Comments

I'm living in a country where broadband isn't even available where I live. I still use dial-up and pay per click for a local call when on-line. Ireland is just now rolling out it's broadband network in certain high density areas and introducing flat rate service for internet use through Eircom. My last phone bill: 786.00 Euro!

So, while I am surprised and disappointed that the US is lagging somewhat in terms of top 10/20 lists...it's way ahead of where I am (and Ireland has one of the fastest growing economies in the world!) So, if one of the worlds fastest growing economies has hideous infrastructure, perhaps infrastructure shouldn't be the focus??

My question is, how fast do we need to go? I have survived with my 1996 Win95 PC with a 33.6 internal modem to date and am able to do everything that I need to do with it. I am looking forward to an upgrade, but only so I can enjoy multimedia offerings more readily.

It's the same with cell phones. God forbid if we can't use our cell phones every minute of the day. Sometimes I pray that there's no coverage when I'm surrounded by a group of P. Diddy groupies with a cornucopia of ring tones singing in disharmony (have you EVER heard the "Crazy Frog" song for mobile phones?..anyone who has would pray for periodic network disruptions!)

• C'mon, is the current infrastructure in the US REALLY threatening our competitiveness, or do we just want to be faster for speeds sake? I'd say our wage and other operational costs compared to Eastern Europe and Asia would be higher on the "threatening" list. That and a lack of hunger! Like a lion, it's hard to be tenacious when your belly is too full.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 4, 2005 4:33 AM

tom o'l., i share your sentiments. always and everytime again. i am the kind of guy who deep down inside feels: innovation??? come on! - my old can-opener can do the job!

digital fotographie... a car built after 1987... a mobile phone smaller than a hammer... what should this stuff be good for?

so instead of smoothly sliding with progress, i am more or less forced to take giant leaps from time to time... and hey, i am always amazed

Posted by jens at August 4, 2005 5:22 AM

My daughter's visiting from her first year living in Europe. Cell service was a total joke almost everywhere she went.

I'll take America, thank you.

And the free wireless internet is now why Starbuck's gets even more of my time!

When American business sees the economic ties to something, it implements pretty fast. In some other countries, they don't care if something adds reasonable value, because it's not "their" money anyway. (Other people's money often gets spent more freely than our own hard-earned dollar.)

If you like it somewhere else, go live there Mr. Friedman.

Posted by Dave at August 4, 2005 9:19 AM

I think a lot of this misses Friedman's point. We can pretend that it's attractive to be a Luddite, and connect people's obnoxious obsessions with talking on their cell phones with the problem of not keeping up with the world on important issues of technology. But to quote Friedman, he grew up having his mom tell him, "Clean your plate, someone kids India and China are starving," and now he tells his kids, "Do your homework, kids in India and China are starving for your jobs."

Posted by Steve Yastrow at August 4, 2005 9:20 AM

Steve, when I was in basic training with the Air Force, our Training Instructor (AF term for Drill Sergeant!) had just returned from observing military training in Japan. He constantly threatened us with "Let me tell you, if there was a war right now, the Japanese would KICK YOUR ASS!"

Trying to perfect our infrastructure though, isn't what we need to be concentrating on in order to be the leader of global business. It's what's being developed and passed over that infrastructure that requires our focus. The infrastructure is adequate as is as a VEHICLE for communicating and distributing our products and services. What's lacking are:

1. Real incentives for innovators to conduct business in the USA, to create...

2. out-of-this-world WOW products and services developed in the US; with

3. the ability to offer those WOW products and services at competitive prices in the world market; and

4. a PR campaign to Make America No. 1 again! Let's not forget that we have a large consumer base right here in river city that can help us, without becoming isolationists of course!

