It is quickly becoming the latest shiny silver object for hardware developers. In my profession, the push for IP implementation is really taking hold; in some cases, it's somewhat disconcerting. I understand that there is a huge convenience factor for devices that are geared to use existing infrastructure in order to communicate with servers. But to place mission critical devices (such as alarm communicators, cameras in day-care facilities, etc.) on networks that are subject to SO MANY variables isn't wise.
One fact will always remain - IP data transmission will only ever be as reliable as the infrastructure on which data transmission occurs.
I'm sure that over time it'll become more reliable.
A lot of hardware manufacturers DO build IP robustness into their products, but it's preposterous to assume data transmission will be more reliable on a network with so many hardware/software variables. For example, in a CCTV camera implementation (non-IP based), camera's video feeds are fed directly to head-end equipment; they're not directed through several hardware switches, routers, software encoders, hardware encoders, and other equipment required for packet based transmission.
How many times a year do you have to reboot your network switches, modems, or routers? How often are your communications affected by bandwidth (far more often than you know)? Indeed, some of the most recent hacks haven't been geared toward the end users themselves (be they enterprise, or no), they've been targeting network/internet infrastructure.IP telephony definitely opens up possibilities - but, DON'T assume those possibilities will be opened up to the end user free of charge (despite the fact service providers actually pay little for said possibilities).
It's interesting to see how many markets can be opened up by creating hype around something new, even though in many cases, it may not actually be better - or more applicable.
No comments:
Post a Comment