more on "Let them eat megabits"

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

Delivered-To: dfarber+ () ux13 sp cs cmu edu
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 12:02:34 +0100
From: Bjørn Vermo <bv () norbionics com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: [IP] more on "Let them eat megabits"
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>

My wife forwards me selected tidbits from your list,
and I have a couple of comments to this interesting article:


> > From: Rahul Tongia <tongia () cmu edu>
...

> > A response to Eli Noam's and other discussions on ICT and development.
> >
> >
> > The entire definition of "broadband" is somewhat murky, though some
> > governments and entities define it varyingly as connections between
> > 128+ kbps to those over 640 kbps (if not more).  When Japan and Korea
> > already have connections in the 10+ mbps range, my 640 kbps DSL sure
> > doesn't seem that broad.

I have worked with data communications for 30 years,
and must say that it is only after marketing people got involved
that medium-speed connections were promoted to "broadband".
The definition, dating to when the concept was first discussed
and most companies still were happy if they had 9600b/s analog modems,
is that broadband in digital terms starts at 2048k bits/s.
This is an E-1 connection, which can accomodate 32 E-0 basic channels.

> > The attributes that really matter, especially for developing countries
> > (er, emerging economies or nations in transition) are that the
> > connection is always on, and that it is "all you can eat" (flat rate
> > pricing).  The actual speeds depend on what applications you want, and
> > that is a chicken-and-egg issue.  The other, equally important issue is
> > the pricing (not just flat rate) -- it needs to be affordable.

I agree that "always on" is important.
I stongly disagree that flat-rate is in any way desirable.
Flat rates are guaranteed to promote wasteful use of resources,
and keeps prices high.

Low rates based on actual costs rather than on marketing ploys
and estimations of how to maximize profit in a given market
will eventually have to be established.
Unfortunately, it is difficult to get there without real competition.

...
> > importantly*, the users who ask for broadband are not the same as those
> > who seek but don't have basic dial connectivity.  Gone are the days
> > when there were waiting lists of years for a phone connection (in many
> > countries).  Cellular and competition (and new technology) changed
> > that.  In Indian cities, one can get a new phone line within 1 day (!),
> > compared to the week Verizon asks.  So why doesn't everyone have a
> > phone line?  Lack of affordability (combined with user perceived
> > demand).

I have lived with a state monopoly which had three-year waiting lists,
and I have no desire to get back to that situation.
On the other hand, I have not had any wired telephone connection since
1995.
Technology has moved on, and today it does not seem like a good idea to
build an expensive copper or fibre infrastructure except in the most
densely populated urban areas.

...
> > Similarly, cellular phones used as local phones are exceptionally
> > appealing to many in developing countries, since the same phone number
> > works on their job (often, the informal sector) and at home.

This is the real point. A mobile phone and supporting infrastructure
costs less per user than old fashioned landline phones.
It is only in places where the old infrastructure has already been
installed that it makes any economical sense to use wire-based
communications
unless you need very high capacity or extreme reliability.


> > How much bandwidth do people need?  There are few developing countries
> > aiming for megabits to every home.  But as Taylor Reynolds pointed out,
> > building a new network just to do dial-up copper is a bad idea.
> > Unfortunately, the poorest actually need the most bandwidth, to
> > counteract a lack of literacy.  Many of us do text emailing quite
> > comfortably, but others need voice messaging, if not pictures and
> > graphics to help them use the system.  This is all the more true when
> > considering interaction with business/government, and accessing public
> > information, not just contacting friends and family.  In a new model,
> > bandwidth might replace some end-user hardware, which has been a major
> > stumbling block for users to buy in to using ICT.  For example, voice
> > recognition, difficult to do on a cheap handheld or thin client, can be
> > done at a local or even regional server, if there is reasonable
> > connectivity.

G3 mobile networks will have the bandwidth most people need, and I believe
this is the way people in China will get their communications needs
satisfied.
With the enormous Chinese market, handsets and more computer-like terminal
devices will be very cheap because manufacturing cost is very low compared
to
development and non-recurring setup costs for this kind of equipment.

Voice technology is on its way into such devices right now. IBM have been
using substantial resources in this sector for many years, and have
released development toolkits aimed at makers of small devices this year.

What it takes for developing countries to reap the benefits of this,
is to get in place a couple of G3 operators who should not pay too much
for their
operating licences, but instead should be bound to compete under terms that
encourage low prices to gain a large market.


> > Applications give us a hint as to why developing country users NEED
> > bandwidth.  A colleague went to India a shortly while back.  His laptop
> > required its weekly dose of Windows and anti-virus update.  Size, 8.3
> > megabytes (a major update).  His dial-up, 28.8 kbps.  In practice, it
> > took nearly 6 hours, and he was lucky it didn't disconnect on him.  His
> > cost for that update, about $6, or almost a week's average income in
> > India.

The answer to this is to avoid using Windows.
You do not need all those antivirus and security updates on any other
platform.
If he had used a Mac OS X or Linux laptop (or whatever else, for that
matter),
the problem would not have existed.

Being a careful professional, I have avoided most such problem.
The few cases I have seen through the years, have been on Windows systems.
It is a platform I just think is untenable in any technologically
undeveloped area.
Most users will need some form of solid IT infrastructure to use it, or
they will
end up causing major problems both for themselves and others.

--
Bjørn Vermo
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/