Our existing infrastructure (bandwith, networks) could be improved substantially if the access costs for non-business use was increased. Do 12 and 13 year olds REALLY need to be texting their friends every 5 minutes or sending .bmp graphics to their pals? Clean the existing system from the junk that clogs it rather than keep spending money to expand the existing system.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 4, 2005 10:37 AM

While I admire Mr. Friedman, this argument is just dumb. If we had no phones and it were "finally" time to install them, it would be moronic of us not to choose wireless ... today. Is that to say 25 years ago we should have gone without our landlines? Periodically, countries/economies are going to leapfrog some technology in the U.S. BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE A COMPETETIVE ONE BEFORE THAT. Will we catch up? In time, yes. But I think we can relax on that drama. It would be wise instead to focus on why the original disparities existed. Take Carlos Slim - wealthiest man in Latin America, whose TelMex (Mexico's quasi-monopoly phone company, traded on the NYSE) provides landlines - TODAY - to only about 1% of the population of Mexico. Without access the people, naturally, turn to cell phones. In both cases, Slim charges an enormous premium (why is it more expense to call from NYC to Mexico City than from NYC to Rome?), gouging everyone he can. The WTO took a peek at the situation and did nothing, even though high prices and limited access have kept trade with Mexico limited and slow. Like Ghana, Mexico has its limitations and their leapfrogging only helps themselves "flatten" the playing field. The leapfrogging is natural. Criminals like Carlos Slim aren't.

Posted by Mark at August 4, 2005 2:32 PM

Folks, Read this.......

Last month, the new Federal Communications Commission chairman, Kevin Martin, cited increased broadband deployment as his top goal for the agency.

According to a recent FCC report, the number of U.S. broadband subscriber lines grew by 34 percent last year; nonetheless, the United States still ranks between 10th and 15th among all nations in broadband coverage.

There is also an interesting news....."Super Speed Broadband Seen Over Cable TV in 2006", which means Broadband Internet access via TV cables can reach 100 Megabits per second as early as next year, 50 times faster than the average broadband speeds now offered to cable TV homes.

Teleste, whose rivals include big U.S. firms Scientific Atlanta and Cisco Systems Inc., said it would early next year bring to the market its Ethernet to the Home product which will give consumers access to 100Mb/s speed.

The sector is closely followed by big technology firms. Last month Sweden's Ericsson offered $51 million to buy Norwegian firm AXXESSIT, which makes broadband ethernet access equipment for telecom operators. To accelerate the transmission speed Teleste fits ethernet—a cheap and standard transport method for Internet data over broadband networks—into cable television networks.

AXXESSIT said it expects first rival technology to be on the market at the earliest in the second-quarter of 2007.

Teleste is running a field-trial with cable TV service provider Essent in Netherlands, but not yet at the top speeds it expects most homes will need in a few years time.

Another info....???? Yessss.......

With a recent investment by Google and a new initiative announced by IBM, broadband-over-power-line technology has leapt back into the spotlight. Have companies finally found a way to profit from the promise of broadband in every home with an electrical outlet?

Using a low-cost adapter, BPL (broadband over power line) customers can get high-speed Internet service using the wiring that already exists in their homes or offices.

The technology has been touted as having a number of benefits for users as well as for utility companies. Not only can it deliver broadband to areas that lack DSL or cable service, advocates say, but it also can boost power service reliability and track outage information more accurately by using network tracking capability.

One of the major hurdles for BPL adoption will be sparking consumer interest in the technology, and that will take both time and money. Also, the expenditure for utility companies could make many cities balk, especially if they have already embarked on strategies for increasing broadband access to underserved areas.

Posted by K.Sriram (India) at August 5, 2005 4:18 AM

Hi,

Thought i'd share this article with u on "China driving Asia-Pacific broadband growth"

Here it goes....

The explosive spread of broadband use in China is expected to be the driving force behind the Asia-Pacific market for the next few years, a research firm said this week.

The number of homes with broadband internet services in the region is expected to rise to 176 million by 2010 from 61 million today, according to Strategy Analytics.

Although China trails other Asian countries in broadband use today, the immense size of its consumer market will make it a key driver for high-speed internet access in the region, the research firm said. By 2010, China will account for 64 percent of all residential broadband users in the region, up from less than 40 percent today.

"Household penetration for DSL and other types of broadband internet access is still less than 10 percent in China," Strategy Analytics analyst Martin Olausson said in a statement. "In a market with over 400 million homes, this leaves plenty of room for growth over the next five years and beyond."

The Asia-Pacific region includes some of the leading countries in broadband adoption, Strategy Analytics said. More than three-quarters of South Korean homes use broadband today, while Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore all boast penetration rates of 50 percent or more.

America!!!!!!! Wake up!!!!!!!

