1996-08-31 - Re: Phoneco vs X-Phone

Header Data

From: Arun Mehta <amehta@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
To: jim bell <vipul@pobox.com
Message Hash: e055abb66d548f8ede7af0810f994389501118ef8d7f6712db0463dcbf735cc5
Message ID: <1.5.4.32.19960831063510.00348e9c@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-31 09:15:40 UTC
Raw Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 17:15:40 +0800

Raw message

From: Arun Mehta <amehta@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 1996 17:15:40 +0800
To: jim bell <vipul@pobox.com
Subject: Re: Phoneco vs X-Phone
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960831063510.00348e9c@giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 17:45 20/08/96 -0800, jim bell wrote:
>
>The fact is, LD phone is a business that, like it or not, is going to shrink 
>drastically _in_terms_of_dollars_, simply because the cost of that service 
>will likewise, go down.  That's life.

Perhaps the answer to this interesting debate between Vipul and Jim lies in
looking at what happened to computers as they became cheaper. There was
a time when someone at IBM predicted that the needs of the entire world would
be met by about 50 computers or so, but now that computers are almost free
(as Jim argues bandwidth has become), we have almost that many in a single
household (counting all the video games, watches, car and
appliance electronics).
People found new ways to use computers, so they used far more of them. So
much so, that the computer industry overall did not shrink, but
grew. There was a
time when you bought "time"  on a computer, as you do in
long-distance telephony. Changing over to computer purchase
didn't kill the industry.

So if you were sold a size of bandwidth pipe instead of how many hours you 
actually use it, and eliminated the cost of accounting for time usage, I think
we'd all be happier -- except maybe the  IBMs of telecom.

Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta@cpsr.org
http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/  finger amehta@cerfnet.com for public key






Thread