Ok. So, I was looking over the New.net extensions recently, pondering whether or not they deserve to be supported in any type of "lookup" service I was programming. For those who don't know, New.net currently offers the following alternative extensions for domain names:
.agent .church .game .law .ltd .scifi .tech
.arts .club .golf .llc .med .shop .travel
.auction .family .inc .llp .mp3 .soc .video
.chat .free .kids .love .school .sport .xxx

The catch is, the not everyone will have names resolve even if you register one. New.net claims that over 175 million internet users worldwide are currently active and able to view their domain names via their respective connections. At the bottom of their home page, it reads:
174,661,619 New.net enabled Internet users worldwide*
* New.net domain names are accessible by persons that use one of our partner ISPs to access the Internet or who activate their browsers. This number is limited now, but growing daily. For source information click here.

I found their numbers interesting (provided by PriceWaterHouseCoopers). Even more interesting was how they arrived at them.

New.net is responsible for maintaining internal control over the complete and accurate collection and processing of data used to report the Enabled User Count. New.net has assessed its internal controls over the calculation of the Enabled User Count and has determined that, as of May 30, 2003, its internal controls provided reasonable assurance that the objectives addressed in the Assessment Criteria were met.

Fair enough. Then it qualifies how the numbers were gotten:

The Enabled User Count is based on the total number of Unique Enabled Computers multiplied by a factor of 2.65. This factor is calculated based on the following statistics provided in a 2002 Department of Commerce Study:
Internet Users per Computer (2.65) = Total U.S. Internet Users (143 million) / Total U.S. Households with Internet Connections (53.9 million)

Interesting. Noting the two things together I see and interesting issue. They say "worldwide", yet the Department of Commerce Study is "A NATION ONLINE: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet, published in February 2002."

I realize they're really pushing against the grain in trying to do an alternative to the approval mechanisms of the Internet mainstream... but, that type of number crunching makes me squirm, especially when someone throws it at me as justification for using a New.net name without quite realizing that many of their visitors may never see their website.

I'm still idly wondering if .XXX will ever see the light of day, and if so, will New.net have a plausible bid given the possibility of generating massive confusion given the nature of its other extensions.

~ Nexus

The other problem is a fair percentage of the "enabled browsers" are probably from kazaa downloads and similar, I really doubt they would be accounting for all the people who get rid of the plugin as soon as they realise what they have downloaded.

New.net's business really is in trying to get people to use their search tool/plugin rather than selling domains. I think the domains part is now just for show. I would say the only people still buying new.net names would be either those who want to get some free traffic from the search system or those buyers who don't yet realise the names they have bought do not resolve for most web users.

the key question is how many of those enabled actually know or care. the answer is going to be pretty much none outside of the tiny core of domainers and webmasters who bought into the ethos of a renegade namespace.

I honestly don't believe they will or should be granted an ounce of thought for tld's matching theirs as they simply did a unilateral land grab ignoring the existing framework for financial gain. To reward that activity would cause more harm than confusing the handful of people who "use" the new.net novelty namespace.

If new.net wanted to play the big game they should have done what other companies did and play by the rules and wait - by choosing not to do that they gave up their seat at the high stakes tables imo.

I still disagree with you safe as New.Net "grabbed" the very TLD's that ICANN had refused to issue to those applicants that applied for those TLDs -- I personally thought this was a very smart move on their part.

The times were very different then and there was much interest in expanding the TLD space. In fact at the time AT&T broadband was supporting New.Net *WITHOUT* any plugins, etc. So any referance to New.Net TLD's were totally seemless to me and the other 8 million AT&T customers.

I just feel that one needs to be very sensitive about history on this one. Innovation should *NEVER* be rejected, unfortunately New.Net's innovation has not worked. And so I do agree that New.Net should get no preferance for the TLD's they have tried to implement.

It's *ALLWAYS* good for the status quo to have a few people nipping at their heals ...

I don't see how unilaterally cherry picking tld's is innovation.

Yes new.net did set up several deals with isp's to provide isp level resolution - but the isp's could do that without causing any direct harm to the dns itself - give them the choice of offering an icann tld or a new.net one for resolution and its obvious which way they would have to fall just to meet their customers expectations.

If new.net want to claim rights - they should give out *usage* stats not formulaic "enabled users" who most likely did not even know they were being enabled or for what when they downloaded software for completely seperate purposes like kazaa.

Originally posted by safesys
I don't see how unilaterally cherry picking tld's is innovation.

To be honest with you often times innovation is nothing more than timing and execution.

If new.net want to claim rights - they should give out *usage* stats not formulaic "enabled users" who most likely did not even know they were being enabled or for what when they downloaded software for completely seperate purposes like kazaa.

Agreed.

When the Vice President (!!!) of New.Net personally called me up and asked me to renew my New.Net domains I knew something was wrong ...

I found new.net installed on one my old computers back in the states. Guess what I did? Disabled it and then deleted it. Did anyone else living there know? no. Did they care? no. Had they ever used those extensions? no. Had anyone asked to be enabled for it? no.

That is the worst part. I dont like companies installing things and marketing it like a trojan. That is unethical and I wouldn't ever support it.

Originally posted by ILikeInfo
AT&T broadband was supporting New.Net *WITHOUT* any plugins, etc.

Really? I don't remember AT&T supporting New.net.

Originally posted by peaceful
Really? I don't remember AT&T supporting New.net.

AT&T *BROADBAND* did, perhaps the dialups did not?

This was before their back bone service provider went bankrupt (can't remember they name but it was TV news at the time since 8 million customers were affected) and we all experianced that 1 week outage. When AT&T put their own infrastructure in place New.Net names no longer resolved.

I see. The dialups definitely didnt as that's what I used. Funny it wasn't highlighted.

Yeah the backbone that they had the agreement with was excite@home I think.

Originally posted by peaceful
excite@home I think.

Yes! That tickled the right brain cell.

And as I now recal Excite was on New.Net's list of supporting ISPs. So I'm guessing that the entire Excite network had the relavent DNS settings. for New.Net.

As I've said before many internet changes occured shortly after New.Net's startup and so I personally feel New.Net's buiness model could have just as well succeeded if the so called "dot bomb" (a term I hate!) period had happened later in time (or better yet not at all ). Fact is we will never know and New.Net's example will likely prevent others from doing the same for some time.

New.net has a new CEO. I was contacted by their PR firm this week asking to set up an interview with him for Domain Name Journal (which I will be doing when he returns from the ICANN meeting in Tunisia). Any questions you guys would like me to ask him for possible inclusion in the article?

Kind of you to give him a voice Duke, many wouldn't give them the time of day...

Originally posted by Duke of Earl
New.net has a new CEO. I was contacted by their PR firm this week asking to set up an interview with him for Domain Name Journal (which I will be doing when he returns from the ICANN meeting in Tunisia). Any questions you guys would like me to ask him for possible inclusion in the article?

perhaps how many domains are currently registered/paid up and how that compares to the past.

Also perhaps a guide to how much of their revenue is PPC.