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 : Ascend Communications (ASND) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: blankmind who wrote (38373)	3/8/1998 12:39:00 PM
From: Jack Colton	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 61433

blank, SI & the group, IMHO, All of those big bandwidth applications are good, but they will not pay the way for increased bandwidth in the internet. There is no reduction in some other cost to offset the new application and the new applications are not widespread enough to pay their own way, yet. As a business owner, I usually change the way I do things as a means of reducing a reoccurring cost. I will spend major bucks on something, if it is going to reduce some other cost of doing business. The only immediate application that I see out there, at this time, is voice over IP. Here is an application that requires real time (TDM) type functionality out of the internet. Voice over IP has the potential for reducing reoccurring long distance charges, and therefore MIGHT be worth the investment in new network. If a lot of companies start implementing VoIP solutions,(and if they try to run it over the Internet instead of their own private network) there will have to be a lot of improvement in throughput for the ISPs. Some ISPs have bigger pipes into the NAPs (Network Access Points for the Internet) than others. Clearly, VoIP is one application that meets my criteria. Streaming Video is good, but it has to be cheaper (reduce the cost) than alternate methods - cable and satellite. Video conferencing is good, but I have had an entire room set up for Video conferencing for 3 years now, and I have yet to see anywhere near the payback for it. Video Conferencing appears to be much more of a niche market than I originally thought. It may be great in applications like Telemedicine, Lawyers Offices for remote depositions, and area where you can save people time ($) and money ($) by not having to travel. {But you and me looking at each other while we correct our typos ain't gonna cut it.} Desktop video has been talked about since the 60s and appeared to be a reality in the film 2001. But, for the masses, we still do not have wall sized flat panel displays, voice recognition and the ability to watch 12 channels at once like in Back to the Future Multimedia E-Mail, E-Commerce and FAX can all trickle in at 2400 bps and no one would know the difference. I think that the Network upgrades will be funded primarily by horizontal expansion for a year, before we see new applications that really drive expansion. FWIW: The WIN98 Beta 3 and NT 5.0 betas that my friends and I have been playing with, appear to be very efficient ATM engines, and they have an M$ (that's Microsoft) native ATM stack in the protocols. Video is also built into WIN98. So, as the next generation of applications is built to take advantage of the next generation OS platforms, we will see a need for more bandwidth and horse power under the hood of the PC.

To: blankmind who wrote (38373)	3/8/1998 12:51:00 PM
From: Sector Investor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 61433

<<no i caught it. - fax servers have been around to long to need to upgrade, 486's would work fine for the technology. I would agree with this, but the platform (Win '95 or NT) demands more. - multimedia email, and for what? and what do you propose will be in this email? video and audio? That and pictures and graphics too. While websites contain most of the graphics today, E-Mail has remained mostly text. My point is that E-Mail will continue to evolve just like browsers have and will continue to require more bandwidth. - e-commerce - why would i need a heavy duty pc for this? - video conferencing - this is more software and bandwith issue. you do not need the latest pentium.>> Blank, any one item won't do it, but multiples will. I should also add enterprise level applications as another bandwidth grabber of the near future. <<we need ms to release another bloated operating system followed by there usual slow and bloated office products, which require a fast machine so the products can respond at a reasonable rate. >> Will Windows '98 be bloated enough for you? <<unfortunately the williams contract and the current infrastructure improvements are attempts to just keep the internet moving and trying to stay ahead of demand (hence the term World Wide Wait), as we have more and more people joining. the current upgrades will prove to be inadequate if the 56k and 28.8 users moved to a high speed technology.>> No, I don't see it this way. The Williams move is more than that - it is a grab for business away from the slower moving telcos. It looks like the Telcos are waking up to this and will respond. This will go way beyond simply adding bandwidth for 56K modems. IMO this is the start of a major upgrade cycle, which as I said before has to occur before Enterprises feel pressed enough to begin a similar cycle.