From: Brian Atkins (Jutta.Stoeckel@t-online.de)
Date: Fri Jun 30 2000 - 16:09:08 PDT
All of those take less than 10mbit or 1/100th of the gigabit/sec proposed...
Even if you do HDTV level videoconferencing with multiple participants you
aren't going to break 100mbit (not to mention that the cameras would cost
a crapload of $$$). So it doesn't appear that the average human is capable
of individually generating or consuming more than 100mbit/sec ? It would
have to be some kind of software under their control doing someting for
them to really suck up that much bandwidth. They could run a warez server,
or run a Beowulf/cluster that is in multiple physical locations.
Jesse wrote:
>
> DVD quality video on demand.
> "real" teleconfrencing.
> remote apps that don't perform like a dog. (though my soon-to-be-ex employer intonet.com
> can do it with DSL-level bandwidth or a tad more.)
>
> jesse
>
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 03:17:46PM -0500, Jeff Bone wrote:
> >
> > Somebody asked me a really interesting question yesterday. What can you
> > do with a gigabit to the home? In particular, what are the killer apps
> > enabled by 3 orders of magnitude greater bandwidth than DSL?
> >
> > Thoughts appreciated,
> >
> > jb
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> jesse reed vincent --- root@eruditorum.org --- jesse@fsck.com
> pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> I have images of Marc in well worn combat fatigues, covered in mud,
> sweat and blood, knife in one hand and PSION int he other, being
> restrained by several other people, screaming "Let me at it!
> Just let me at it!" Eichin standing calmly by with something
> automated, milspec, and likely recoilless.
> -xiphmont on opensource peer review
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 30 2000 - 16:12:49 PDT