blank, SI & the group,
IMHO, All of those big bandwidth applications are good, but they will not pay the way for increased bandwidth in the internet. There is no reduction in some other cost to offset the new application and the new applications are not widespread enough to pay their own way, yet.
As a business owner, I usually change the way I do things as a means of reducing a reoccurring cost. I will spend major bucks on something, if it is going to reduce some other cost of doing business.
The only immediate application that I see out there, at this time, is voice over IP. Here is an application that requires real time (TDM) type functionality out of the internet. Voice over IP has the potential for reducing reoccurring long distance charges, and therefore MIGHT be worth the investment in new network. If a lot of companies start implementing VoIP solutions,(and if they try to run it over the Internet instead of their own private network) there will have to be a lot of improvement in throughput for the ISPs. Some ISPs have bigger pipes into the NAPs (Network Access Points for the Internet) than others.
Clearly, VoIP is one application that meets my criteria. Streaming Video is good, but it has to be cheaper (reduce the cost) than alternate methods - cable and satellite. Video conferencing is good, but I have had an entire room set up for Video conferencing for 3 years now, and I have yet to see anywhere near the payback for it. Video Conferencing appears to be much more of a niche market than I originally thought. It may be great in applications like Telemedicine, Lawyers Offices for remote depositions, and area where you can save people time ($) and money ($) by not having to travel. {But you and me looking at each other while we correct our typos ain't gonna cut it.}
Desktop video has been talked about since the 60s and appeared to be a reality in the film 2001. But, for the masses, we still do not have wall sized flat panel displays, voice recognition and the ability to watch 12 channels at once like in Back to the Future
Multimedia E-Mail, E-Commerce and FAX can all trickle in at 2400 bps and no one would know the difference.
I think that the Network upgrades will be funded primarily by horizontal expansion for a year, before we see new applications that really drive expansion.
FWIW: The WIN98 Beta 3 and NT 5.0 betas that my friends and I have been playing with, appear to be very efficient ATM engines, and they have an M$ (that's Microsoft) native ATM stack in the protocols. Video is also built into WIN98. So, as the next generation of applications is built to take advantage of the next generation OS platforms, we will see a need for more bandwidth and horse power under the hood of the PC. |
