On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Funk wrote:
> However, when someone uses such an argument to extrapolate to the
> overall level of wireless and fixed line services in a country (which was
> the point of the article), problems begin to emerge. first, there are many
> different kinds of people who have very different needs. and these
> different needs cause people to make very different choices.
I wasn't trying to extrapolate that far. I was just pointing out that if
someone has 64 Kbps wireless Internet access, you can expect that they
won't also have 64 Kbps wired Internet access as well, becuase there's
simply no need. Sometimes these technologies do substitute for one
another, and you should look at individual service types, rather than
the particular service, when trying to look at the Internet penetration
in a country.
> CJS's comments show how easy it is to fall into this trap; his
> comments imply they are substitutes when my guess is that if he were
> pressed for an opinion, he (and probably Nick May) would probably say
> they are not substitutes.
It depends on your use. If you need mobility, Air-H" and ISDN are not
fungible; one has it, the other doesn't. However, there's no question
that Air-H" is a substitute for ISDN in that, once you have Air-H", you
have no need at all for consumer ISDN Internet access at home.
> ...just as the mobile Internet has much
> less performance than the PC internet.
In this case, no. That there are better-performing access methods
than ISDN (such as ADSL and FTTH) doesn't mean that everybody will
use, or even need, those better methods.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs_at_cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
Received on Sun Sep 22 02:22:41 2002