Posted by K.Sriram (India) at August 5, 2005 4:30 AM

Remember, technology does not make us smarter. It is only a vehicle for our efforts. At times we focus too much on the technology around us rather than on the people beside us. Technology can actually inhibit good communication.

Cardinal O'Connor (NY) once said something to this effect:

"Isn't it amazing that we can propel man to the moon, measuring the exact propulsion necessary, with exactly the right coordinates and technological inputs needed to control a spaceship in orbit; and yet, we can't go from you to you to you to me?!"

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 5, 2005 5:18 AM

I am always wary of articles that compare the bad stuff in your country with the best country in that field. It's very easy to start getting a downer on your own country - everything seems better somewhere else. The UK seems to be prone to this.

Guess what - Articles in many different countries do the same thing! Suddenly your own country doesn't look so bad when you read: look the UK is streets ahead of us in that and Germany is sooooo much better for this.

Does the place you live in help you to be a fully self actualised individual? Great - stay put. No - move

Obviously we shouldn't get complacent

Posted by PaulH at August 5, 2005 7:39 AM

I love technology and I love the spirit of innovation and enterprise that you find in the States. Today two men came to my very remote property and installed an American two-way satellite system that allows me to wirelessly surf the internet at broadband speeds. Making a transatlantic telephone call through fibre optic cables buried beneath the ocean still amazes me, but being able to wirelessly surf the net through a satellite hovering in space is really something else.

When I do business in the States, I don't experience "technological deficiencies" (providing of course that I'm using Apple and not a Microsoft based system!). And I don't know what Cardinal O'Connor was thinking that day, but the internet to me is all about sharing things with people.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 5, 2005 8:00 AM

It is time to wake-up and realize that surface issues such as wireless connectivity are a barometer to the core issues we face in re-building our weakened ability to be competitive with the rising powers of the world. To re-quote from Friedman above... he grew up having his mom tell him, "Clean your plate, someone kids India and China are starving," and now he tells his kids, "Do your homework, kids in India and China are starving for your jobs."

At the core I cannot help but think that we in the west have a problem with entitlement. Like an aging sports or rock star we want to believe our past accomplishments are enough to keep us at the forefront and that the rest of world will remember and respect us for what we have done. In reality the educated and motivated masses in countries like India and China are hungrier, more motivated, and (in many cases) becoming more innovative and strategic in their pursuit of owning the American dream - and this is a takeover bid that will not be stopped by political intervention.

Posted by Kevin at August 5, 2005 10:54 AM

I agree that India and China have a strong work ethic which weighs in their favor, but then I've known plenty of Americans and Europeans with as strong a work ethic. The Chinese and the Indians are not going to be satisfied forever with low wages. Eventually, they'll fully industrialize just like we did and the salaries will go up. Meantime, we get to produce our goods at a lower cost and sell them back to them in their growing markets. Their side of it is the opportunity to industrialize and develop that middle class that they'll no doubt have very soon.

In the eighties it was "The Japanese are coming! The Japanese are coming!" Now it's "the Chinese and Indians are coming! The Chinese and Indians are coming!" Let them come. We thrive on competition and America particularly is never satisfied with second best. It can't hurt us to have other people in the race to keep us running our hardest.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 5, 2005 12:57 PM

Noel, technology DOES indeed facilitate communication but it DOESN'T improve it. Listening effectively, for example, requires the observation of body language, hearing intonation, etc.

Technology makes things more efficient, but not necessarily more effective.

Perhaps we should focus on what innovative products and services we can provide to the world (at competitive prices) USING the technology that is available to us. The heavy focus on technological efficiency inhibits the pursuit of effective solutions. Rather than thinking how we can do something faster, perhaps we should be asking ourselves how we can do it better? An affordable car tyre, for example, that never punctures. An umbrella that that wind doesn't invert (I think the Japanese actually did that one a few years ago.), a cure for the common cold, etc.

I still have a Nokia 3300 (or whatever) that I bought when I first came to Ireland in '99. Doesn't do photos, isn't hands free, no fancy ring tones; but it does what I need it to every time...normally, that's talking to people. Would newer, more technologically advanced phones respond to my objectives any better? No.

