To: crushelits
Well, this all could be summed up by two words, Weak Dollar.... Obviously European countries are buying IT,(American Technology) because the dollar is weak and they get more for their money right now...
To: crushelits
"British businesses were quick to adopt new technologies early, including voice over IP, or VoIP calling, which replaces a telephone line by making calls through the Internet, as well as desktop video conferencing, the report found."
Ooooh....
Could it be that the businesses in these countries are simply seeking reliable inexpensive phone service??? Something that is generally unavailable in these countries???
The incentives to move to VoIP here are low simply because our phones work and there's lots of competition forcing costs down.
VoIP is lower quality and lower reliability here while it offers an improvement in both there.
4 posted on
12/14/2004 3:16:28 AM PST by
DB
(©)
To: crushelits
I think George Gilder would tell you that it is the FCC, and possibly our antitrust enforcement, which has resulted in the situation where high-speed Internet is more common in South Korea than it is in the US. If you think about it, the use of cell phones and VOIP should obsolete POTS almost completely, and VOIP should supplement cellular by making it possible to have small cells wherever there is an wireless internet router. And long distance voice should be cost no more than local, nor should international cost a lot.
7 posted on
12/14/2004 3:22:23 AM PST by
conservatism_IS_compassion
(The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters but PR.)
To: crushelits
I'm not clear what variables they use to construct the 'complex' index used in this survey. Until we know what they are, it's difficult to give any comment...
10 posted on
12/14/2004 3:42:01 AM PST by
paudio
(Four More Years..... Let's Use Them Wisely...)
To: crushelits; good_fight; KantianBurke; MJG; Semi Civil Servant; SunnySide; t_skoz; AzSteven; ...
11 posted on
12/14/2004 3:47:14 AM PST by
fdsa2
To: crushelits
"Commissioned by Britain's Department of Trade and Industry, the survey by the New York-based consulting firm was based on telephone interviews from April-July of nearly 8,000 businesses in Britain, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Ireland, South Korea, Sweden and the United States."
I'd like more information on how this study was conducted?
Did they contact an equal number of businesses in each country? What types of business?
Realize that some (all)of these countries individually have a GDP that would rank comparably with our lesser producing state economies.
VOIP is not an end all be all technology. It's time will come (is coming fast) but the US has a very reliable circuit switched system that many businesses are, for good reason , slow to give up because of the flaws that still exist even in the best VO/IP products.
I'd wager that there is as much or more (total $ volume) state of the art business technology deployed in NY and LA than the rest of the world combined!
18 posted on
12/14/2004 9:33:14 AM PST by
Ramcat
(Thank You American Veterans)
To: crushelits
To: crushelits
A factor is also the relative size of the countries involved. Deploying telecom in a smaller country is much easier than in a large country like the US.
24 posted on
12/15/2004 8:34:46 AM PST by
dfwgator
(It's sad that the news media treats Michael Jackson better than our military.)
To: crushelits
"Misery
Sophistication Index"
now it makes sense
To: crushelits
Rankings like these are pretty silly and essentially meaningless - they're the sort of thing that insecure people come up with to create a false sense of superiority. It's either that or some sort of lobbying scam.
To: crushelits
Well gosh, it's really easy to implement new technologies when you've got a very small or non-existent installed base to worry about. People here expect to still be able to use their old cell phones.
35 posted on
12/16/2004 11:30:31 AM PST by
Doohickey
("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
To: crushelits
Dunno what to make of it. Saying who is more "advanced" is a smokescreen at best. It reminds me of the debate in television where in some ways, the USSR was ahead of the US in direct broadcast satellite in 1965 or the same could be said of India in 1975. I think the thing is that the United States did establish TV networks coast to coast much earlier than the resto f the world in the late 1940's and early 1950's and we had to use the technology of the time, coaxial cable and microwave relay towers. The USSR and India did not have the resources, money, need, or whatever to do such in the 1950's, at least not to the extent the US could. But as TV grew into the hinterlands, when the time was ready, the in thing was satellites so in many isolated regions in the USSR, the only way to watch TV was direct from the satellite, either through a community antenna cable system or having your very own satellite receiver. Same with India with Indiasat in the 1970's. In some ways, both were ahead with direct from satellite TV than the US, although we had a few TV geeks here that loved to get the signals "off the bird" as a hobby and was seen as such until the mid 1980's at least.
Here in the US, we already had established a network for computers to use is the dialup phone lines whereas other nations basically can start from scratch with high speed lines. I'm still on dialup myself, my neighborhood still has the old 1950's era phone lines to this very day. I'm connected at 48 k-baud now, if I'm lucky, I can do 50.
38 posted on
12/16/2004 2:02:57 PM PST by
Nowhere Man
(We have enough youth, how about a Fountain of Smart?)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson