Comments on: VoIP needs to be better, much better http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/ Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:31:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Ronald Gruia http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101046 Sat, 19 Mar 2005 18:19:31 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101046 Hi Om, I posted my replies to the topic, and do not think our views are that far off.

]]> By: Technology Futurist http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101045 Sat, 19 Mar 2005 08:38:05 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101045 99.999% Availability, Part Deux

Since I saw Larry Borsato mention some figures in the 99.999% availability requirement-for-VoIP-networks debate, I decided it was time for me to dust off my networking theory book and implement Erlang formula on an Excel spreadsheet using VBA, to get a…

]]> By: Om Malik http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101044 Fri, 18 Mar 2005 20:30:08 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101044 the question is not that we should have wireless back-up, but instead if we want VoIP to quack like PSTN, well then it has to be as good as PSTN. sorry but don’t buy the argument of having back-ups. Maybe IP should instead by integrated communication on IP

]]> By: Steve Stroh http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101043 Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:21:31 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101043 David Isenberg sorted this out in . He points out that to the extent there is real competition, one can buy as many “nines” as they need. Wireless phones make a good backup to VOIP Telephony.

]]> By: Aswath Rao http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101042 Fri, 18 Mar 2005 17:16:44 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101042 Instead of drinking the cool-aid of PSTN replacement and PSTN interconnect, if we consider IP Communication where by two (or more) individuals communicate via text, speech, image and screen sharing etc., then the paradigm changes. The user may be willing to live with less reliability because the new mode of communication allows different form and experience. (Just like people agree to live with lower quality of cell phones.) The tragic flaw is in trying to replace (that means we have to replicate) PSTN. The irony is that VoIP proponents think PSTN is dead, but they keep PSTN in their radar all the time.

]]> By: JC Francois http://gigaom.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101041 Fri, 18 Mar 2005 16:23:20 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/03/18/voip-needs-to-be-better-much-better/#comment-101041 There’s an excellent paper on availability and reliability of VoIP that I recommend: Assessment of VoIP Service Availability in the
Current Internet

Its conclusion is:
Overall, we observe that the call success
probability at around 0.5% and call abortion probability
at about 1.5%, resulting in a 98% net availability, which is still
some steps away from what the PSTN offers today (three to
four 9’s), but already comparable to the availability of mobile
telephone networks (around 97% to 99%).

My take is that users only accept poorer quality if it is (more than) offset by a compelling feature. Example: mobile quality is worse than fixed line but that is the price to pay for mobility.
What is the deal for VoIP?

]]>