Ireland has had one of the (if not THE) fastest growing economies over the past 10 years, and the infrastructure here is diabolical. I'm still using DIAL-UP because there is no DSL, Cable, Broadband, Ethernet, Wireless, etc. available in my area (or most areas for that matter). The Celtic Tiger roared because Ireland made corporate taxes very low, had a good talent base, and a great work-life balance.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 5, 2005 3:36 PM

Tom, go satellite - that's what I did - it's available everywhere. In fact, the guys who came to install mine today told me that in Ireland you don't even need a license from the government's telco watchdogs over there to put up a satellite dish. And then with your wonderful new and extremely fast wireless broadband you can put in a webcam and speak with and see people online, hearing that intonation and seeing that body language that I agree are a vital part of communication. Technology may not at the moment be all we would like it to be, but everyday it's getting closer to what we want it to be; both efficient and effective.

As for work-life balance, sorry to refer again to the two men who came to install my satellite, but they provided an interesting contrast on that subject; one of them had no problem getting up at 5 am to drive 5 hours to find our house, the other complained about it. One loved what he was doing, the other was doing time. One had dreams and plans, the other was proud of his kids and family but was definitely living in a prison. I liked both of these men for different reasons, but it was the fellow who loved the work he did that I liked more.

Too often in my experience people seeking 'work/life balance' are stuck in jobs they despise and do them only to bring in enough cash to let them get on with the things in life they do enjoy. Far better in my view to spend time finding something you love doing and then spend all of your time doing it, if possible, keeping your family around you while you do it. This is what I do and though I tend to sleep less having five children around me all the time, I haven't had too much trouble balancing 'work' with 'life'.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 5, 2005 5:41 PM

Whenever you are doing something, even something that you love, too much, it will strain your relationship with your family Noel. Whether it's playing golf 5 days a week or working 80 hours. The person who is being fulfilled doing what they love might not have a problem, but those waiting around to spend time each day with them do. Seldom will our children tell us that we don't spend enough time with them until its too late.

It's not so much of a problem when our children are grown and doing their own thing...but when they are young, especially in their formative years, consistent time each day with Mom and Dad is important; watching them participate in activities, making cookies, whatever it is. That whole "quality time" theory from the late 80's early 90's has been refuted consistently by psychologists (and most importantly, children!).

Perhaps one day, technology will allow us to touch each other. There's something really nice and honest about a handshake!

Regarding "dreams and plans", it sounds like they both had them. One just happened to be fuelled by monetary measures and the other by relationships. As far as I'm concerned, my family will be there long after my clients are gone. I've been lucky to find a happy balance, but strive not to "work" more than 50 hours a week. My philosophy has always been work smarter, not harder.

WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL ME EARLIER ABOUT THE SATELLITE! I'm moving to back to the States next month! Thanks for the advice though!

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 5, 2005 6:58 PM

Tom, I didn't know about it myself until I was told that there was no broadband and wouldn't be so I had to hunt around a bit for an option. Now with my super-smart Apple wifi, I can sit anywhere I like in my house and log on with my kids around me (my two year old is sitting beside me on my living-room chair as I tap). When you're engrossed in something, you don't watch the clock, even if your kids are interrupting you twenty times a day to ask questions, watch them doing some new fangled trick they've learned or want you to cook dinner with them. If you're really enjoying what you do, the time flies by, but the aim is always to get what you have to do done no matter how many hours in a week it takes. I can try to be as smart as I like and have lots of fun doing it, but there really is no substitute for hard work.

I agree that nothing beats a handshake, but that's what conferences are for. I get to meet in person at least once a year everybody I do business with over the phone or the net. Other times I travel to see people before doing business with them but I'm never away from home for more than a few days. Sometimes, I bring one of the older kids with me. Work doesn't strain my relationship with my family. Never has, even those times when I was flat broke. The way I look at it, we've got a family business. The kids will grow up in the business and I think they will learn more from being around it than they ever could in school. This may not be for everyone, but it suits us well.

I'd like to agree that both of the two satellite guys had dreams and plans but that's not what I saw. One was interested not in relationships but in the work itself which he found fascinating while the other hated what he was doing to bring in money, living only to get back to the pub.

