I really have to disagree with this comment because it is way too pessimistic... I've been on the Internet since around 1995 and I have yet to see a pay-per-view content system fly; A great case in point would be Napster. BMG is planing on retooling it to be a subscription service... and are they going to have the thousands of users they once had when it moves to a true business model? No. Sure people will pay a monthly fee for it, because you are essentially paying for an all-you-can-download one time fee. But the majority of users attracted to it were attracted to it's being *free.* People won't pay for things they can get for free... and there's no way to circumvent another napster/imesh/gnutella/et cetera breaking down the price barrier. Sure some people will pay for the service, mostly people who wish to be considered legaly using the media which they posess.
Furthermore, people generally don't purchase subscriptions to online magazines, newspapers, streaming radio stations, et cetera. It seems to me the only people making money on content over the 'Net are people selling pr0n.;)
Did anyone else notice the complete lack of mentioning the CPU specs in all of those oldschool ads? I thought that was cool:)
Something else too... these computers used "ease-of-progamability" as a selling point! I remember trying to type programs into the Atari 1200XL I had... but never tried programing on my 286 laptop, 386 desktop, pentium120 desktop, or even my new G4. The software to program with isn't bundled with the computer anymore.
Later:)
Sure Mozilla was free to non-commercial users, but it didn't form out of thin air... Netscape had financial backing to pay off coders, et cetera. And I didn't mean the software side of the 'Net either, I meant the infastructure. The pipes and bandwidth. That too, if not for the work of the private (read: commercial) sector, would never have propelled the Internet into what it is today. Most people have to pay $20/mo for their Net connection, regardless of the software they use to utilize it.
3G systems will provide access, by means of one or more radio links, to a wide range of telecommunication services supported by the fixed telecommunication networks and to other services that are specific to mobile users. A range of mobile terminal types will be encompassed, linking to terrestrial and/or satellite-based networks, and the terminals may be designed for mobile or fixed use.
Here's some more...
Capability to support circuit and packet data at high bit rates:
* 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
Companies don't agree to standards because they all just want to use *their* way of communications. I think the same thing happened with the major networks trying to decide on a standard for DTV... It's not the government or the FCC being greedy, or even companies... its just the fact that companies usually have to license technology from other companies if their format doesn't win the standards war.
Radio stations can't just raise their power whenever they see fit... they have to go through a bunch of FCC red-tape, plus pay substantially more $$$/Watt. And just because l0pht uses HAM radio packet transfers to transmit ther 31337 ju4r3z doesn't mean that the idea of HAM Internet is compeltely flawed... Hell why don't we just say that the Internet helps spread computer viruses, illegal copies of software,movies and music, et cetera, and we should see to it that the government takes control of it so we can have a "safer" Internet. No thanks. I'd rather see what happens when normal people and capitalisim kick in. That's what spawned the tremendous growth of the Internet we have today... like it or not.
I refuse to believe radio pirates are raking havoc on the airwaves even in places where they have a major presence; such as the greater Miami area for example. It's not very hard to make a "clean" station that has no problem locking in to its assigned frequency instead of interfearing with others. *ANYWAYS* They way I see it, the FCC should be obligated to assign a block of frequencies to the public a la CB Radios back in the day. I thought I heard somewhere a while back that some HAM operators were able to "transmit computer packets" back and forth via some sort of gizmo... long distance filesharing... neato. Anyone have any clue what I'm talking about?
Slashdot Mirror
I really have to disagree with this comment because it is way too pessimistic... I've been on the Internet since around 1995 and I have yet to see a pay-per-view content system fly; A great case in point would be Napster. BMG is planing on retooling it to be a subscription service... and are they going to have the thousands of users they once had when it moves to a true business model? No. Sure people will pay a monthly fee for it, because you are essentially paying for an all-you-can-download one time fee. But the majority of users attracted to it were attracted to it's being *free.* People won't pay for things they can get for free... and there's no way to circumvent another napster/imesh/gnutella/et cetera breaking down the price barrier. Sure some people will pay for the service, mostly people who wish to be considered legaly using the media which they posess. Furthermore, people generally don't purchase subscriptions to online magazines, newspapers, streaming radio stations, et cetera. It seems to me the only people making money on content over the 'Net are people selling pr0n. ;)
Did anyone else notice the complete lack of mentioning the CPU specs in all of those oldschool ads? I thought that was cool :)
Something else too... these computers used "ease-of-progamability" as a selling point! I remember trying to type programs into the Atari 1200XL I had... but never tried programing on my 286 laptop, 386 desktop, pentium120 desktop, or even my new G4. The software to program with isn't bundled with the computer anymore.
Later :)
Amen.
Sure Mozilla was free to non-commercial users, but it didn't form out of thin air... Netscape had financial backing to pay off coders, et cetera. And I didn't mean the software side of the 'Net either, I meant the infastructure. The pipes and bandwidth. That too, if not for the work of the private (read: commercial) sector, would never have propelled the Internet into what it is today. Most people have to pay $20/mo for their Net connection, regardless of the software they use to utilize it.
Here's some more...
Capability to support circuit and packet data at high bit rates:
* 144 kilobits/second or higher in high mobility (vehicular) traffic
* 384 kilobits/second for pedestrian traffic
* 2 Megabits/second or higher for indoor traffic
Click here for the link
Companies don't agree to standards because they all just want to use *their* way of communications. I think the same thing happened with the major networks trying to decide on a standard for DTV... It's not the government or the FCC being greedy, or even companies... its just the fact that companies usually have to license technology from other companies if their format doesn't win the standards war.
amen.
Radio stations can't just raise their power whenever they see fit... they have to go through a bunch of FCC red-tape, plus pay substantially more $$$/Watt. And just because l0pht uses HAM radio packet transfers to transmit ther 31337 ju4r3z doesn't mean that the idea of HAM Internet is compeltely flawed... Hell why don't we just say that the Internet helps spread computer viruses, illegal copies of software,movies and music, et cetera, and we should see to it that the government takes control of it so we can have a "safer" Internet. No thanks. I'd rather see what happens when normal people and capitalisim kick in. That's what spawned the tremendous growth of the Internet we have today... like it or not.
I refuse to believe radio pirates are raking havoc on the airwaves even in places where they have a major presence; such as the greater Miami area for example. It's not very hard to make a "clean" station that has no problem locking in to its assigned frequency instead of interfearing with others. *ANYWAYS* They way I see it, the FCC should be obligated to assign a block of frequencies to the public a la CB Radios back in the day. I thought I heard somewhere a while back that some HAM operators were able to "transmit computer packets" back and forth via some sort of gizmo... long distance filesharing... neato. Anyone have any clue what I'm talking about?