting. He just decided he no longer wanted to, so he killed the blogs of everyone who wasn't his buddy (i.e. Searls). So if you haven't sucked up to Winer sufficiently, your blog is toast. Such are the tribulations of dealing with millionaire dilletantes.

          Winer is freaking out. His "fellowship" at Berkman is over, he's got no job and nobody wants him around anymore, even his sycophants are no longer willing to help him find his next gig.
          [ Parent ]
          • Re:Umm... by Anthony Boyd (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:31PM
            • Re:Umm... (Score:5, Interesting)

              by sakusha (441986) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:47PM (#9438760)
              You seem to be operating under some mistaken assumptions. Winer still owns Userland. He is being disingenuous when he says he no longer runs Userland. Maybe he doesn't hold the official title of CEO, but he still owns the company, and it is operated under his direction.
              You also seem to be assuming that this hostility towards Winer is unjustified because he gave out these services for free. I assure you from personal experience that Winer treats you like shit even if you're a paying customer.
              You also seem to believe it when Dave says he's getting out of the hosting business. Wrong again. He's just killing off the FREE weblogs (with the exception of his suck-up buddies like Searls). His servers still host the paid customers of Radio Userland, hosted on radio.weblogs.com, so he can't dump all of weblogs.com like he claims he's doing. The big question is why did he have all those websites moved to HIS server if they were paid customers of Userland?
              You also seem to think these criticisms are unnecessarily harsh. I disagree. Winer is notorious for baiting people, then editing the exchange of messages. His usual tactic is to say something offensive, then someone responds in a similarly hotheaded manner, then Winer edits his original remark to something innocuous, so it seems like the response is a completely flaming response to a polite remark. So it is not too surprising that people jump at the chance to respond to Winer's insanity in a forum that isn't controlled by Winer. These remarks are quite civil by Winer's standards of conduct.
              [ Parent ]
              • Re:Umm... by Anthony Boyd (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:39AM
              • Re:Umm... by yellowhousejake (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @09:49AM
              • Re:Umm... by rocketjesus (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @11:55AM
              • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
            • Re:Umm... by RedWizzard (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @02:15AM
              • Re:Umm... by nacturation (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @04:34AM
              • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
            • 2 replies beneath your current threshold.
      • Or not, it makes no technical sense. by metalhed77 (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:48PM
      • Re:Umm... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by rimu guy (665008) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:50PM (#9438020)
        (http://rimuhosting.com/)

        He has 3000 people using the service. It would have taken them some time to sign up. He would have had ample info about the cost of running the service and providing support for it.

        I can only deduce that Mr. Winer's personal circumstances have changed dramatically, and that is what is causing the problem.

        And I agree with the grandfather post. There should have been warning about the service change. He should have let people know they had a week or a month to move things off the server. There would have been an increase in server load. But it would have been manageable.

        ---
        Yep, we host blogs [rimuhosting.com]

        [ Parent ]
        • Re:Umm... by EvanED (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:57PM
        • Re:Umm... by bitserf (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @05:45AM
      • Re:Umm... by SuperDuperMan (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:55PM
        • Re:Umm... by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:46PM
          • Re:Umm... by SuperDuperMan (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:56PM
        • Re:Umm... by cHiphead (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:56PM
          • Re:Umm... by sirsnork (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:31PM
            • Re:Umm... by SuperDuperMan (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:18AM
            • Re:Umm... by cHiphead (Score:1) Thursday June 17 2004, @09:32AM
      • Re:Umm...got bandwidth cost? by itallushrt (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:56PM
      • by cbreaker (561297) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:57PM (#9438086)
        (Last Journal: Tuesday December 12 2006, @07:54PM)
        Considering that the majority of the data is displayed on users' browsers, they could have shut down the sites but allowed the owners of the blogs to grab the data. It would probably have been less traffic in the few days before shutdown then normal traffic.
        [ Parent ]
    • Re:Umm... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:54PM (#9438054)
      Well, let's suppose you're Dave Winer. Stay with me here.

      You know that no matter what you do to close down the site, you will be flamed and people will hate you. This is true for anybody, not just Dave Winer. Imagine if slashdot closed up one day. I bet the non-paying slashdotters would complain the loudest.

      And you know the traffic will go UP immediately.

      You just don't want the hassle.

      Also, remember you're Dave Winer and you have Dave Winer's.. let's say "unique" personality.

