Sandman
In article <bseb7lFu7guU1@mid.individual.net>, android wrote:

android
Further: I don't think that a web (Googs in this case) interface is NNTP client at all.

Sandman
Well, it's a crappy one, for sure. But that being said, it is a client that use the NNTP protocol to exchange information with NNTP servers nonetheless. It's just that us that use proper news clients think it's crap :)

android
You're totally WRONG of course. Apologize to humanity! Really, the Goog gives your web client access to their usenet client...

Sandman
Well, I can't say I know just how the NNTP part of Google Groups works, to be sure. Maybe you have more information about that than me. I'm just saying there IS an NNTP part :)

android
I said that the web interface on Goog Groups is not an Usenet client.

Sandman
Fair enough

android
It's not. It's interfacing a Goog server that has a Usenet client aboard that communicates with Googs NNTP server. Therefore when a user are reading or posting through Goog Groups they are not using a Usenet client at all but a web client that accesses a Usenet client. You are a web designer and should know this...

Sandman
Yah, only problem is that *my* web interface *is* a NNTP client. Again, Google may do this very differently. But when I hit post in my (current) NNTP client (that has a web UI), the web server takes the posted data and connects to a NNTP server and posts it.

Sure, one could claim it is the script that accepts the post data to be the actual NNTP client, I suppose. But then again, that's not far from how many "native" news clients also work. I.e. they have a UI thread that "posts" data to the underlying NNTP framework.

Not arguing, I see what you mean and I agree.