🚀 go-pugleaf

henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:


>I'm really not sure of this.  Hereabouts, at least, much of the advertising
>for cellular phones seems to be pitched at people who have a professional
>requirement for them.  I really question how much demand there will be from
>people in more ordinary jobs, who very seldom have much need to make a
>phone call without a fixed phone handy.

"need" doesn't really work its way into the equation. If the technology
gets cheap enough, people will get on the 'bandwagon' because of the
convenience that having a personal phone with you everywhere you go provides.


>pocketphones share many of the same characteristics:  for most people they
>do not represent a significant added utility, they'd be costly and at times
>inconvenient, and the infrastructure (in this case, spectrum space) is not
>there to support a really universal pocketphone system.

I disagree with the above statements. How would they be NOT be a significant
added utility? You would have the means to talk to anyone, anywhere, anytime.
To me that is greatly useful. As far as inconvenient goes, you can always
turn it off. Or maybe there will be cellular answering machines small enough
to be built into pocket phones to take messages when you dont or cant answer

I do agree that the infrastructure is not here yet. But it will be.


-- 
John Sparks         |D.I.S.K. Public Access Unix System| Multi-User Games, Email
sparks@corpane.UUCP |PH: (502) 968-DISK 24Hrs/2400BPS  | Usenet, Chatting,
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|7 line Multi-User system.         | Downloads & more.
A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of----Ogden Nash