Hi jjeanie,
In simple terms (because I'm a simple guy), what I mean is that the limitation of bandwidth of wireless is a function of the radio spectrum and its capacity to carry data. For example, a lot of the equipment vendors are telling us that their new whizbang 3G networks are going to be capable of providing 2 or 3 Mbps to the customer. Sounds great, but when you read the fine print, you find that this is the shared bandwidth per node and that there will be often times dozens of subscribers who will be sucking at the same straw and won't ever achieve the advertised bandwidth. So, there is some dissembling going on with the promoters.
When you compare the capability of wireless modes of communication, including things like Terabeam, you find that there is a theoretical throughput ceiling somewhere in the low gigabit range on the most sophisticated and advanced systems, none of which are commercially available, nor will they be for quite some time. This should be compared to the carrying capacity of a fiber optic strand which is capable, with the right equipment at the ends of the cable, to transmit and receive up to eight terabits of information, at least in one announced system between Singapore and India. This is one heck of a lot of bits. Vastly more than is flowing on the Internet at any one time. So, my point is that we haven't hit the theoretical limits yet on the application of fiber optic bandwidth, but that we are working very hard to widen the bandwidth of wireless, which inherently will never be even close to fiber optics in its capacity to transmit bits of data. I'd say it comes up short by two to three orders of magnitude. (i.e. 100 to 1,000 times less capacity.)
HTH, Ray :) |
