on (one's) own/ Best Efforts Are Not Enough！
◎8M/640K以現場實際可傳送之最大速率（best effort）提供服務，下行最高傳輸速率介於2M ~ 8M間。
◎本服 務之各速率係指最高可提供之線路速率(line rate)，實際傳輸速率依網路環境及使用情況而變，因此於提供用戶上網服務時依國際標準網路品質分類歸屬為「Best effort」模式，上網時連線速率會因上網終端設備、距離、所在位置之環境及到訪網站之連外頻寬等因素之影響而有所變化。
《戴明一日通﹕戴明博士談〝愛拼還不夠！〞》
CD-ROM二張
（Best Efforts Are Not Enough！）
本 產品為戴明博士得意門生謝爾肯巴赫（W. W. Scherkenbach﹐作品有中譯本《戴明修練I》﹑《戴明修練II》）和韓德生（D. J. Henderson）博士回到戴明博士的故鄉小鎮﹐主持一天的戴明思想研討會﹐作為向戴明博士致敬禮﹐並告訴與會鄉親戴明博士在品質上的教誨﹐不只在其一 生中（1900-1993）影響了無數的世人﹐更會嘉惠未來世代的子子孫孫。
你可以善用 本產品多媒體及CD-ROM科技﹐親自看﹑聽﹑學習戴明 博士自己（許多談話為首次披露）及他的門生們﹐說明他的管理理論及日常生活中（其中至少有園藝﹑健身計劃﹑宴客三個案）的應用。本書有極精要的說明及相互 索引﹐可助你融會貫通戴明哲學﹐並可測驗你是否抓到重點。本產品共用二張CD-ROM﹐內容為﹕
第一張CD-ROM主題﹕
Deming Perspective（戴明展望）
Deming Biography（戴明傳記）
Role of the Customer（顧客的角色）
Profound Knowledge（淵博(深遠)智識）
4 Ways to Improve（改善的四方式）
Shewhart Cycle（修華特PDSA循環）
Funnel Experiment（漏斗實驗）
14 Principles（14要點）
Red Bead Experiment（紅珠實驗）
Deadly Diseases ＆ Obstacles（致命惡疾及障礙）
第二張CD-ROM的內容為﹕
Demingisms（戴明基本教義衍申）
Red Bead Experiment（紅珠實驗實際演練）
Philosophy in Action（戴明哲學應用）
Interactive Review（互動式複習）
Subject Matter Experts（本產品主持人簡介）
Google Fiber: Can ultra-fast internet change a city?
VIDEO: People in Kansas City discuss the arrival of Google's super-fast internet
Google is installing super-fast fibre optic internet service in Kansas City. Will it usher in a new era in industry and society - or just enable faster web browsing and media downloads?
For technology consultant Bret Rhodus, Google's newest venture is an amazing business opportunity.
"This can be a game-changer," he says. "The opportunity for entrepreneurs is significant."
For art supply clerk Danni Parelman, however, it's just a chance to download more music.
The California internet giant has begun installing fibre optic cable that will give Kansas City residents download speeds of up to 1Gbps - about 100 times faster than the broadband internet service currently available to most Americans.
'The future'?
Danni Parelman says the high speed internet will enable her to download music faster In dozens of interviews in the streets, shops, offices and cafes of Kansas City - a metropolitan area that straddles the Kansas-Missouri state line - residents and business people agreed that the project would be great for the town.
Analysts say the project, called Google Fiber, is the future of the web.
But the speed will be so much faster than what is currently available that even people familiar with the concept have a hard time imagining how it will affect industries and lives.
Although the seeds of the internet germinated in US Department of Defense laboratories and many of the most innovative internet companies are based in the US, Americans have far slower internet than residents of many other industrialised nations.
Google Fiber details
- In March, Google chose the Kansas City metropolitan area from more than 1,100 cities and towns that requested the service
- Google crews have begun hanging fibre lines from utility poles in selected neighbourhoods
- The service will launch in residential neighbourhoods only - no commercial districts - the first half of 2012
- About two million people live in the Kansas City metropolitan area, but Google has not said how many will have access to the service
- Google has not said how much the monthly service will cost, but says it will be "competitive"
Source: BBC research
The average broadband internet speed across the US is 12.84 Mbps, according to Netindex.com. That makes the US 31st in the world (the UK is 32nd with 12.4 Mbps speed).
The ultra-high-speed unleashed by the fibre optic technology is a natural progression in the development of America's telecommunications infrastructure, says Aaron Deacon, a member of the board of the Social Media Club of Kansas City and a technology marketing consultant.
"This is the way the world is heading," he says.
"There are other places around the world that have this kind of connectivity, but around the US adoption has been pretty slow."
Uncertain impactBut what will be super-fast internet's affect on the town in practical terms?
Aaron Deacon says: "Being the first for a new infrastructure is kind of a double-edged sword" At first, the ultra-high-speed could simply mean people use the same web sites and internet services they already do, just faster.
