RE: Talking about Bandwidth-Some People Are Missing The REAL ISSUE

[Jim Beck]

Now that this horse is nearly dead, I'd like to get in a few kicks myself.


In my experience, software manufacturers and designers both tend to eat up

all available bandwidth and processing headroom with new features and cool

stuff.  For example, I am about to build a new Pentium II 350 box.  I know

for awhile I'll have a killer fast machine. But probably within a year a lot

of the software I count on daily will upgrade and those new versions will

suck up all I've got. Some apps we all use right now will take as much

processing speed as they can to the point of degrading performance. I

believe bandwidth will be the same way; once the masses have faster

connections, designers and manufacturers WILL exploit that speed, but

probably to the point that we will be about where we are now speedwise, just

with lots of cool stuff we didn't have yesterday.


Here in Alaska we have some of the most sophisticated distance learning and

telecommunication networks on the planet, and probably have more internet

users per capita than most states. But a lot of us live way out in the woods

away from urban areas and the ability to get a fast(er) connection is a LONG

WAY OFF for a lot of reasons. In my office I have never been able to connect

faster than 26.4. The only blessing is my connections are clean and solid.

My first look at the original Signposts site worked fine... I did not at all

have the same complaints as many did.


J i m  B e c k

jimbeckalaska [dot] net

H u m a n  S o l u t i o n s

humanspobox [dot] alaska [dot] net

907-746-0228

907-746-0229 fax


ADA Partners Project

1-800-770-0228 (toll free AK only)

907-746-0228


-----Original Message-----

From:

ownershocker [dot] com

 [

ownershocker [dot] com]On">mailto:ownershocker [dot] com]On

 Behalf Of Matt

Gitchell

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 9:23 AM

To:

flashershocker [dot] com

Subject: Re: Talking about Bandwidth-Some People Are Missing The REAL

ISSUE



Carrie Dailey wrote:

<snip>


> Don't gripe that developers/designers are producing content that you can't

> access.  We should be begging EVERYONE to create content in this fashion.

> Make it bigger, more beautiful, more interactive, HUMONGOUS.  If a

majority

> of websites are inaccessible to low speed connection households or

> businesses, the technology giants will be literally SPEWING new, LOW COST,

> high speed connections for the general public and they will be BEGGING you

> to take it.  DON'T HOLD IT BACK.  Create the demand...the industry will

> provide the supply... AND they will do it on OUR terms.


 <...and snip>


While this is a nice theory, it doesn't work in practice.

Most of the clients we deal with here don't give a squat about advancing the

technologies. They don't want to "create demand."


They hire us to get their message out to as many people as they can. Often

times, this means that we design a site so that AOL 3.0ers can use it

without

downloading anything, or even for Netscape 2.0 or higher (both of those

elements

make my toes curl, BTW).


Try telling Primestar that their target audience, consisting of people

looking

into getting a satellite dingus, will have to wait for a 700k doohickey to

load,

they'll balk.


A lot also balk at the idea of having visitors to their page download ANY

kind

of

plugin, even if it is the teensy-weensy little Flash plugin.


I mean, look at the body of work seen on this list. Most (I'd say at least 9

outta 10) of the examples we look at are designers proffering their

services,

and only a handful are actually for paying customers.


Every chance I get I try and push the Flash angle to our customers, and a

lot of

them just won't bite due to the perceived "effort" it puts the visitor

through,

Smart Shockwave or no Smart Shockwave.


I think in any kind of commercial enterprise, the second you say "to hell

with

the consumer," in this case with respect to bandwidth, you're inviting

problems.

Unless you're willing to accept the fact that substantial parts of your

potential audience won't wait the 5 minutes for your download, no matter how

cool it may be, it's just a bad idea. Clients want their sites to get

traffic

yesterday, not a year from now, when ISPs catch up.


The availability of bandwidth will continue to progress, because there is

consumer demand for it. A group of renegade designers out purposefully

creating

one-Meg sites isn't ging to advance the cause, unless that cause is to be

bandwidth-elitist against people who can't afford T3s in their living rooms.


When we wear our designer hats, it's great to turn up our noses and eat the

wait

time for our art, so to speak, but the business-hat wearing side has to

acknowledge those concerns and provide what our customers (and consumers!)

want.


To be honest with you, the stuff that impresses me the most is the stuff

that's

graphically/functionally impressive AND low bandwidth or quick.


--Matt "so what if the horse is dead?" Gitchell

----------------------

Matt Gitchell

ersatz multimedia cat

mattgnavidec [dot] com

----------------------



------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com