"Worldcom, L3, Global Crossing, and anybody else who built out big fiber networks got caught because the technology for multiplexing lots of very fast connections on a fiber finally caught up with the market."
I think that carrier's problem is that they ovelooked the local loop; although there's a lot of unused bandwith on the copper to the homes I don't hear anybody complaining about the bandwidth glut on copper; I also don't hear any baby bell going bankrupt (ok, some people talk about Qwest; but Qwest in my opinion is one of the smartest baby bells in handling the local loop; it hasn't anything to do with you thinking that their service sucks). Why isn't anybody complaining? Because you have a paying customer on that line. However, carrier's customer is beyond that local loop. The fact is that you need a customer in order to have revenue; local loop is in my opinion a natural monopoly so if the customer is yours the only thing stopping you from building a network and providing the service is business stupidity (ex: @Home providing internet access on cable companies' networks). This kind of stupidity is not going to last forever; solutions to this? Level3 went into software; AOL bought TW (well, they got more than they bargained for). People say that the telecom doom is due to dot com doom; and why is that? In my opinion the problem is that those dot coms were like piramydal schemes: at some point the number of new customers didn't grew at the same pace due to local loop providers seeing their own stupidity: why should they put money in someone else's pocket? Why shouldn't they have their own network? Unfortunately, network building takes time and money and at this moment nobody wants to tell investors that they are putting fiber into the ground. However, in the telecom doom there will be plenty of cheap networks... At this moment, in my opinion the best positioned in the industry are Cable&Wireless and Qwest; unless something goes terribly wrong (accounting issues etc.) all the others players should get in similar situation or go down. Bundling rules! (not that I like it) Of course, there's also wireless; but this technology has a few things to sort out before it will be ready for massive deployment (first of all there's still quite some research still going on).
This is a good idea. A few years ago I received from Novell some CDs (in Romania) declared at 10$. Me and the DHL guy had a nightmare explaining at the customs what's a CD (don't laugh!). I was told that Microsoft was declaring the CDs as having O$ value and nobody asked anything. Apparently they got away with it in the US too.
Never seen this NFS drop problem. Am I just lucky?
Maybe you're not using IRIX 6.5; I heard it has NFS problems. I use 6.2 and never seen any of my Linuxes "dealing with" network outages while running NFS as well as my IRIX does.
Actually, according to the IRIX manual for grio, it has much to do with the OS; it will have to do resource evaluation in order to know if the hardware can cope with the request, then some resource reservation stuff; the whole thing is designed for any kind of resource reservation, but it only works on xfs/real-time partitions. I suppose this is the reason why they put that disclaimer in the XFS/Linux presentation: it might be too much trouble to introduce this in the linux kernel.
Slashdot Mirror
"Worldcom, L3, Global Crossing, and anybody else who built out big fiber networks got caught because the technology for multiplexing lots of very fast connections on a fiber finally caught up with the market."
I think that carrier's problem is that they ovelooked the local loop; although there's a lot of unused bandwith on the copper to the homes I don't hear anybody complaining about the bandwidth glut on copper; I also don't hear any baby bell going bankrupt (ok, some people talk about Qwest; but Qwest in my opinion is one of the smartest baby bells in handling the local loop; it hasn't anything to do with you thinking that their service sucks). Why isn't anybody complaining? Because you have a paying customer on that line. However, carrier's customer is beyond that local loop.
The fact is that you need a customer in order to have revenue; local loop is in my opinion a natural monopoly so if the customer is yours the only thing stopping you from building a network and providing the service is business stupidity (ex: @Home providing internet access on cable companies' networks). This kind of stupidity is not going to last forever; solutions to this? Level3 went into software; AOL bought TW (well, they got more than they bargained for).
People say that the telecom doom is due to dot com doom; and why is that? In my opinion the problem is that those dot coms were like piramydal schemes: at some point the number of new customers didn't grew at the same pace due to local loop providers seeing their own stupidity: why should they put money in someone else's pocket? Why shouldn't they have their own network? Unfortunately, network building takes time and money and at this moment nobody wants to tell investors that they are putting fiber into the ground. However, in the telecom doom there will be plenty of cheap networks...
At this moment, in my opinion the best positioned in the industry are Cable&Wireless and Qwest; unless something goes terribly wrong (accounting issues etc.) all the others players should get in similar situation or go down. Bundling rules! (not that I like it)
Of course, there's also wireless; but this technology has a few things to sort out before it will be ready for massive deployment (first of all there's still quite some research still going on).
Nokia 7650.
As I remember it wasn't a very happy partnership; SGI's CEO at the time (Rick Beluzzo?) was ousted and now works for M$ (purely by chance ;-)
This is a good idea. A few years ago I received from Novell some CDs (in Romania) declared at 10$. Me and the DHL guy had a nightmare explaining at the customs what's a CD (don't laugh!). I was told that Microsoft was declaring the CDs as having O$ value and nobody asked anything. Apparently they got away with it in the US too.
maybe wiring CAT5 into every room of every house, same as electricty and phone?).
Why not? Does this sound so laughable to you?
The only thing particularly slow I notice on the Indy is heavy disk access, but that's probably just my hard drive ;-)
No, that's the crappy SCSI bus. Check the specs!
Never seen this NFS drop problem. Am I just lucky?
Maybe you're not using IRIX 6.5; I heard it has NFS problems. I use 6.2 and never seen any of my Linuxes "dealing with" network outages while running NFS as well as my IRIX does.
Actually, according to the IRIX manual for grio, it has much to do with the OS; it will have to do resource evaluation in order to know if the hardware can cope with the request, then some resource reservation stuff; the whole thing is designed for any kind of resource reservation, but it only works on xfs/real-time partitions.
I suppose this is the reason why they put that disclaimer in the XFS/Linux presentation: it might be too much trouble to introduce this in the linux kernel.