| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.99 09:59l 186 Lines 7827 Bytes #-9759 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_241E
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/241E
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0ERF<DB0HSK<PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8APD<PI8WNO<PI8HGL<
PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990926/0243Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:2718 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_241
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19923 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 00:00:11 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015935 ; Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:08:15 MET
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 99 01:03:17 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_241E>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/241E
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
I want a real, physical packet network that real hams can use. No pretending
on the phone. I don't have anything against high-speed or tcpip in
themselves, but on the other hand I also feel that neither one is a good
excuse to sit around and do nothing, undercut the efforts of others, or
avoid the use of Radio with other systems simply because they are NOT
high-speed or tcpip.
I feel that the node sites are more important to hams that what speed or
protocol they are being used with at any given time.
I feel that any adult who is satisfied to "pretend" they are using ham radio
on the Internet is an embarrassment and a liability to the hobby.
--
73 DE Charles Brabham, N5PVL
N5PVL @ N5PVL.#NTX.TX.USA.NOAM
http://www.texoma.net/~n5pvl
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 1999 09:04:02 -0500
From: "Peter O. Brackett" <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Rob:
Thanks for all of that information. Good work.
Yes we too have cablemodem access in this country, as well as various xDSL
offerings.
Over here in America the "going rate" for cablemodem service is $50 per
month. It is advertised as megabit service, similar to Ethernet it is a
shared media service. Currently there are about 1 million cable modem
subscribers in the USA. A lot fewer ADSL subscribers, probably fewere than
50, 000 today. The xDSL services go all the way from 128 kbps up to the
"classic ADSL" at 6 Mbps downstream. The most widespread xDSL in the USA,
although it is not called that, is HDSL. There are over 700,000 HDSL lines
in the USA, but they are called T1's heh, heh. The Local Exchange Carriers
or LEC's do not want to sell the other new "consume" DSL's because they are
market priced cheaper than the T1/HDSL that they make lots of profit on.
They don't want to cannibalize their HDSL too soon. But the cable modem
purveyors are putting the pressure on them.
But all that being said, the overall penetration percentage for the
cablemodems and xDSL pales in comparison to the 160 million access lines in
the USA. And . . . on all those access lines the V.90 all you can eat 24 by
7 service for $40 per month is still "the only deal in town", and a good one
compared to most of the world.
And yes . . . when I spoke of world prices for telecom, I really meant
American pricing. American telecom deregulation has been leading the world
for the past couple of decades. This has driven down prices everywhere else
and also initiated deregulation by legacy PTTs and governments elsewhere as
in an effort to keep the American companies and Internet from taking over
all the world markets.
Isn't competition great?
Thanks again Rob, I really enjoy the interaction with you.
Best Regards,
Peter AB4BC
Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn7umcuj.ar4.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
> Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >In almost all places in the world other than North America, local
telephone
> >service is metered by the minute. This is certainly true all over
Europe,
> >Asia and Latin America. Now in the USA local telephone service has been
> >available at a flat rate for all you can eat local service for 6 - 7
> >decades. Since Theodore Vail of AT&T sold Congress on the AT&T monopoly.
>
> >Thus in the USA we now enjoy a flat rate local telephone service at
> >approximately $20 per month in all 50 States.
>
> >We can call anywhere in our local cities (LATAs) and stay off hook on
that
> >connection for 24 hours per day 7 days per week and all we are charged is
> >roughly $20 per month. Long distance of course is extra and charged by
the
> >minute, nowadays in the USA you can get long distance service for 5 - 10
> >cents per minute anywhere in America.
>
> In the Netherlands, we have 2 different rates: "local" (which is a much
> larger area than what you would get for "local cities", it is usually
> an area about 25km in diameter), and "long distance".
> Long distance costs less that what you pay, but of course the distance
> is a bit less as well as we have a smaller country. OTOH, we can call
> to the US for the same rate as you pay for "long distance" service.
> "local" is about a dollar an hour.
>
> >So that . . . In the USA we can dial our local Internet access provider
and
> >connect to the Internet at approximately 50 kbps (V.90) for 24 hours per
> >day, 7 days per week for only $40 per month! $20 local phone service
plus
> >$20 local Internet access service.
>
> >Let me ask you Rob. . . . In comparison to the American pricing, of $40
per
> >month, in the Netherlands how much does a 24 hour by 7 day 50 kbps
Internet
> >connection cost?
>
> We would not do that via a dialup connection!
> I can get cable Internet, at about 90 kbps when the company does its work
> well (which it doesn't always do) for $28 per month all-in (no extra
> charges for connect time).
> Other cities have better cable Internet systems that perform better (more
> like 1500kbps) but usually cost around $40/month.
>
> Also, in my opinion an Internet provider cannot offer what is in fact
> a leased line (a dedicated modem and a dedicated line) for each customer
> for $20/month including traffic. So, you are counting on the fact that
> other customers are paying for your usage. That is not very popular here,
> because customers like to "get what they pay for" in this country.
> So, when there would be a flat rate telephone service (there *was* such
> a service until the late seventies!), a lot of people would be doing what
> you describe, and the system would collapse because the provider would not
> have enough lines and modems to service everyone, and would not be getting
> the money to buy them. (providers are now successfully running a 10
> customers/line ratio here, the cheap/free ones have an even higher ratio)
>
> >I hope you feel that you can share this pricing with us all here, because
I
> >know what it costs and since I am a "Yank" I want to defer to you who are
a
> >citizen of the EC and a Netherlander. Tell us. . . how much?
>
> As shown above, it looks like it will cost us less, when using cable
> Internet.
>
> >I believe that this artificially high governmentaly imposed cost/price
alone
> >in Europe distorts the hapbits of European amateur packet radio
operators.
> >Of course they still favor the use of amateur radio over the Internet.
>
> Our license precludes us from making connections between amateur radio
> networks and foreign networks. There has always been discussion about
> using the Internet as a tunnel between amateur networks, but the license
> does not specificially say that this is allowed as an exception.
> The authorities here have a "laissez-faire" attitude (as you undoubtedly
> know), so there are some stations that have setup gateways even though
> it is not formally allowed.
>
> Still, most of the network is operating via radio here. You see, the
> hobby is amateur radio. Of course there are *a lot* more people on the
> Internet than on amateur radio, probably there are even more amateurs
> on Internet than on packet radio. But that is just a different hobby.
>
> >But for how long will they do this after the prices reach world market
> >prices? I maintain that you will see the same effects that we have seen
> >here in America. The ham packet activity will wither!
To be continued in digest: hd_99_241F
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