      The only logical thing to do is close it up, wait a few days for the dust to settle, and then deal with the sycophants, leaving the rest to rot.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Umm... by TeamLive (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:42PM
      • Re:Umm... by segfault7375 (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @07:26AM
    • Re:Umm... by xoboots (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:22PM
    • RE: knowing in advance by King_TJ (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:33PM
    • Re:Umm... by thedillybar (Score:3) Wednesday June 16 2004, @12:28AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Wired article (Score:3, Informative)

    by Tekmage (17375) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:38PM (#9437919)
    (http://www.plumb.org/tekmage/)
    Wired has an article [wired.com] up as well, with a bit more detail.
    • Re:Wired article (Score:5, Funny)

      by skaffen42 (579313) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:52PM (#9438035)
      From the Wired article: "I just have my fingers crossed that my girlfriend gets her blog back," said software programmer Tom Gortell. "She feels like someone just sucked out her brains. I don't get it, it's just an online journal, right? But she feels like her entire life has been stolen."

      The guy works as a programmer and he never told her to make backups? And then he tells Wired that he doesn't get why she is upset. Somebody better e-mail him the number of a good florist.

      But seriously, he should have told her to make backups. Free service. You get what you pay for. What more can you say?
      [ Parent ]
      • Zombies by pipingguy (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:54PM
      • Re:Wired article by mothz (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:59PM
      • Re:Wired article by DAldredge (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:02PM
      • Re:Wired article by DNS-and-BIND (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @11:40PM
      • Re:Wired article by IronChef (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:11AM
      • Brains? by adamofgreyskull (Score:2) Wednesday June 16 2004, @06:37AM
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • Re:Wired article (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Moraelin (679338) on Wednesday June 16 2004, @03:41AM (#9439770)
        (Last Journal: Monday June 21 2004, @04:25PM)
        No offense taken. I'm a programmer, and half the people I see in this line of work are incompetent burger-flippers. Who only got hired because some "smart" beancounter thought he's cleverly saving money by hiring the cheapest monkeys. Except they have mental trouble even tying their shoelaces, forwarding emails or cutting and pasting.

        (True story, and I swear to God I'm not making it up: every month I have to clean up my overflowing inbox at work, because some "programmer" mailed me a 24 bit full-screen screenshot to show me an error message displayed in telnet, or in whatever log viewer they were using. It takes work to teach them to copy and past that error message. What took the cake, though, was seeing an attached 24 bit full-screen screenshot of... an email in Outlook. Poor man's substitute for "forward".)

        I would, however, disaggree with the assessment that even these are "just above" field service and helpdesk. You haven't seen the service and helpdesk, then. _Some_ of those make the "programmers" above look like brilliant geniuses.

        The proper IT people here gave us PCs with Matrox drivers installed... and a Nvidia card. And the wrong IDE drivers. Anything except installing from the CD with the backed-up standard NT4 config is _miles_ over their head.

        If you call them because your Outlook '97 (corporate standard, you see) crapped and now throws an error message on startup, as happened to a couple of co-workers, they'll want to format the HDD and reinstall that holy standard CD.

        I swear to God I'm not making it up.

        So basically, yeah, I'm with you there. Just because someone's job says "programmer", doesn't automatically mean that they can actually program or administer a computer. Or what a backup is.

        Don't get me wrong. I also do know a whole bunch of good competent programmers. But also about 3 times as many whose only merit was being shameless enough to lie to an incompetent HR droid.
        [ Parent ]
      • Used more than a week? by RogL (Score:1) Wednesday June 16 2004, @07:54AM
      • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
    • A choice quote from the Wired article: by Ayanami Rei (Score:2) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:42PM
    • Re:Wired article by randyest (Score:3) Tuesday June 15 2004, @10:15PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Crystal Ball (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:39PM (#9437926)
    I can forsee quite a few people complaining about this in their weblogs.

    Oh...wait...
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Audio recordings (Score:4, Insightful)

    by AirLace (86148) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:39PM (#9437927)
    The most interesting thing is that Winer announced the withdrawal of service through a poorly recorded audio file. Could it be that he's been struck down with RSI?

    Whatever the case, I think he could have shut down the service gracefully, perhaps handing it over to a friend or a third party rather than abruptly pulling the plug. But at the end of the day, he's only damaged his own reputation -- it's not the end of the world for anyone.
  • And this is bad news? (Score:3, Funny)

    by jm92956n (758515) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:39PM (#9437929)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday August 17 2004, @10:31PM)
    I just saw this over at Halley's place and went to Tom's blog and read Dave's post on Tom's private weblog. Tom is traveling back from Mexico, not sure if he's landed yet, but I doubt that the first thing on his mind is how hard Dave Winer wants his old Manilla users to blow him in this special "one-time" offer.

    Good riddance! I don't understand how one could possibly read such crap.

    I scratched my nose a little and then depressed the 'W' key, knowing full well the corresponding character would henceforth be displayed in its full glory!
  • ha by 2057 (Score:1) Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:40PM
  • Ironic (Score:5, Funny)

    by shadowmatter (734276) on Tuesday June 15 2004, @09:40PM (#9437940)
    Having your blogging service totally shut you out without notice finally seems like the perfect thing to blog about.

    - sm