Enterprise Technology By Phil Edholm

Older: Video and Collaboration Blog 2

Newer: Voice Centralization Adoption

Comments

1. Hi - I get a ‘404′ error when I click on the www.nortel.com\edholm-vision-series link above. I think you need to change the link to replace a period with a hyphen

   October 31st, 2007 at 8:38 am by Bruce Harding

2. Thanks Bruce - I typed it with the wrong slash……

   November 1st, 2007 at 3:40 pm by Phil

3. Interesting you point to Metcalf’s law on slide 7. I always agreed with the notion he was at least misunderstood.

   In an IEEE http://spectrum.ieee.org/print/4109 article last year, Andrew Odlyzko (one of my heroes) says it is closer to n (log)n.

   I have seen examples of less than (n2) value myself recently in the merging of several large networks. The value for members of the smaller network is greater, the value for those in the larger network is so-so and my even be negative. Value in my observations boils down to logistical things (I am sure others can add more):

   Compatible technologies (architecture, protocols, devices)
   Geographic redundancy (not too many nodes in the same locations)
   Competition for interconnection (if there is no price elasticity value is reduced)

   Simeon Simeonov (a former co-worker) defended Metcalf’s law in this posting and blames George Gilder for the misquote. I agree with what he wrote, but his analysis also seems to make Metcalf’s law not very useful.
   http://simeons.wordpress.com/2006/07/26/metcalfes-law-more-misunderstood-than-wrong/

   So, I would argue that Edholm’s law is a more accurate and useful depiction of how things are and likely will be for the foreseeable future. Barring some breakthrough, the notion of Metcalf’s law as a “silver bullet” of inter (dare I say hyper) connectivity is probably not accurate.

   As an aside, I think this observation is true for social networking as well, when I had built a network on linked in once it reached a critical mass it became kind of a PitA. People with little value add became barnacle on the network and it has evolved now to something less than useful.

   November 1st, 2007 at 11:01 pm by many

4. I read some interesting discussion around Metcalf that argued value to the Service Provider, while the overall value is most critical. It would be interesting to analyze what part the financial activity of the web is not merely transitional (i.e. moving a purchase from a brick to click that would have happened anyway) to actual new activity. If looked at that way, is most of the Amazon revenue transitional?
   If, as Alan Greenspan has said, economic expansion for the last 15 years has been driven by the productivity impacts of technology, does the productivity impact in the channel/distribution that the web introduced have significant overall economic value?
   I have not seen any detailed economic analysis of the overall web activity viewed from these points.

   November 6th, 2007 at 1:14 pm by Phil

5. Phil,

   I assert that logistics determine (or more correctly dampen) value to the Service Provider. There are economies of scale to combining networks, but are they more valuable than other options? The equipment vendors and standards bodies seem to be ignoring this because it is a hard problem and there seems to be a perception that differentiation helps them sell more kit. I think these facts will severely impede a more homogonous user experience with the network. The curve is much flatter, and the tethered, nomadic and mobile will remain separate curves for a while to come.

   I think the economic measurement you are talking about is (ala Alan Greenspan) how much more efficient the move from brick to click is? Certainly, from a time perspective it can be faster. Intuitively it would seem that the amount of energy spent on the act of shopping and distribution would be less, but how much so? Transitively, does this translate to better margins? Lower consumer cost? More widgets sold?

   On the other side, does it mean less activity in real estate, more activity for FedEx, DHL and UPS? How does it affect shopping habits? And the big one; is Greenspan referring to a widget improving the efficiency of the worker, or to the fact that technology has enabled wage competition? Does the exporting of jobs and the accelerated bifurcation of North American society into haves and have nots coupled with inexpensive imports and global markets of “new” middle classes really raise all boats or simply balance out and equate to the exporting of standard of living?

   Time will tell.

   November 6th, 2007 at 3:25 pm by many

Leave a Reply

Enterprise Technology is powered by WordPress.
Copyright © Nortel Networks 1999-2008. All Rights Reserved. View the Nortel Networks Privacy Policy.