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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : DGIV-A-HOLICS...FAMILY CHIT CHAT ONLY!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bird who wrote (22913)	8/22/1998 10:51:00 PM
From: MARK C.	Respond to of 50264

Bird How old is that article you printed. Lets see isnt a codec what is in the equipment we are buying from NMSS and dont we have proprietary technology already capable of 43-1 compression. Go do some more reading Bird.

To: Bird who wrote (22913)	8/23/1998 8:28:00 AM
From: RocketMan	Respond to of 50264

Whoever is feeding Bird techy info said: "There is no need to tell them, Believe it or not, it is much easier and requires less maintenance long-term to install the necessary fibre-optic hubs for the odd phone-booth in the more remote areas of third world nations." And, pray tell, where are they going to get their investment dollars for the infrastructure? The U.S. is not there yet, and won't be for another few years at least. But let's say they do. What keeps IP packets from going through fiber-optic hubs? Or satellite links? The Defense Department has been doing this for years, using multiple paths, balancing loads, using ATM switches and the whole thing and you know what? The data is still packetized and it is still compressed. That is the new technology! So what is your point? IP telephony and IP mutlimedia will use whatever infrastructure is there, from older PSTN to the latest in fiber optics. Latency is addressed through CODEC algorithms and multiply routing packets. Not easy to do, but it is being done. The trade is that the more remote the area and the lousier and more expensive the phone service, the more people are willing to put up with decreases in quality and some latency. For metro areas where there is more infrastructure, people demand more, and they get more. The beauty of IP telephony is that it scales and it is adaptable to the existing or future infrastrusture. In closing, what does any of this have to do with DGIV specifically? What you are doing is questioning the future of IP telephony. Talk to the industry gurus, including AT&T, WorldCom, and just about everyone else who is tripping over themselves to get a piece of this action. Or talk to Pulver. No, better not, better send whoever is giving you this techy stuff. You would be way over your bird head.