home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: inforamp.net!ts49-12
- From: crs0794@inforamp.net (Geoffrey Welsh)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: 512Kbps modem developed by Ericsson
- Date: 18 Apr 1996 03:47:06 GMT
- Organization: InfoRamp Inc., Toronto, Ontario (416) 363-9100
- Message-ID: <4l4dvq$968@sam.inforamp.net>
- References: <4k9grj$q2t@rubens.telebyte.nl> <4k9qem$fnf@sam.inforamp.net> <pjkDpw55L.Czt@netcom.com> <3172f9fb.2406869@news.pbinet.com> <pjkDpyArv.sF@netcom.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ts49-12.tor.istar.ca
- X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4
-
- In article <pjkDpyArv.sF@netcom.com>, pjk@netcom.com (Philip J. Koenig) wrote:
- >I admit that with _current technology_ it would be hard to imagine getting
-
- Current _telephone_ technology. No matter what you do to the modem, you won't
- beat the 64 kbps limit imposed by the telephone switch until the phone
- companies rip out all of those 5ESS and DMS-100 switches that they just put in
- and replace them with something that gives each channel higher bandwidth.
-
- >much more speed out of the existing infrastructure. That being said,
- >head in the sand science doesn't go anywhere either. I'm sure you are aware
- >of the kinds of things DSP has done that "traditional wisdom" claimed
- couldn't
- >be done a few years ago.. i.e. current levels of areal density achieved in
-
- For you, "traditional wisdom" might have been what the ignorant Bell employee
- said to you. Shannon's law hasn't changed since long before DSPs became
- commodities, and the signal to noise ratio - and thus a line's data capacity -
- has improved only because of th digital implementation that is the basis for
- my claim of a hard and fast limit on the phone system.
-
- --
- Geoffrey Welsh, Developer, InSystems Technologies Inc.
- Temporary: crs0794@inforamp.net; At work: insystem@pathcom.com
- At home: geoff@zswamp.uucp or [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff
- TYPING IN ALL CAPS IS GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE DISMISSAL.
-