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 (18104)	12/21/1999 1:03:00 AM
From: KailuaBoy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

ahhaha, If service levels are what they are on my DSL line now then the promise isn't going to be fulfilled. It doesn't work consistently. SI is a good example. Maybe I have a fast DSL line but the effect of my DSL provider not being able to control my experience is that I sit staring at my screen while the hourglass laughs at me. I, as a consumer, don't care why. I just stare and get mad. Now if my provider, as a part of the service offering, required SI to locate servers on my network then they could exercise a little more control over my experience. Why would SI do that? Because my service provider has millions of customers and they will make it difficult for them to see SI unless they make sure that the quality is good. That's just one aspect of controlling the experience. KB

To: ahhaha who wrote (18104)	12/21/1999 3:18:00 AM
From: Jay Lowe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

>> QoS is paying more for a guaranteed level of quality of throughput Aren't there actually multiple meanings here? Technically, QoS is also used to refer to the specific mechanism by which a client-server pair are enabled to negotiate a connection of known performance characteristics. This mechanism is various defined by several RFCs (e.g., RSVP) and the assorted platform API calls which implement them. Administratively, QoS refers to the bitrate characteristics used to provision a connection, i.e., it is a service agreement parameter. Subjectively, as Frank has pointed out elsewhere, QoS refers to a subjective experience and as such is capable of various interpretations. In a marketing sense, QoS is defined to be that buzzword which attempts to maximize revenue at the boundary of customer dissatisfaction ... by creating resources out of, er, hot air. The distinction I want to draw is that even in the "pure" world, QoS in the limited technical sense above does have a role ... notably within the client and/or server protocol stacks and process scheduling. By making a QoS API call on NT workstation, I am changing the behavior of the protocol stack AS WELL AS emitting RSVP frames. Saying that QoS is irrelevant in a space of infinite bandwidth ignores it's other implications. Additionally, there is never a time when infinite resources are reliably available ... resources will be consumed to the limit of their availability, even when initially perceived as infinite ... even 20Gb disks fill up sooner than one thinks. When pure exists, applications which challenge pure will exist. There will always be a time where QoS has a role to play ... the role of prioritizing the relative performance of applications.