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.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JDinBaltimore who wrote (36452)	1/19/2001 12:44:20 PM
From: Jeff Jordan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

well, I hope your friends mentioned LU in their chat....I still like CIEN, CORV JNPR TLGD JDSU GLW NT...the information age is just starting...never too much bandwidth!ok ...even CSCO

To: JDinBaltimore who wrote (36452)	1/19/2001 1:08:28 PM
From: s-words	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

XML is an open standard not controlled by MSFT. They will try get their hooks into it, as they always do. It's designed as a subset of SGML, and to be cross-platform, like the original HTML spec. w3.org

To: JDinBaltimore who wrote (36452)	1/19/2001 1:16:23 PM
From: clark66	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

a primer on XML xml101.com

To: JDinBaltimore who wrote (36452)	1/19/2001 1:32:36 PM
From: Peace	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

I remember the days when I bought a new 386 PC with a 40M hard drive and I thought how much more could I need. Now 40G hard drives are a standard and the need for more storage continues to grow. The same applies to bandwidth. Any technology that improves the efficiency of information exchange will only hasten the need for bandwidth. When I had a 56K modem few years ago my bandwidth demand was so little as I was limited by the 56K connection. Now I have gotten used to 3M connections and you wont believe how much bandwidth I am gobbling up. The bulk of the internet access today is till 56K. When the majority migrates to broadband (Cable, DSL, Wireless, Fiber) the demand for bandwidth will shoot thru the sky. You aint seen nothing yet as far as bandwidth is concerned. By the next decade even third world countries will have their folks on broadband. We are only in the 2nd inning of the ballgame.

To: JDinBaltimore who wrote (36452)	1/20/2001 6:41:19 PM
From: smchan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

JD, let's look into what your friend is saying... Cisco, Intel, HP etc. and he said that these companies are in for a rude awakening! The 2nd wave of the internet is about to get off the ground, and he said it ain't hardware driven! Bandwith, faster routers, optic switching will be an over kill. Years ago, I started thinking (as did the company for whom I worked) felt that routers would become commodities as has other types of computing hardware. The thought was that speciality chips for routing, bridging, and switching would drive out the need for speciality microcode (basically software that runs hardware) making networking equipment basically a box of standard chips (like today's PCs) and thus driving the price down. We also believed that would clip Cisco's wings and make them nothing more than a basic box builder. Hasn't happened... and XML is not the technology that's going to change that. (Read on...) First, a very brief tutorial. XML is a representation language. It gives data meaning. HTML is one of many presentation languages. Others include WML and VXML. Representation tells us something about the data, for example, $9.32 is a dollar amount whereas HTML (and other presentation languages) merely tells the machine how to display $9.32. Either way, $9.32 needs to be carried over the wires (or air) when a query is issued. The difference is whether $9.32 has meaning or not. With XML after the original request all manipulation on data would be handled by your computer, I thought the example a bit lame, but he said that the reduction in bandwidth required to perform request, multiplied by millions of users, is staggering. OK, I understand what your friend is saying, but I disagree with his conclusion. When your computer receives an HTML document, it is a display only document and is of not much use beyond display. If your computer receives XML, the data has meaning and can be re-formatted or queried again. Keep in mind that only the data you've received thus far can be queried. Suppose you're doing a Yahoo search on "sports cars". Whether it be in HTML or XML, you only have data on sports cars and it's only useful to the point that you can subset the data; you cannot expand upon it without pulling more data across the wires. Hmmm... I can see some optimizations there, but certainly not enough to have dramatic impacts on bandwidth. Besides, in my experience, XML is a wordy language and will generally generate the same if not more bandwidth demands than HTML. (I won't get into details of how XML is displayed, but if it's done client side, it usually requires the XML data plus something called a stylesheet which is yet more bandwidth.) That said, why would Intel be in for a rude awakening? Your friend proposes that client-side processing capabilities are one of the features of XML (and it is) which, if anything, requires more processing power on the XML side. (XML processing is not cheap, by the way.) In my opinion, the beauty of XML is easier data interchange which should make writing middleware easier or as you say, transfer information between applications. a network engineer for Ciena (a company I love to short!) If your friend is representative of the typical engineer at Ciena, I think I'd stay short. No offense intended; I just think he has a very unrealistic view of XML's capabilities and what Ciena may be doing with it. Sam