"People say, 'oh it's going to just be faster YouTube'. It's sort of a joke," says Mr Deacon.
"But actually to have fast YouTube and videos with no buffering, and instantaneous downloading of feature movies, is a pretty significant change in the way that video can work."
The high speed will enable small businesses and home-office workers to have high-definition video conferencing without the hiccups, lag-time, and buffering slogs frequently suffered with cable or DSL broadbased.
It will allow greater use of cloud computing by small businesses, for example by allowing them to keep customer databases and accounting systems online instead of in costly local servers.
"Once business people can collaborate and work together and they don't have to worry about lag times - when you're not frustrated with the limitations of internet speeds - things really start jiving and amazing things get done," says Dave Greenbaum owner of a Kansas City computer repair company, who predicts a burst of small business innovation.
Aside from the expected boon to businesses, analysts predict almost every aspect of people's personal lives could be affected.
Having affordable super-fast internet in the home will enable faster and more efficient telecommuting, which could take cars off the roads, analysts say.
Holograms and MRIsAverage broadband download speeds, in Mbps
- South Korea: 32.96
- Lithuania: 31.78
- Latvia: 26.78
- Sweden: 25.26
- Romania: 24.80
- Netherlands: 24.61
- Singapore: 22.84
- Bulgaria: 22.26
- US: 12.76
- UK: 12.44
Source: Netindex.com, based on volunteers who have tested their own connections through the speedtest.net
Doctors and hospitals will more easily be able to transmit data-heavy medical images like MRI scans. Businesses or local governments could install "dumb terminals" - computers with little more than a screen, keyboard, mouse and internet connection - across the city.
Communities could establish shared music, film and e-book libraries. High definition - even holographic - video conferencing could enable greater participation in local government: "Town hall in the home" is one catchphrase. Public safety could be improved by higher definition CCTV and video emergency calling.
Elsewhere in the US, an electric power firm in Chattanooga, Tennessee now offers 1Gbps internet to its customers - the broadest community-wide rollout of fiber optic connectivity in the nation.
But with its high cost for residential customers - about $350 (£223) a month - only nine have signed up, says EPB's spokeswoman Danna Bailey.
"It's not going to happen overnight," she says.
"It's a bit of a curiosity."
Google published web videos and a blog promoting its service to Kansas City residents And in Britain, BT says it will begin offering 300Mbps - less than one-third of Google Fiber's advertised speed - in 2013.
Shift to wifiDespite the overwhelming enthusiasm in Kansas City for Google Fiber, people familiar with it warn of potential pitfalls.
"Being the first for a new infrastructure is kind of a double-edged sword," Mr Deacon says.
"It can be a really great thing, and it can build a leadership position around that, but you're also sort of a guinea pig, so if you're not smart about how you use that opportunity you can be the bad example that somebody else learns from."
Since Google first announced plans to install the fibre network in 2010, internet users' attention has shifted away from desktop internet to mobile internet, as consumers spend more and more time on smart phones, tablets and other mobile devices, says Ed Malecki, a professor of geography at Ohio State University who studies technology and economic development.
As mobile providers tighten up on cellular data use, consumers will have greater need for high-speed wifi where ever they go in their home towns, he says.
Residents said they hoped the project would help Kansas City outgrow its reputation as a "cow town" "If Google wants to make super-fast community wifi, fine," he says. Google fiber is "not going to help anybody unless it's translated into wifi."
Meanwhile, Ms Bailey of EPB notes past world-changing technologies took years to have a broader impact.
"When electric power first became widely available in homes, it was a more convenient, somewhat novel alternative to the oil lamp for lighting," she says.
"At that time, it would have taken an incredible visionary to predict what kind of an impact electric power would have on business and ultimately quality of life."
世界第一！南韓高速寬頻服務最佳
作者：經濟學人 出處：Web Only 2011/02
相關關鍵字：經濟學人
已發展世界的部分地區甚至連基本的寬頻都沒有，多數南韓人卻能以每月30美元的代價享用高速光纖服務。縮小此差距已經成為部分政府的首要目標；澳洲於09年4月推出極具野心的超高速寬頻計畫，預計於2018年讓超過90%的民眾都能使用，估計得花約270億美元公款。
問題在於，澳洲這種政府出資的大型計畫是否值得、是否有效。批評者認為，納稅人的錢應該花在別的地方，寬頻發展最好交由私人部門；其他人則相信政府應該減低其涉入程度。
經濟學人為此進行了一項研究，判斷政府該做什麼、不該做什麼。寬頻排名通常是考量速度、價格等因素，但經濟學人所製作的政府寬頻指數（gBBi）則檢視公部門計畫的內容，除了速度和涵蓋率外，還包括成本佔政府年度收入的比例等。
在gBBi名列前矛的國家，通常在傳統寬頻排名中也表現得很好；南韓名列第一，日本居次，新加坡第三。讓人意外的是，那些急於迎頭趕上的國家排名之低；澳洲的計畫在16項計畫中排名第9，英美兩國的名次更低。
排名高的國家有哪些共同特徵？速度、涵蓋率、時程等目標當然重要；日本目前打算提供1000M的服務，澳洲則為100M。更重要的或許是，gBBi不利於那些大量花用稅收的國家；南韓年度政府預算中，寬頻僅佔1%，日本為0.06%，澳洲則高達7.6%。
瑞典的計畫要求在水電網絡擴充或升級時，同時安裝光纖管路，芬蘭則為使用高速光纖連線的人提供稅賦優惠；兩國的速度和涵蓋率目標皆與澳洲相似，但政府支出都少得多，它們除了在典型的寬頻排名表現良好外，在gBBi的排名也高。
From The Economist
Published: February 14, 2011
Governments want to assist broadband development, but lavishing taxpayers' money on high-speed networks is not the answer.
