home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: bristlecone.together.net!usenet
- From: krw@together.net
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Why 33600?
- Date: 14 Apr 1996 01:59:16 GMT
- Organization: TGF Internet Services
- Message-ID: <4kpm5k$joo@bristlecone.together.net>
- References: <4kn9v9$n6e@solaris.cc.vt.edu> <4kok44$mj9@hg.oro.net>
- Reply-To: krw@together.net
- NNTP-Posting-Host: vtr-btv217.ramp.together.net
- X-Newsreader: IBM NewsReader/2 v1.2
-
- In <4kok44$mj9@hg.oro.net>, estarry@oro.net (Ed Starry) writes:
- > Not really! If people would start demanding (and using) 'cached serial
- >ports' they would discover even 14.4's are much faster than they realize. To
- >me this increasing of the Analog Rate is a marketing ploy.
- > The marketing image that 'bigger is better' has overshadowed the more
- >sensible notion of 'bigger is simply bigger'. Diminishing returns is never
- >considered when it pertains to advertising.
-
- Ed, I think you have some explaining to do here. Just what the hell is a
- cached serial port, and why would want to cache a serial port? If you mean
- buffering it (as in a FIFO) this is the norm. No, 28.8K will not give twice the
- performance of a 14.4K, much the same way that a Pentium 133 will not get
- your work done twice as fast as a P66.
-
- > All my sheets are white except my colored ones!
-
- The only question is, when did you color them?
- >
- > ** Common Sense Is Not Common **
-
- No, I guess not.
-
- /----------------------------------------------------------
- / Keith R. Williams
- / krw@together.net
- / Burlington Vermont
-
-