Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (14321)	8/12/1999 11:15:00 PM
From: Sleeper	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 29970

Let it be. Not everyone wants cable. Good. Maybe that will change when Pure-to-the-PC becomes reality. In the interim cable won't be overloaded. Ahhaha, I am surprised to hear such an effete point of view from you. Did you really mean to slight the masses, and reduce the egualitarian potential of the 'net to a potential toy for the rich and/or famous? Sleeper

To: ahhaha who wrote (14321)	8/13/1999 12:16:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 29970

"I should let Frank answer the telephony question. He'd love to tell you how difficult it is for the umpteenth time to incorporate voice. Voice has many inherited complications. The Net is hardly stable for IP data. It has to be bullet proof for telephony." I'm not sure about the context I'm supposed to be picking up here. I take it that it's about the ease with which voice can be incorporated into the service mix, in one way or another, onto the cable plant. Yesterday, in a reply to another poster's views on the subject, DenverTechie outlined some of the issues he saw them as they relate to IP and switched versions of voice over cable facilities. A dialog ensued which might be of interest to some here. And you are right, many of these issues have already been covered here before. From the LMT: Message 10927655 techstocks.com techstocks.com techstocks.com techstocks.com