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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jing Qian who wrote (4361)	1/17/1999 1:15:00 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

>>Good video transmission needs 10 Mbps of bandwidth.<< Assuming that cable modems of the type that ATHM uses will be successful, and they will, how much of that 10 Mb/s do you think you will have at your disposal once your cable section is fully populated? >>How are Baby bells out to achieve with a slow ADSL line?<< If your answer to my first question was about 1 meg, it would be about right, or a little optimistic during traffic periods, but then that is still only a draw with DSLs. Until, of course, either discipline realizes the inherent limitations of their existing platform designs, and decides to upgrade yet again. >>Even if they overcome the technical hurdle, do they have the MONEY to scale up to 1 million subscribers? << Yes. Far beyond that. Is it cost effective? Not always, and will be determined on a case by case basis. But it preserves the customer base. Will it stifle progress? Again, yes. But such is sometimes the artifact of JIT competition. Most MPEG deployments (even the ones being used in digital TV only require a fraction of the 10 Mb/s you referenced. Commercial delivery can be sustained by 1.5 Mb/s, 3.1 Mb/s and 6.3 Mb/s flows, depending on the type of content and the degree of image motion. OTOT, streaming video of the type we are discussing here, or many other forms of non-commercial TV grades of payloads, can and are being sustained at sub-T-1 levels, which means at speeds below 1.5 Mb/s. In other words, you will not be taxing the full potential of the 10 Mb/s pipe to your home with these forms of delivery. The greater problem will be one of total usage on the cable segment in the neighborhood, and not simply what the total bandwidth [e.g., 10 Mb/s] rating is on the collision domain. In MOST DSL deployments, these contention issues do not exist on the subscriber side of the central office-based DSL access multiplexer, or DSLAM. And in these instances, the DSL ISP must worry about other factors looking upstream, just as the MSO would: That is, congestion at the edge looking towards the backbone. Regards, Frank Coluccio

To: Jing Qian who wrote (4361)	1/18/1999 1:46:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

No, they don't. As any telco tries to scale DSL, they will find exponential rising costs. Those who choose the DSL route and get in deep, will cause themselves significant operating losses which will not be recoverable. Those who go the cable route will suffer a reduction in earnings, but the situation will reverse and the companies will reap a large and leveraged benefit. They also realize the ancillary dividends of being capital investment positioned when other synergies are discovered in the cable cornucopia. Re: MPEG. I agree with your comments on MPEG. It is the dog that wags the VoIP tail, not the other way around. Initially, companies are just trying to field a reliable implementation of VoIP. Once that is substantially achieved, they will realize that the added value comes from video even in telephony. Voice will just be an adjunct to the important video flows like the soundtrack on a motion picture. Video always refutes voice if only because voice can be represented in video, but the opposite can't occur. As you indicated the inadequate bandwidth available puts the MPEG dominance in the future and probably in a new protocol standard, say, MPEGV. However, bandwidth will be going from drought to flood even though it is true that available bandwidth is used up to its capacity. It just so happens that technological developments in throughput are getting ahead of infrastructure developments to tax them. It is in this "glut" environment that MPEGV will arise to dominate.