Over the past nine quarters, wireless substitution has accelerated, with more than one percent of households cutting the cord every quarter, or five percent a year, Bazinet says.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Almost A Third Of U.S. Households Have Cut The Landline Cord
Almost 30 percent of U.S. households have cut the cord, up from about 25 percent a year ago, says Citi Investment Research analyst Jason Bazinet.
Over the past nine quarters, wireless substitution has accelerated, with more than one percent of households cutting the cord every quarter, or five percent a year, Bazinet says.
Over the past nine quarters, wireless substitution has accelerated, with more than one percent of households cutting the cord every quarter, or five percent a year, Bazinet says.
Labels:
wireless substitution
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Intel Buys McAfee: Why?
Intel Corporation is acquiring security software firm McAfee. The $7.68 billion deal has been approved by boards of both companies. So why is the chipmaker buying a security software firm? One can argue it is a move "up the stack" from hardware to applications. That is true, but probably not the key driver.
Intel now can craft products that combine hardware and software, and that is an upside. But perhaps the most compelling argument is that Internet devices now are moving away from PCs and other similar devices to other machines that one does not traditionally associate with security suites, such as sensor networks, automated teller machines, medical devices, cars or TVs.
Intel now appears to regard security for all those devices, and its chip-buying customers, to be on par with its strategic focus areas in energy-efficient performance and Internet connectivity.
Intel now appears to regard security for all those devices, and its chip-buying customers, to be on par with its strategic focus areas in energy-efficient performance and Internet connectivity.
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
A Net Neutrality "Grand Compromise" is Necessary, Not an Option
At the end of the day, unless the major stakeholders in the network neutrality debate can come to some enduring compromise, broadband investment in the United States is likely to be quite constrained.
That is why agreements such as Google and Verizon have struck, are so important. At the end of the day, unless private commercial interests can be persuaded there is a way forward that encompasses all the key interests, there can be no outcome satisfactory for the public interest, either.
This one graphic suggests why ISPs, as well as application providers, will have to reach a grand compromise. Voice, for over 100 years, has been the underpinning for all public networks, but that is not going to be the case in the future. For the moment, voice continues to underpin mobile and fixed networks.
But nobody believes that will last. ISPs and service providers must find ways to at least replace the lost voice revenues with new revenue sources. Application providers, specifically, and the public interest, in general, also require robust investment in the new broadband and IP networks of the future. But investments always require some expectation of profit. Absent that, investment will not happen.
ISPs are going to have to give up some possible revenue streams. That is what the Google-Verizon agreement stipulates, in essence.
But application providers are going to have to give some ground on network management. Without such agreement, broadband investment will be imperiled. Some do not believe that to be the case, to be sure.
But the investment community has spoken loud and clear, for decades, about broadband and capacity upgrades by cable and telcos that investors worried would not provide a financial return. If one believed that the federal government, or other units of government, could make those investments after private interest collapsed, then collapse would not permanently affect broadband deployment.
But there is not such option any longer. U.S. networks will be built by private investment, or not at all. Despite some carping, that is why the Google-Verizon agreement is so important, and why wider industry agreement on some grand compromise, is essential, not optional. Nobody is going to get everything they might want. But all of us need to get enough to keep moving forward.
The worst outcome for the public interest is continued stalemate.
That is why agreements such as Google and Verizon have struck, are so important. At the end of the day, unless private commercial interests can be persuaded there is a way forward that encompasses all the key interests, there can be no outcome satisfactory for the public interest, either.
This one graphic suggests why ISPs, as well as application providers, will have to reach a grand compromise. Voice, for over 100 years, has been the underpinning for all public networks, but that is not going to be the case in the future. For the moment, voice continues to underpin mobile and fixed networks.
But nobody believes that will last. ISPs and service providers must find ways to at least replace the lost voice revenues with new revenue sources. Application providers, specifically, and the public interest, in general, also require robust investment in the new broadband and IP networks of the future. But investments always require some expectation of profit. Absent that, investment will not happen.
ISPs are going to have to give up some possible revenue streams. That is what the Google-Verizon agreement stipulates, in essence.
But application providers are going to have to give some ground on network management. Without such agreement, broadband investment will be imperiled. Some do not believe that to be the case, to be sure.
But the investment community has spoken loud and clear, for decades, about broadband and capacity upgrades by cable and telcos that investors worried would not provide a financial return. If one believed that the federal government, or other units of government, could make those investments after private interest collapsed, then collapse would not permanently affect broadband deployment.
But there is not such option any longer. U.S. networks will be built by private investment, or not at all. Despite some carping, that is why the Google-Verizon agreement is so important, and why wider industry agreement on some grand compromise, is essential, not optional. Nobody is going to get everything they might want. But all of us need to get enough to keep moving forward.
