[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bellheads vs. netheads
- To: Anssi Porttikivi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: bellheads vs. netheads
- From: Greg Kochanski <email@example.com>
Anssi Porttikivi wrote: > I can't > really see why the router/microcomputer/Windows market would need more > than a financially negligible amount of technology from the old > telecomms world to fullfill all global communications needs. The > datacomms companies are busy re-einventing and surpassing everything the > phone system has ever had, only much, much cheaper this time. Yes and no. The perception of infinitely cheap internet service has been encouraged by people getting free connect time to an ISP in their local calling area. That's a regulatory subsidy, where voice customers are forced to pay for the phone calls of internet users. This subsidy will probably end eventually. It's also been encouraged by the fact that most Internet users (especially at home) really don't use it much; that's a hidden subsidy from light users to heavy users, since they usually pay the same monthly fee. If you were to imagine putting the existing voice network on top of an internet-like network, one would need to spend a lot of money to shuffle all those bits, and produce a reliable network that runs all the time. Also, you shouldn't forget that essentially all the internet (except the LAN in your office) actually runs over those 'old' switches and fibers. So, if you take out the superlatives, I might agree with you. So do quite a few people in Lucent, which is why there is quite a bit of interest in data networking and Inferno, in particular.