Well I guess when you look at multiple technologies like
VR (voice recognition), VN (voice navigation), IA (intelligent agents),
& WAP of course, Then you begin to see the relationships and importance
of wireless applications. I concur with you on the point of land optics
however the average person requires remote and mobile access to their
corporate networks, intra-nets, extra-nets, and value-added-networks.
Therefore one could conclude that wireless access will have a main
space within future technologies. In addition to this point I would
like to also state WAP is the front runner in regards to linking
wireless apps to the Global Internet and her sub-nets. Also, I would
like to re-reference you to understanding Teledesic's network model.
This is where you can clearly see the wireless model @ work. In closing,
I would ask that you stay aware of WAP for this is not a govt technology,
it was formulated from people like you, me, & the members of IETF! And
it will play a major role in all of our lives from a protocol stand point.
Video to Video, Voice to Text, Broadcast to IP, Data to Voice = WAP(Display)
Coming From The Brain,
JT
-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:anthony(_at_)atkielski(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:12 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: WAP - What A Problem...
thats why intelsat and a cosortium of telcos has
a charity that built a box that is solar powered
and provides n gsm phones access + 1 64kbps uplink/
downlink to geostatinary atellites
So that's what, 64/5 = 13 kbps per user? Even as current Internet designs
require ever more bandwidth and strain even multi-megabit connections? And
has anyone considered what happens when you have 6 million active ground
transceivers trying to communicate with a single satellite?
actualyl, a LOT of places that are really poor in
the world dont even have electricty- but they can get
batteries and if they use sms (e.g. for calling
emergency service/flying doctors/vets etc), they
can make them last quite a long time
Why use SMS instead of just voice?
Has anyone considered the ergonomics of WAP? Even if it works perfectly,
how many people are willing to work on a screen smaller than a credit card?
How many people are capable of touch-typing on a keyboard with only ten soft
keys that must be pressed in various arcane combinations for almost ever
letter? It just doesn't make intuitive sense.
Anyway, I have a really good instinct for picking technology winners, and
thus far I put WAP in the same category as MiniDiscs, bubble memory, color
fax machines, and quadraphonic sound. I think the growth area is in
broadband land-based links; I don't understand why people have flown off on
tangents towards wireless when land links are just starting to come into
their own. I suspect it is more politically motivated than technically
motivated, and that is one reason why I think it will fail. A lot of time
and effort is being wasted on WAP.