I think everyone has something they are naturally suited to and they have to find what that is and apply themselves to it if they're interested in being happy. Very few people in my experience find what it is they are good at and enjoy, but this doesn't mean you should give up searching for it just because the odds against you finding it are pretty high. And if you do manage to find it, you can spend most of your time doing it and still have a happy family around you if you're willing to be a little flexible.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 6, 2005 4:02 AM

Noel, is the satellite connection competitively priced with broadband/cable, etc.?

I agree with you Noel. I think that our philosophies are very similar. I just really happen to LOVE being active with my family more than anything else at the moment; and for that reason put most of my time into that (I have two little girls, 2 and 4). There are 24 hours a day and I find myself doing most of my personally-focused things when the kids are sleeping (I'm a night owl anyway).

Couldn't agree more about finding a path in life that gives fulfillment, so that you are naturally and passionately engaged in it without being conscious of the clock. Writing has always done that for me (although I never made any money from it). The only problem is that my wife has often said "Tom, do you know how long you have been on that computer today!" or "Where you up all night again!" I had to learn to disengage from my personal passions every now and then for the sake of others in my life.

There is so much beauty and wonder in life that it is so important to balance and make time for it all. I get anxious if I sleep more than 6 hours any night because I feel as though I'll miss something exciting. I took a sabbatical this last year in Ireland to just be with the family and let my mind wander. I've learned a lot, mostly about myself, my wife and my children.

Don't know about the hard work concept though. Seems very outdated. There might be physically demanding work, mentally challenging work, time-consuming work, etc. I suppose it's a matter of semantics. When I think of "hard work" I think of guys in prison breaking rocks with a big heavy hammer...and that would be put into the "physically demanding" category. Like you said, if you like what you do, nothing will seem too demanding or challenging or time-consuming...and especially not hard.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 6, 2005 5:11 AM prescription viagra prices in canada

BTW: I'll be the first to admit that I use the term "hard work", even in subscribing to the philosophy of "work smarter, not harder". Perhaps I'll construct a more appropriate mantra: Something like "Engage yourself willingly with the effort necessary to succeed."

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 6, 2005 5:43 AM

Tom, the cost of satellite depends on whether you choose what they call one-way or two-way. One way gives you broadband speeds for surfing and downloading files and costs in English pounds about £175 inc. VAT for the satellite dish and installation. Monthly costs range from £5.99 for 1MB per second to £25.99 for 4MB per second, broadband speed. You can go up to 16MB per second for £33.99. However, if you want to upload files on a one-way system, e.g. update your blog or website, you'd be communicating at dial-up speeds - 56K per second. A one-way system accesses the satellite via dial-up so you'd have to dedicate a telephone line to it, pay the line rental on that phone and also pay for a dial-up connection which is currently running at £12.99 per month through Virgin for unlimited dial-up usage.

A two-way satellite system does not require a telephone line. It's always on and allows you to both download and upload at broadband speeds, but it costs a lot more - about £1150 for the dish and installation and £99 per month for 512k download and 256k upload though you can get 512k/128k for about £65 a month. You can go up to 1MB/256k for about £150 per month.

There are some restrictions to both one-way and two-way, what they call a fair usage policy, which basically only allows you to download about 65MB during a normal working day. If you download more, your service slows down. There are no limits on download after 5:30pm.

I'm using a two-way system with Apple's Airport Express (it's a wifi thingy that works on both the Mac and the PC and costs £88. Here's the link http://www.apple.com/uk/airportexpress/ ) This networks all my computers, allows me to sit anywhere in the house and surf wirelessly as well as print wirelessly AND play my music from my laptop over my stereo. If I didn't have Airport, my computer would have to be physically connected to the satellite modem.

So in the UK you could have a one-way system for around £175 upfront fee and then about £30 a month carrying costs, including telephone line rental and dial-up charges. This information is probably coming too late since you're heading back to the States, but there might be someone else out there stuck on dial-up whose quality of life would be greatly improved by skipping all the landlines and catching a few microwaves from space.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 6, 2005 6:05 AM

As for "hard work", I think we're saying the same thing with different words.

Posted by Noel Guinane at August 6, 2005 6:09 AM

Ok...forget everything I've said, Technology is cool and I want it! Thanks Noel. Better late than never and who knows, I might wind up back in Ireland again. It's a small world.

Posted by Tom O'Leary at August 6, 2005 9:37 AM