Subject: RE: WAP - What A Problem...

From: "Taylor, Johnny" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2000 13:06:53 -0400

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:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 1:12 PM
To: [email-masked]
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.

---

From: Renfield Kuroda <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 13:31:28 +0100

"Taylor, Johnny" wrote:

> In addition to this point I would
> wireless apps to the Global Internet and her sub-nets.
>
I'd have to disagree there. The 8 million non-WAP users in Japan are unarguably
enjoying the most prolific, robust, and deep wireless Internet available today.

Regards,

r e n

> --
> ascii: r e n f i e l d
> octal: \162 \145 \156 \146 \151 \145 \154 \144
> hex:   \x72 \x65 \x6e \x66 \x69 \x65 \x6c  \x64
> ** note new work email: [email-masked] **
>

---

From: "Anthony Atkielski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 15:21:51 +0200

> 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.

The average person doesn't use any of these networks, and so does not
require access to them.  There are still too many people (_most_ people, in
fact) who do not have an e-mail address.

> Therefore one could conclude that wireless access will
> have a main space within future technologies.

Some sort of wireless access to the Internet will surely have a place in the
future.  Beyond that, I wouldn't make any specific predictions about what
form it might take.

> In addition to this point I would like to also
> state WAP is the front runner in regards to linking

I'm not sure what you mean by "Global Internet," since I'm not aware of any
other kind of Internet.

Also, in English, inanimate objects and concepts take the neuter gender, not
the female gender, so the Internet is "it," not "she."

> Also, I would like to re-reference you to
> understanding Teledesic's network model.

Satellites in low orbit providing two-way communication with a vast number
of ground stations, right?  What else is there to it?

> This is where you can clearly see the wireless model
> @ work.

Has this wireless network actually been implemented?  Last I heard of
anything coming close was Iridium, and we know what happened to that.

> 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!

I'm as aware of it as I was of MiniDiscs and Betamax.  When and if it moves
to the mainstream (something I do not really expect at this point), I'll
consider it in greater detail.

One thing I'd like to know is:  Is WAP a response to user demands for
wireless Net access from credit-card-sized terminals, or is WAP something
that looked like it would be cool to implement that the inventors and their
marketroids are now trying to sell to others?

> And it will play a major role in all of our lives
> from a protocol stand point.

Just like Picturephone service and DIVX.

> Data to Voice = WAP(Display)

I don't see the two killer apps here--e-mail and the Web--unless they are
disguised in terminology somewhere in there.  I'm not even convinced of the
practicality of those, however, on terminals that are ergonomically
unsuitable to either.

---

From: "Anthony Atkielski" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 15:26:13 +0200

> I'd have to disagree there. The 8 million non-WAP users
> in Japan are unarguably enjoying the most prolific, robust,
> and deep wireless Internet available today.

We still have more than five billion users who aren't even online yet.  They
haven't enjoyed anything thus far.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 12:20:33 -0400

> haven't enjoyed anything thus far.

Umm.. A large fraction of those 5 billion would settle for
clean drinking water and some protien in their diet...

---

From: "Raymond Cutts Jr." <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 12:27:21 -0400

I think you both makes some good points.  However, the main issue is: "Will
there be a NEED for some type of Wireless Application?" ...and the
Undisputable answer is: "Absolutely".

Now, whether the ultimate STANDARD will be WAP or some other application is
somewhat irrelevant.  The bottom line is there WILL BE some wireless
application(s) that will become the preferred protocol(s) to transmit
information through RF.

Some of the arguments stated by the gentleman in the original e-mail are
some of the same type arguments stated 15 years ago, when cellular phones
initially came onto the consumer scene.  The argument(s) about the number of
user -vs- the capacity limitations, etc., etc., were all the same type
issues that the cellular industry overcame.  They will also be overcome in
the newer wireless information transmission industry; if by nothing else
than Economies of Scale.  As more and more people demand service, and more
and more money (lots of money) is thrown in this direction, the cost
justification for embarking on such ventures will become more and more
reasonable; and companies/individuals will invest their energy to make it
happen {and make a profit at the same time}.

As far as 'ergonomics', those issues will become non-issues, as well.  I
recently started work with a new company, and many of the employees use
"i-pagers".  If you are not familiar with i-pagers, they are paging units
(slightly larger than the miniature text pager) that are used predominately
for transmitting e-mail messages.  I have no problem reading through long
messages on the screen, which is smaller than a credit card.  Even when you
read through text on your computer screen, you never get the entire document
(or picture), thus you have to scroll up and/or down to read the entire
message.  This is the same thing with the smaller devices.  Also, these
i-pagers have a FULL "qwerty" style keyboard for typing messages; not ten
soft keys that need to be combined to type out one letter.  I actually find
this "mini-laptop" to be very useful, and I enjoy using it.  We also have a
wireless LAN, which everybody loves.  It's one of the most convenient
devices used widely in our office {and it works almost flawlessly}.

The bottom lines is that wireless devices provide convenience and
productivity, which land-line devices can not even begin to compete; thus,
wireless devices inherently capture a segment of the market unattainable by
land-line devices.  This provides for an extraordinary opportunity in the
Wireless Industry.  And as the land-line infrastructure continues to
increase, to accommodate higher bandwidth, the opportunities in the wireless
world will increase.

There is no question that the immediate opportunities are in increasing the
bandwidth for the land-line infrastructure.  The infrastructure must be
improved in order to provide next generation type applications for the
consumers.  Even if one could send Gigabit sized information through the
air, once it connect to a land based network, there will still be a
bottle-neck if something is not done.  However, for longer-term
opportunities you must look to the wireless industry.  Once the build-out of
the land-line network is complete (or as complete as necessary), there will
still be opportunities for value-added services.  This is where the wireless
services come into play.

Just take another look back at the cellular industry.  Who would have
thought that the number of wireless phone user would ever surpass the number
of land-line user? ...well were coming up on that reality very soon; and it
has already happened in several places.  Also, who would have thought that
the revenues from the wireless side of the Baby Bells would (or could) ever
exceed the mammoth revenues produced by their land-line business.  Well, the
revenues (and profits) from the wireless side of the Baby Bells have BLOWN
AWAY the revenues (and profits) of the traditional land-line business ....
and this took place many years ago.

Don't Sleep on the Wireless Industry.  The intensity of the current
situation is much more focused on the land-line infrastructure (as well as
it should be), but don't pack up your stuff and go home once that party is
over....because there is going to be an after-party.  It may not be "WAP",
it may not be one of the other "sexy" acronyms being thrown around ...., but
one thing you can be sure of: it will be something wireless.

Peace,
Raymond

-----Original Message-----
From: Taylor, Johnny [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 1:07 PM
To: Anthony Atkielski; [email-masked]
Cc: Kevin Clements (E-mail); Kevin Lampkin (E-mail); Raymond Cutts
(E-mail); Robert Scott (E-mail)
Subject: RE: WAP - What A Problem...

Coming From The Brain,

JT