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 : Loral Space & Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jim black who wrote (1706)	1/17/1998 10:46:00 PM
From: ccryder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 10852

I think that we individuals will get our satellite links, but the limitations are still going to be with us regarding bandwidth. The only solution I see is some sort of control over how much bandwidth we get and when. No one wants to hear that, of course. We can't all have video conferences for hours a day and for free. Another problem is with important sites that get bogged down, like e-trade. There needs to be a fall back to nearly text only when a site gets really busy.

To: jim black who wrote (1706)	1/18/1998 11:29:00 AM
From: JMD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10852

Jim, I don't qualify as "more informed" but can offer some sympathy. Like you, the world wide wait was and is a source of enormous frustration. All the great stuff about the net just seems to be very diminished in value. Then I started reading (this is 1 1/2 years or so back)that Bill Gates was frustrated about the "bandwidth problem", so much so that BG and McCaw were trying to scratch up nine billion to build Teledesic. I thought: it's not just me, this is serious and there must be an enormous investment opportunity here, and so I built a mini-portfolio consisting of companies that are in one way or another working on the bw problem. The research into Teledesic took me to LOR and GSTRF. Those boards have lots of guys/gals who own QCOM which in turn spun off into TLAB, LU, ANDW, and GLW. This is kind of like buying Nordstrom to ward off credit card pain, but it's an idea for you to consider. As to when all of the home internet users at the end of the wire will get some relief?--everybody disagrees with everybody on everything. Best I can tell, cable modem (I think Bill has figured out that Teledesic may be just a mite far fetched and has hedged his bet with investments in cable companies to get modems and set top boxes running Windows CE of course) into your/my dens will be the first, real, no kidding improvement that is a 'quantum leap'. All @home users report jaw-dropping amazement at cable modem speeds. Meanwhile, all xDSL solutions seem too expensive, too far away, too threatening to the RBOCs, etc. to predict any real help there. And as you have found out 56k is a joke (if not a fraud). Now as to the future, I think Cyberstar will dust Teledesic which will make me a very happy (a)shareholder of LOR and (b) customer of Cyberstar to access the net. But this is circa 2001, at which point I think it will make sense to stick a dish on the roof and say good-bye to the cable companies for both TV and net--for now, Hughes gives you that option but while it's great for TV, it's expensive for the net, and as someone else pointed out, it's expensive, and uplink speeds are slow-poke. Cyberstar will give you almost the same speed up as down and presumably be much more competitive. Thoughts to soothe frustration :). Mike Doyle

To: jim black who wrote (1706)	1/18/1998 10:55:00 PM
From: Reagan DuBose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10852

*Off topic response to query* Jim, my personal semi-solution to the ISP access bandwidth problem was to install home ISDN service. PacBell provides the ISDN line, and I can dial-up any one of several ISPs who provide ISDN access. At present I use GTE, and find their service satisfactory ($39.95/mo for unlimited access). Never get a busy signal, and email service is fine. No editorial content, but I only want internet access anyway. ISDN is a bit of a pain to install and configure, and costs a bit more, but is affordable and available now. If only one bearer channel is used, access is at 64K bits per second. If two channels are used, 128K bits/second is the speed. I find the 64K to be not much slower than the 128K, as the local-server-to-my-home link is usually not the bottleneck in the system. Also, if the second 64K channel is not used for internet, it is available as an extra telephone line (even while I am using the other channel for internet access), which I find useful for fax and/or voice. Of course, some day (real soon now) inexpensive higher bandwidth will be common; perhaps ATM or cable, or satellite. Until then, I think ISDN is not a bad choice. Reagan

To: jim black who wrote (1706)	1/19/1998 1:43:00 PM
From: Bernard Levy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10852

Hi Jim: There are actually at least 3 high-speed solutions to Internet access: a) ADSL, which will offer speeds up to 1.5Mb/sec. However, because of the need to recondition their lines (eliminate coils, etc..) RBOCs do not appear to be in a big rush to deploy ADSL massively. b) Cable modems: The problem here is the same, since two-way access requires two-way activated HFC cables. c) Fixed wireless access in the 28GHz or 38GHz bands. The 28 GHz band has been allocated by the FCC for LMDS (local multipoint distribution service) which is capable of providing bundled video/telephony/data (Internet) service to the home. The LMDS auction will take place next month. The only LMDS provider right now is CVUS which offers wideband internet access in Manhattan. The achievable rate is around 40Mbps/sec, but I do not believe their current service is that fast. CVUS still uses a phone line for the return line, but LMDS is really designed for two-way access. LMDS is a promising technology, since it is probably cheaper to deploy than ADSL or cable, but because it is a line of sight technology, it has a few problems. In particular, it is affected by obstructions such as tall buildings and trees. In the 38GHz band, Winstar (WCII) appears also poised to roll out Internet access services. However, WCII is primarily a CLEC (competitive local exchange carrier) whose customer base is primarily businesses, not individuals. I believe that fixed ground based broadband wireless services may represent a strong competition against satellite-based Internet access providers. This may not be a huge threat for Cyberstar/Skybridge, which is a relatively simple system, but I would not bet a dime on the success of Pacific Teledesic. I think Bill Gates made a mega-billion dollars mistake. Of course, he can afford to recover from this mistake by buying out whoever emerges as the dominant fixed broadband wireless company. Regards, Bernard Levy