[1257] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
technical details
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (francis%zaphod@gargoyle.uchicago.e)
Wed Aug 28 22:42:53 1991
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 91 21:42:32 CDT
From: francis%zaphod@gargoyle.uchicago.edu
To: com-priv@uu.psi.com
In-Reply-To: Geoff Collyer's message of Tue, 27 Aug 91 18:29:44 -0400 <9108272229.AA29125@world.std.com>
Reply-To: francis%zaphod@gargoyle.uchicago.edu
geoff@world.std.com (Geoff Collyer) writes:
>I think the T3 backbone is a red herring. Once a network reaches a
>certain speed, adding more speed doesn't make it any more useful.
I don't think this is the case. A T3 net may not be much better,
inherently, than a T1 net--they can both do the same sort of
things--but the users will be more likely to use a faster net for
intensive things like FTP. And, at an administration level, a site
which has a lot of bandwidth available will be more willing to use
more of it for things like newsgroups, providing FTP servers, etc.
Overall, the T3 net will be used more; its users will get more out of
it. When people have to wait for what they perceive to be unwieldy
lengths of time, they just don't.
(Similarly, a flat-fee net is good because it doesn't make people
think about whether they can afford to do something.)
/============================================================================\
| Francis Stracke | My opinions are my own. I don't steal them.|
| Department of Mathematics |=============================================|
| University of Chicago | Should five percent appear too small, |
| francis@zaphod.uchicago.edu | Be thankful I don't take it all. "Taxman" |
\============================================================================/
