星期五, 12月 22, 2006

Recent Trends

ADSL -> FTTH
  • Point-Topic:光纖降價有取代Cable modem之勢 (2006/12/14)
802.11 a/b/g -> 802.11n
3G -> HSDPA (3.5G) -> 4G, WiMax
CD -> Paid Music Download

TV-> IPTV, DTV, DVB-H
Wireline Phone -> VoIP or VoWiFi
Mobile Phone->VoIP over HSDPA

Spread Spectrum -> OFDM -> OFDM + MIMO

12-23-2006 Class

Student Presentation (schedule)

12/23
Service model: 台北市政府的VOIP公務服務系統

Web 2.0 BBS: Gaaan

Web 2.0 Personal Portal:
Wi-Fi Community Network and Business Model <fon>


預告
12/30 連假日停課ㄧ次

星期一, 12月 18, 2006

Homework 12/16/2006

For housing services, compare the three websites
http://www.housingmaps.com
http://www.urmap.com.tw/asp/kijiji/
http://www.7house.com.tw

List the differences in the user interface design and usability. Make comments
by your use experiences.

星期日, 12月 17, 2006

Web 2.0 for NPO (Nonprofit organization)

Web 2.0 is absolutely a trend that NPO should pursue.
I have a study as posted in the following.
Web 2.0 also has some problems that people start to notice. First of all, sharing is limited and diverse.
Various tools exist: Blogs, Flickr, BT, …. It is not uncommon
that one has to combine several services in order to make things done.
For example, save the documents in Google Docs, store the photos on Clickr,
and write blogs on SixApart.
Second, existing Web 2.0 service providers give limited storage and functions.
There is no roadmap about the new features people
are looking for. Change of the platform is not straightforward, either. For example,
people better not decide to move from Blogger to Xuite, because there is no import
function.
Nonetheless, I think one can still leverage the existing nice services such as Flickr, Google Docs, and Blogger that
are already popular. These services seem generic and have uses in many ways.
As to the mission critical applications that NPO want to build, Web 2.0 essentials can be built into these systems
from scratch. For example, we can do AJAX programming to make the GUI more usable and friendly.
We can also let users contribute and share their data, and even enable them to mash services up, just to name a few.
A far dream may be a Web 2.0 platform that NPO can host their mission critical applications.
In that case, all they need is learn how to use the systems without the bothering IT maintenance problems.

星期六, 12月 16, 2006

Web 2.0

Web 2.0
  • WYSWYG (What you see is what you get.)
  • Personalization
  • Mashup
  • Sharing
  • Feedback
If Web 1.0 is read only, then Web 2.0 is Read-Write.

Web 1.0 is for the user.
Web 2.0 is for the user and by the user.
Web 3.0 is for the user, by the user, and of the user.

examples:

Wikipedia

http://www.google.com/ig

Google News

Software as a Service: Wriely

Panorama Explorer

Mashup examples:
References:

What is Web 2.0? By Andy Budd of Clearleft Ltd

What Is Web 2.0 by Tim O'Reilly

星期六, 12月 09, 2006

Unlicensed Mobile Access

UMA Technology
  • seamless handoff from WiFi to cellular networks,
  • converging the fixed and mobile worlds
  • under the control and billing of the mobile operator
UMA Architecture
  • a new network element (the UMA Network Controller, UNC)
  • UNC interfaces into the core network via existing 3GPP specified A/Gb interfaces.
  • protocols for the secure transport of GSM/GPRS signalling and user plane traffic over IP.
SIP
in contrast, uses the Internet for routing

Issues
  • WLAN couldn’t really support it due to the hand-off issues among APs.
Vendors
  • Extricom selling 8 and 24-port WLAN switches
  • client on the network associates to the switch, not the radio/AP
  • No de-association or re-association
UMA in the office