> This was always a nonsense claim, since people
> were running IP over 2400 baud modems 10+ years
> ago, which is about as high latency, low
> bandwidth as you can get.
...and extremely unpleasant. I had the misfortune to be forced to dial in from home some time in 95 using an old 2400 modem and it was virtually unusable.
WAP reserves its specialist low-latency stuff for transferring data down the wireless "last mile" - i.e. between the WAP gateway and the handsets themselves. I think it's entirely justifiable to have specific stuff there.
Elsewhere it uses all the existing TCP/IP, HTTP stuff we know and love.
I can't say I agree with much of what he says. His point about the ease with which an MP3 collection can be destroyed assumes that you're treating MP3s as you do physical items like CDs - when in fact you could/should be paying for the *right* to listen to the music, rather than the file itself.
"With MP3s, rarity does not compute." Sure you can have limited edition MP3s - in fact, by lowering the cost of getting music out there you can have a lot more, in the form of live sessions, less "saleable" recordings etc.
As for blurring the lines between art, music, and data... is music heard on the radio intrinsically different, or lacking in "artistic" value because of the transport mechanism used to get it to you?
"People will forget how to make music the old fashioned way." Oh *please*. There's no reason why MP3 should change the way music is made - it's a distribution network.
Slashdot Mirror
> This was always a nonsense claim, since people
> were running IP over 2400 baud modems 10+ years
> ago, which is about as high latency, low
> bandwidth as you can get.
...and extremely unpleasant. I had the misfortune to be forced to dial in from home some time in 95 using an old 2400 modem and it was virtually unusable.
WAP reserves its specialist low-latency stuff for transferring data down the wireless "last mile" - i.e. between the WAP gateway and the handsets themselves. I think it's entirely justifiable to have specific stuff there.
Elsewhere it uses all the existing TCP/IP, HTTP stuff we know and love.
I can't say I agree with much of what he says. His point about the ease with which an MP3 collection can be destroyed assumes that you're treating MP3s as you do physical items like CDs - when in fact you could/should be paying for the *right* to listen to the music, rather than the file itself.
"With MP3s, rarity does not compute." Sure you can have limited edition MP3s - in fact, by lowering the cost of getting music out there you can have a lot more, in the form of live sessions, less "saleable" recordings etc.
As for blurring the lines between art, music, and data... is music heard on the radio intrinsically different, or lacking in "artistic" value because of the transport mechanism used to get it to you?
"People will forget how to make music the old fashioned way." Oh *please*. There's no reason why MP3 should change the way music is made - it's a distribution network.