Dear C-R,
Two earlier posts ("building a parallel isochronous Internet" & "Bradley
re: isochronous techhie talk") discussed some issues re/developments in net
communications technology. Below are some snippets from Allan Bradley's
comments, along with two threads from Arun's india-gii list:
re/ISDN
re/"PLANET 1".
My point in encouraging this "net evolution" thread is to build a better
understanding of the cyber future from an other-than-political perspective:
What will Cyberspace II be like?... How will it be implemented?... How will
it be priced?... How might it co-evolve with Internet?... Will Internet die
like the horse and buggy, or rejuvinate like optical media? (Again,
forgetting momentarily the political angle.)
-rkm
---
Allan Bradley wrote:
>...I believe now there will be to two
>categories of switched connectivity and will be allocated on a platform by
>platform basis. Which is fine because both are needed for different
>markets
>...The Telecom Bill transport fairness rules are based on old vertical market
>allocation, when the real money will be in horizontal market bandwidth
>distribution. That is the monopoly danger. That is why I harp on defining
>the models. If you have the money for the technology, you have the huge
>advantage in the market.
>
>My concern is that schools, public services, city communities may get the
>short end of the stick, because it is a distribution bandwidth market and
>they need cheap bandwidth and that could lower market margins. The
>investment cost in these technologies today is very high. The problem is
>that regulations need to include bandwidth distribution and not exclusively
>physical distribution as the basis of universal access/distribution.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996
From: Arun Mehta <•••@••.•••>
To: "Multiple recipients of list •••@••.•••"
Subject: Cable modem v/s ISDN
Could our Department of Telecom have wited too long to introduce ISDN?
Just when it is becoming obsolete?
> ISDN VS. CABLE MODEMS
> After years of neglecting ISDN, Baby Bells are finally beginning
> to use a consumer-oriented approach to the marketing of ISDN
> services -- but industry observers say it's probably too little,
> too late. "I think it's time to write the obituary on ISDN,"
> says a Gartner Group analyst. "Nice launching, wrong airport.
> It's time to turn the page and move on," he notes, referring to
> the cable companies' plans to offer high-speed, high-capacity
> access for a fraction of ISDN's costs. (Wall Street Journal 23
> Jan 96 B7)
This was picked up from Edupage.
Arun
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996
From: "Rajesh P. S." <•••@••.•••>
To: "Multiple recipients of list •••@••.•••"
Its not clear how the ISDN vs. Cable modem battle is going to shape up.
ISDN (despite its non-widespread use) is a technology that has been in
place for a long time. However, there was an article in the NY Times a
couple of weeks ago stating that PAC Bell was having problems making
money with its ISDN offering and had filed for increased rates. The current
rates that are being offered (for ISDN) in the BAY area is very reasonable.
Cable modem technology on the other hand have been largely untested and
I have heard reports of `teething' problems in places where they have
been implemented. The other thing to remember that if I am not mistaken the
high speed, high capacity that the above analyst is referring to
is a shared capacity, i.e., if there are number of cable users logged in
at the same time the actual capacity available to each user will be
much smaller.
Arun:
I would be interested in knowing what the DOT's plans as far as offering
ISDN is concerned. Further, do you have any statistics on what percentage
of househoulds (at least in the metros) in India have cable access.
Also are there are private ISP (Internet Sevice Providers) or is the DOT
/VSNL the only provider.
Rajesh
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996
From: Arun Mehta <•••@••.•••>
To: "Multiple recipients of list •••@••.•••"
Subject: Re: Cable modem v/s ISDN (fwd)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996
From:•••@••.•••
Subject: Re: Cable modem v/s ISDN
I really think that what the Gartner Group is saying today will
apply sometime in the future. The reality is what the first
part of the message says - ISDN is being implemented today.
Period.
The press and the analysts, in my experience talk about things
that take some time to materialize. It takes a lot to implement
new technology in a way to make it practical and reasonable for
"mass" use. (See how long it has taken ISDN to become a reality
- we were implementing ISDN solutions as far back as in 1984
!!)
In summary I do not believe the DoT has waited too long. When
one introduces new technology what you really need is
interoperability to the maximum extent. If DoT had introduced
ISDN - say about 5 years ago, it would have had limited
usefulness because of a lack of international support in terms
of infrastructure. However, today that is less of an issue.
Cable modems will come. However, for them to reach the stage
ISDN is today - it will be another 5 years. Ofcourse,
technology is evolving rapidly, and one can't predict what the
real issues are. However, ISDN implementation is defintely not
a waste.
__________________________
Moderator comments:
I'm not sure cable modems will take nearly as long as ISDN to mature.
When ISDN was introduced, it seemed to be a solution looking for a
problem. Today, with Internet access and the World Wide Web, there is
tremendous demand for high-bandwidth connections. So, cable modem
development is demand-driven rather than supplier-driven, as was the case
with ISDN.
Another factor: in India, cable TV is the fastest growing network. Once
government monopoly over uplinking goes, that might be the quickest route
to spreading Internet services in the country, and possibly much of the
3rd World.
Arun
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996
From: Arun Mehta <•••@••.•••>
To: "Multiple recipients of list •••@••.•••"
Subject: Planet 1 (fwd)
List members might be interested in the following press release. You
would be breaking the law if you used such a system in India, though...
COMSAT INTRODUCES PLANET 1
WORLD'S FIRST PORTABLE, GLOBAL PERSONAL SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
SYSTEM
PLANET 1 Allows Users to Send and Receive Calls, Faxes or E-mail
Anywhere in the World
BETHESDA, MD -- COMSAT Mobile Communications today introduced the
world's first personal satellite communications (PSC) system, PLANET
1. Available by mid-1996, PLANET 1 terminals will retail for $2,995,
with an all-inclusive (fully terminated) charge of $3 per minute
(pending FCC approval). The PLANET 1 system integrates cellular and
mobile satellite technologies to offer seamless global, personal voice
and data communications from a portable, notebook-sized terminal.
COMSAT's PLANET 1 terminal, manufactured by NEC, a world leader in
electronics, incorporates the functionality of a standard business
phone with value-added features such as single-number global roaming,
voice/fax mail notification, paging and call-in-absence indicator. In
addition to the high-quality digital voice and data capabilities,
PLANET 1 will also provide mobile data services such as E-mail,
Internet access and short messaging service.
"PLANET 1 meets the immediate need for seamless, worldwide personal
communications and is the only truly portable, global wireless service
available today," said COMSAT President and Chief Executive Officer,
Bruce L. Crockett.
~--<snip>--~
Editorial Contacts: Eileen Pacheco
Creamer Dickson Basford
(617) 467-1576
Judith Pryor
COMSAT Mobile Communications
(301) 214-3432
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland
Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/
CyberLib: http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib
Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use.
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
