It's just one point from our lengthy interview
with Reed Hundt, but it's a good one: Why, as an industry, did we ever agree to lionize the akward moniker VoIP? It's still new enough that it suffers from the Gaddafi-Khadafy syndrome -- in some publications, it's VOIP, while others (like here) seem to have standardized on VoIP. Any way you slice it, it's terrible to type and pathetic to pronounce. (Anyone who says "Voyp" out loud should have a goodly length of Cat 5 cable stuffed in their mouth to prevent repetition.)
I'll cast an early vote for Hundt's better description, Broadband Voice -- which quickly becomes the sexy, easy-to-say TLA of BBV. Sure, it'll be a tough fight to convert our industry, since I'm guessing there are people out there who like the geeky, clumsy nomenclature of the technology known as Voice over Internet Protocol. But did we ever say "Video over Internet Protocol," or "Porn over Internet Protocol?"
Nope. Bits is bits, and if we don't want VoIP -- excuse me, BBV -- to be taxed or regulated, we shouldn't name it any differently than other packets on the stream. Of course, there will be some initial confusion, especially for some German hoopsters and some British Dr. Who wonks. But the pain and struggle will be worth it, if we can eliminate VoIP in our time.
Subsea cable alternatives can provide a level of comfort for those concerned about disruptions. Realistically, they will continue to play a small, but critical role in the short term.
Maintaining existing network infrastructures often incurs huge technical debt before newer technologies are adopted over time.
Amid ongoing regional uncertainties, telecom infrastructure in the Middle East has expand to include terrestrial low-latency network infrastructure, which offers resilience and agility in navigating political complexities without relying solely on undersea networks.