Visitors to South Korea cannot fail to be impressed by the speed of the country's online connections. While even basic broadband access is unobtainable across parts of the developed world, most South Koreans can enjoy high-speed fibre-optic services for just $30 a month. Closing this broadband gap has become a priority for some governments. In April 2009 Australia unveiled a hugely ambitious plan to bring superfast broadband connections to more than 90% of the population by 2018, at a cost to the public purse now estimated at around A$27 billion ($27 billion). The British and American governments also want to use taxpayers' money to plug the broadband holes in their rural communities.
Why do governments feel such a need for speed? Many private-sector companies insist there is no commercial case for investment in high-speed networks. Although internet usage is soaring, network operators earn no more from traffic on bandwidth-gobbling sites like YouTube, which functions better over faster connections, than from customers accessing simpler web pages. Yet authorities increasingly see broadband as integral to economic prosperity, with the energy, education and health-care sectors among those set to benefit from the roll-out of improved infrastructure. That means broadband is bound up with governments' political fortunes, too.
The question is whether such vast public-funding commitments as Australia's are desirable, or even effective. Critics say taxpayers' money would be better spent elsewhere and that broadband development is best left to the private sector. Others argue for less heavy-handed public-sector involvement. South-East Asia, notably, appears to have built its broadband lead by encouraging companies to stump up the huge investments required.
A new study from the Economist Intelligence Unit, our sister company, makes some judgments about what governments should and should not be doing. While broadband rankings typically measure factors such as the speed, availability and retail prices of existing services, a measure created for the study, the government broadband index (gBBi), looks instead at the components of the highest-profile public-sector plans. Besides targets for speed and population coverage, these include the cost to the taxpayer as a percentage of annual government revenues and the deadlines for universal access. The gBBi also considers the regulatory aspects of the various plans. Here are the results:
The index leaders are countries that usually perform well in more traditional rankings of current broadband capability. South Korea tops the index with a score of 4.4 out of 5, with Japan in second place and Singapore in third. What is perhaps surprising is just how badly marked are those countries most desperate to catch up. Australia's plan ranks ninth out of the 16 that feature in the index, with a score of 3.4. The plans announced in Britain and America fall even further down the list.
What factors unite the countries that do well? Ambitious targets for speed and coverage are certainly important, as is an ambitious timetable for network deployment. Japan is now eyeing services of one gigabit (ie, 1,000 megabits) per second, compared with targets of 100 megabits per second in Australia, and wants them made available to at least 90% of the population by 2015. South Korea hopes to realise a similar goal next year. Perhaps more importantly, the index rewards countries that are not hurling taxpayers' money at the broadband agenda, and penalises the big spenders. Public-sector broadband spending as a percentage of annual government budget revenues is just 1% in South Korea and a paltry 0.06% in Japan. In Australia, in contrast, the figure is a whopping 7.6%.
To some observers, a low level of public-sector funding could simply indicate a lack of broadband ambition, especially given the huge civil-engineering cost of laying fibre-optic lines. But the gBBi index's rationale is that governments are most effective when they avoid such big financing commitments, focusing instead on appropriate market regulation and incentives for private-sector investors. Sweden's plan mandates that fibre ducts be laid in parallel whenever any electricity or water networks are expanded or upgraded. Finland offers tax breaks for those hooking up to high-speed, fibre-optic connections. Each country has similar speed and coverage targets to Australia but is providing much less in public-sector funding. Besides performing well in typical broadband-comparison tables, both rank highly in the gBBi.
Meanwhile, in Greece, the gBBi's lowest-ranked plan has suffered long delays. A public-sector consultation has already identified potential problems with regulatory aspects of the proposed scheme, while its public-sector funding commitment is also a stumbling block for such a debt-ridden country. At a cost of more than 12 times the commitments in South Korea (per household covered), that is hardly a surprise.
沒有留言:
張貼留言