1996-09-16 - Re: 56 kbps modems

Header Data

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
To: Bill Stewart <cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 432ea18fd68a68ef5ea53c6790c5081b2faca327fbd7a689a9b45462ffd47164
Message ID: <199609152017.NAA12491@mail.pacifier.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-09-16 00:40:43 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 08:40:43 +0800

Raw message

From: jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 08:40:43 +0800
To: Bill Stewart <cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: 56 kbps modems
Message-ID: <199609152017.NAA12491@mail.pacifier.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 01:31 AM 9/15/96 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:

>Unless they're _really_ talking about ISDN "modems", I'm surprised
>to hear somebody saying they can take 56 kbps, turn it into analog,
>let the phone company quantize and mu-law the analog into 64kbps,
>and still get the original 56kbps back out.  But if they can, well,
>yee-hah, ISDN is nearly dead :-)  (Not totally dead; the signalling is
>still useful for some applications, the convenience of two channels on
>one wire pair is nice, and the fact that people can get 56kbps without
>the phone company's help will pressure them into offering ISDN for
>a lower price in areas where the Phone Company's idea of "all the market 
>will bear" is substantially higher than voice pricing.)

If the phoneco was realistic about ISDN value, they'd decide that since 
anybody can buy a 31k modem  for $100 or so, the "value" of a 128K 
connection is about $400, and then they'd charge based on the actuarial 
value of this hypothetical one-time fee, at perhaps an interest rate of 5% 
or so:  In other words, about a $20 per year charge, or around $2 per month.


Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com





Thread