home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.aimnet.com!news
- From: JNavas@NavasGrp.com (John Navas)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Why 33600?
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:23:15 GMT
- Organization: The Navas Group of Dublin, CA, USA
- Message-ID: <31765595.85943803@news.aimnet.com>
- References: <4kn9v9$n6e@solaris.cc.vt.edu> <4kok44$mj9@hg.oro.net> <3171de07.5184018@news.pbinet.com> <4l18iv$ps0@hg.oro.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: dial-bp1-14.iway.aimnet.com
- X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.198
-
- [Posted to comp.dcom.modems]
- estarry@oro.net (Ed Starry) wrote:
-
- >JNavas@NavasGrp.com (John Navas) wrote about {Re: Why 33600?} in
- >'comp.dcom.modems'...
- >
- >~> 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.
- >
- >~No offense, but that's nonsense.
- >
- > OK, explain how to achieve 230,400 bps from an 'Enhanced V.42bis' 28.8
- >modem?
-
- I have ZyXEL Elite 2864 attached to my computer, with both serial and
- parallel interfaces, that can go as high as 460.8 Kbps. However, real-world
- transfers do not exceed 115.2 Kbps.
-
- >If I can transfer data at 7,000+ cps from a rickety 3 year old 14.4
- >'WHY' do I need a modem with a higher Analog Rate?
-
- 1. You can't transfer real-world files that fast with a 14.4 modem.
-
- 2. A 28.8 modem would be twice as fast on a good connection as your 14.4
- modem.
-
- >... If compression is working as
- >designed then higher Analog Rates aren't needed, are they?
-
- Only if you don't care about much higher speed. Data compression works the
- same on a 28.8 connection as it does on a 14.4 connection.
-
- >When 'YOU' tell
- >people how to attain throughput rates 'Exceeding 115,200 bps' then and only
- >then will I entertain the notion of upgrading to an 'Enhanced V.42bis' 28.8
- >modem!
-
- There's no way to do that with real-world files on a dial-up analog
- connection.
-
- Until then I stand by my statement regarding 'marketing ploy'.
-
- >... When using the word 'buffer' many people, for reasons unknown
- >to me, instantly think of the 16550 UART and we both know this UART isn't a
- >buffer, don't we?
-
- The 16550 UART has two 16-byte buffers.
-
- > The public now wants to know how to attain 230,400 bps data throughput from
- >a 28.8 modem, after all they exist. Don't say it's impossible or you might
- >alienate a number of modem manufactures, including USR. There is a way!
-
- Not true. 230 Kbps on real-world data is impossible over a dial-up analog
- connection, and the modem companies know it.
-
- > If you want to know the definition of 'Enhanced V.42bis' check out
- ><http://web.aimnet.com/~jnavas/modem/faq.html>.
-
- The term "Enhanced V.42bis" does not appear on that Web page. I should
- know, since I am the author.
-
- >PS: While you're at it, would you tell everyone what a 'Serial Port
- >Interface capable of 128 Kbps' is?
-
- The standard PC serial port cannot run at 128 Kbps -- the limit is 115.2
- Kbps. Non-standard serial ports can and do run faster than 128 Kbps, an
- example being Digi AccelePort C1 and C2
- <http://www.DGII.COM/prodprofiles/profiles-prices/digiprofiles/digispecs/accelc1c2.html>.
- A standard parallel port can also run faster than 128 Kbps.
-
- >The 'External' BitSURFER Pro requires one
- >to achieve maximum performance and I want maximum performance.
-
- The BitSURFER Pro is an ISDN terminal adapter, not an analog modem.
-
- --
- Best regards,
- John mailto:JNavas@NavasGrp.com http://web.aimnet.com/~jnavas/
- 28800 Modem FAQ: http://web.aimnet.com/~jnavas/modem/faq.html
-