Re: .mac bandwidth
Re: .mac bandwidth
- Subject: Re: .mac bandwidth
- From: Matt Johnston <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2002 20:02:21 +0100
For this reply, focus on the detail about bandwidth...there's some
actual data there. IT rejoins the .Mac argument at the end....
On Sunday, Sep 22, 2002, at 19:34 Europe/London, Randolph Marshall
wrote:
Actually, I recently engaged in a conversation with a knowledgeable
webmaster who shared that bandwidth is not an issue. When you are a
large
company, you do not buy bandwidth, you buy a full time always on
connection
to the internet that will transfer a specific amount of data (say a
meg a
second) to the internet and up to a specific burst mode of data (like
up to
ten megs a second on burst).
Bandwidth remains an issue because:
a) Apple won't have to support 2.2 million users therefore their
bandwidth requirements will be much lower.
b the BURST is chargeable. We have a 6/9 PVC. 6 Megabits transfer with
burst to 9 Mbits when we need it. Every bit above 6 megabits is charged
for.
Bandwidth is always an issue especially when you want to have any sort
of reliability, because then you need to buy multiple pipes. We have
dual connections for data redundancy and a third slower link going via
a different path onto the corporate network. I'd be very surprised if
Apple was any different.
So unless we can actually determine as fact that Apple does pay for
bandwidth which would make them unique among entities on the internet
then,
this fuss about bandwidth charges is actually a fallacy. It did not
matter
how many .mac accounts existed, nor did it matter how busy each
individual
was.
It does. Each pipe is only a certain speed. To support 2.2 million
users at a certain rate you need a certain bandwidth. To support 200
000 users you either don't need the same bandwidth OR the performance
for the 200K users is better.
The reality is that this was seen as an opportunity to try to create
additional revenue for an already existing infrastructure.
And on recouping the investment, somewhere along the line an
investment in
every product must be recouped either through writing it off on taxes
as a
business loss or generating profit to replace what has been spent.
Apple had promised that the money will be used for developing .Mac
services.
One last thing:
NO ONE is going to buy a Mac based on the .mac thing. .mac will not
sell
hardware because it can not even sell itself at the moment.
.Mac is selling itself. You don't think that 100 000 subscribers in 2
months is good? Go and look at the rate of signup for other pay-for
services on the internet.
--
Eve succumbed to the temptation of the Apple.
_______________________________________________
augd mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/augd
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.