home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!waikato!NewsWatcher!user
- From: ldo@waikato.ac.nz (Lawrence D'Oliveiro)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.comm,comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: faster than 28.8
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 17:35:06 +1300
- Organization: University of Waikato
- Sender: ldo@waikato.ac.nz
- Message-ID: <ldo-3101961735060001@130.217.96.144>
- References: <sumner-2001961038000001@sumner.tiac.net> <4ds0fp$4ap4@news-s01.ny.us.ibm.net> <AD29910A96685C7229@asd-stat13-153.dial.xs4all.nl> <bgrubb-2301960739100001@10.0.2.15>
- Reply-To: ldo@waikato.ac.nz
- NNTP-Posting-Host: godot.cc.waikato.ac.nz
-
- In article <bgrubb-2301960739100001@10.0.2.15>, bgrubb@acca.nmsu.edu
- (bgrubb) wrote:
-
- >As I understand it v.42bis which is built-in can have 4:1 compression.
- >So in some conditions a 144 modem can go up to 57K and a 288 modem can go
- >to 115K. Because of overhead 2:1 ratios are more common.
-
- Also bear in mind that compression only works with data that is, well,
- compressible.
-
- Consider all these Web surfers downloading GIF and JPEG images, sounds,
- and QuickTime and MPEG movies. All of these (except the sounds) are
- already compressed, and in fact none of them would benefit very much from
- compression by a modem.
-