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 : Frank Coluccio Technology Forum - ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (1085)	2/6/2000 10:21:00 PM
From: alfranco	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1782

Thanks Frank for expanding on the possibilities we will face in communication. Yes when I said the "user's processing center at home" I was thinking of a CPU/home LAN with these large hard-drives but realizing that they could store HDTV quality broadcasts for temporary viewing or just as easily access a broad bandwidth connection for downloads of multimedia presentations or for on-line access to a software program with their own work-project housed electronically at a remote server site, all whilst the "processing center" could be communicating with embedded chips in various appliances in the home or office building. As for HDTV, I see that as a one-way potential over-the-airwaves downlink server that has some unused capacity in its signal (which varies according to the density of video content, perhaps, more than a MBps) which could be used for real time data-transmission or 'trickle downloads' of potentially purchasable/rentable multimedia content for later viewing if client chooses to do so. This could supplement the existing narrow bandwidth so many end-users currently have which seems to be likely to be extended by partial measures such as DSL, cable modem by vertical integrators if I read the moves of the "Bellheads" right. Spending just a little more for optical fiber would offer infinitely more especially with continuing increases in the capacity of fiber once laid... and I am in favor of the horizontal integrators since in the end voice/cable/web all revolve around the same axis... communication. As for paying by content vs. paying by transmission I would like to correct myself. Two payments: paying for some content of your choice by the minute/hour/month or by purchase is my expectation. As for transmission, I expect we will pay according to the size of the pipe (the capacity) we want to rent and not by the amount of use of that pipe... so the transmission will not be free but once paid for its' use will not be counted by the provider per bit and so in a very loose sense 'free' just as I don't clock the use of my ISP right now. You make the interesting point of a "centralized bandwidth controller" which I would understand by analogy this way: those fiber companies will want to monitor the traffic at potential choke points for problems and they will charge a flat rate for off and on ramps but if there isn't a congestion at the on and off ramps they won't be turning their "centralized bandwidth controller" in that direction but will keep it focussed on the main arteries. As for billing, the costs of the bandwidth pipe will be paid by the customer as you say either bundled with content in vertically integrated models or as a pure carrier cost in horizontal models, at a flat monthly rate. Either way it won't be truly free but as data transmission costs drop, usage will go up esp. for more demanding multimedia use and the user will want those bigger pipes more and more over time. Hope I am not way off base, AL