W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mw4d@w3.org > August 2008

Re: Connectivity [Re: Determining MW4D Core Values]

From: Stephane Boyera <boyera@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 13:50:13 +0200
Message-ID: <48A961F5.3070609@w3.org>
To: "Bipin P. Kumar" <bipin.kumar@zivasoftware.com>
Cc: public-mw4d@w3.org

Hello Bipin,

i believe you are perfectly right. We should not talk here about the 
network technology at all, and this should not impact the technological 
solution. So it is probably a mistake to mention GSM. In my mind, we put 
GSM because it represents the lowest common denominator in terms of data 
  bandwidth (9.6k), and capabilities (voice+sms).
So i believe that what we wanted to express is the availibility of at 
least 9.6kb, voice and sms. most of mobile networks have these 
capabilities, some have more, but this is the lowest bound we should 
consider.

Best
Stephane

Bipin P. Kumar a écrit :
> Have been a passive observer/reader of the mails so far.
> 
> Ken's pdf on the core Values and Assumptions has already been 
> semantically nit-picked, but there is an issue with 'Connectivity'. Hope 
> its not been discussed earlier...Its to do with  'technology solutions 
> and analysis needs to focus around GSM network technology'. Why? Can it 
> not be network technology agnostic?
> 
> In India one of the networks mostly embraced by semi-urban and rural 
> users (or BOP users as is termed) is run by Reliance, on CDMA. Likewise 
> another network that has made inroads with BOP users is by Tata Indicom, 
> another CDMA player. Price (and connectivity offered) are major issues 
> why they have been well received by BOP users.
> 
> In any case, I feel that with the objective of the group being 
> 'solutions' for social development using the mobile web (over SMS, 
> GPRS/CDMA X/EDGE/3G, Voice, etc), it need not be anchored to a network 
> technology.
> 
> Your thoughts please.....
> 
> Thanks,
> Bipin
> 
> 
> Stephane Boyera wrote:
>>
>>
>>> b) says "The three key providers of services are NGOs, government, and
>>> entrepreneurs/ the private sector".  This does not leave
>>> anybody out, so what's the point of stating the obvious?
>>
>> well perhaps we need to be a bit more clear.
>> It is essential imho to list the three major providers, because each 
>> of them have specific needs and challenges so it is three completly 
>> different view points to consider.
>> just an example: ngo needs software and probably technical training
>> government needs systems that could address country level issues.
>> entrepreneurs are looking for service to sell, yet another set of 
>> constraints coming in.
>> More over the status is quite different: ngo believes in mobile but 
>> most of the time lack expertise and tools. Government are overlooking 
>> the mobile platform.
>> So i believe this is three different view points to consider
>>
>> Stephane
>>

-- 
Stephane Boyera		stephane@w3.org
W3C				+33 (0) 5 61 86 13 08
BP 93				fax: +33 (0) 4 92 38 78 22
F-06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex,		
France
Received on Monday, 18 August 2008 11:51:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:05 GMT