The worst outcome for the public interest is continued stalemate.
Labels:
net neutrality
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Private Net Neutality Discussions Restarted
Some key Internet and telecommunications firms apparently have restarted private talks to develop a proposal for how Internet traffic should be managed, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The new discussions are hosted at the offices of the Information Technology Industry Council, a Washington-based lobbying group that represents dozens of tech companies.
Cisco Systems Inc. and Microsoft Corp. are said to be among the firms trying to reach some agreement satisfactory to the stakeholders and the Federal Communications Commission. Apparently Google and the FCC are not at present involved in the talks.
The new discussions are hosted at the offices of the Information Technology Industry Council, a Washington-based lobbying group that represents dozens of tech companies.
Cisco Systems Inc. and Microsoft Corp. are said to be among the firms trying to reach some agreement satisfactory to the stakeholders and the Federal Communications Commission. Apparently Google and the FCC are not at present involved in the talks.
Labels:
net neutrality
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Facebook Message Congestion?
As is the case with Twitter, mobile users tend to receive many more Facebook, than text messages, in a month's time.
That might suggest more reliance on Facebook and Twitter for communication programs is a reasonable decision.
But it might also indicate the odds of getting noticed are much lower for Facebook or Twitter campaigns.
That might suggest more reliance on Facebook and Twitter for communication programs is a reasonable decision.
But it might also indicate the odds of getting noticed are much lower for Facebook or Twitter campaigns.
Labels:
Facebook,
SMS,
text messaging
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Twitter or Text? Clutter Might be a Factor
Twitter has emerged a huge generator of mobile messages, dwarfing text messages, for example.
That should convince some mobile marketers that Twitter is a channel they ought to be using.
Others will see too much "clutter" and might prefer text messaging as a channel.
But SMS remains a highly-personal medium where the risk of end user irritation is quite high.
Twitter might be a more congested channel, but the risk of end user irritation is far lower.
That should convince some mobile marketers that Twitter is a channel they ought to be using.
Others will see too much "clutter" and might prefer text messaging as a channel.
But SMS remains a highly-personal medium where the risk of end user irritation is quite high.
Twitter might be a more congested channel, but the risk of end user irritation is far lower.
Labels:
SMS,
text messaging,
Twitter
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Hughes Network Systems Gets $59 Million Broadband Stimulus Award
Hughes Network Systems has been awarded $58.7 million to provide satellite broadband services to consumers and businesses nationwide, garnering the single biggest award under the The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 "broadband stimulus" program.
Significantly, the award, as well as others gotten by Wildblue, Echostar and Spacenet, represent the first time Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service funds, traditionally used to support rural telco and cooperative projects, have gotten funding.
Hughes Network Systems estimates 258,685 people will benefit, as well as 3,200 businesses.
Echostar got a $14 million award to offer satellite broadband service to rural residential and commercial subscribers. The funds will provide service to 42,478 people and 1,888 businesses.
Spacenet got an $8 million award, which will allow Spacenet to offer satellite broadband service to rural residential subscribers in Alaska and Hawaii.
Wildblue got $20 million to provide satellite broadband service to rural residential and commercial subscribers in the west and midwest United States. About 110,150 people and 4,896 businesses might be served.
Significantly, the award, as well as others gotten by Wildblue, Echostar and Spacenet, represent the first time Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service funds, traditionally used to support rural telco and cooperative projects, have gotten funding.
Hughes Network Systems estimates 258,685 people will benefit, as well as 3,200 businesses.
Echostar got a $14 million award to offer satellite broadband service to rural residential and commercial subscribers. The funds will provide service to 42,478 people and 1,888 businesses.
Spacenet got an $8 million award, which will allow Spacenet to offer satellite broadband service to rural residential subscribers in Alaska and Hawaii.
Wildblue got $20 million to provide satellite broadband service to rural residential and commercial subscribers in the west and midwest United States. About 110,150 people and 4,896 businesses might be served.
Labels:
broadband stimulus
Gary Kim has been a digital infra analyst and journalist for more than 30 years, covering the business impact of technology, pre- and post-internet. He sees a similar evolution coming with AI. General-purpose technologies do not come along very often, but when they do, they change life, economies and industries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Zoom Wants to Become a "Digital Twin Equipped With Your Institutional Knowledge"
Perplexity and OpenAI hope to use artificial intelligence to challenge Google for search leadership. So Zoom says it will use AI to challen...
-
We have all repeatedly seen comparisons of equity value of hyperscale app providers compared to the value of connectivity providers, which s...
-
It really is surprising how often a Pareto distribution--the “80/20 rule--appears in business life, or in life, generally. Basically, the...
-
One recurring issue with forecasts of multi-access edge computing is that it is easier to make predictions about cost than revenue and infra...