Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:06 pm
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:48:53 -0800, FatBytestard
<FatBytestard_at_somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:54:15 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
ISDN has always been out of the question in the US. The tariff structure has
always been dumb. V.90 put the nail in ISDNs coffin.
Yet ALL lines are ISDN from the first digital point onward. Period.
Repeating your falsehoods just makes them into lies, AlwaysWrong.
Quote:
You seem to be 100% retarded as to what ISDN is. It isn't something
some dopey fuck like the krw retard calls up some other fucking retard
and gets installed. They FAILED at selling it. That doesn't mean that
it is not still used, idiots.
AlwaysWrong, is wrong. Yawn.
Quote:
ALL POTS runs over ISDN schemas from the point which your lines become
digital, which is at the very first switch.
Wrong again, AlwaysWrong.
Quote:
You are glaringly fucking stupid to keep acting as if it doesn't v90
has NOTHING to do with it. Those are at the tail end connection.
Keep it up, ALwaysWrong. Sooner or later you'll pop a cork.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:08 pm
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:51:38 -0800, FatBytestard
<FatBytestard_at_somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:54:15 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
They tell us 17K' (3 miles). I'm right at that limit and recently had to
downgrade to 768K (after 1-1/2 years working at 3Mb).
Hahhahaah... wuss. I enjoy regular connections at 18Mb/s
Over ISDN, too! Everyone with a little dick brags about their size.
FatBytestard
Guest
Sat Mar 06, 2010 10:56 pm
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 14:08:03 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:51:38 -0800, FatBytestard
FatBytestard_at_somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:54:15 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
They tell us 17K' (3 miles). I'm right at that limit and recently had to
downgrade to 768K (after 1-1/2 years working at 3Mb).
Hahhahaah... wuss. I enjoy regular connections at 18Mb/s
Over ISDN, too! Everyone with a little dick brags about their size.
Cable, you retarded fucking ditz. If you were any more dirt dumb, I'd
swear that you were related to the Thompson retard.
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz
Guest
Sat Mar 06, 2010 11:30 pm
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 13:56:09 -0800, FatBytestard
<FatBytestard_at_somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 14:08:03 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 11:51:38 -0800, FatBytestard
FatBytestard_at_somewheronyourharddrive.org> wrote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:54:15 -0600, "krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
They tell us 17K' (3 miles). I'm right at that limit and recently had to
downgrade to 768K (after 1-1/2 years working at 3Mb).
Hahhahaah... wuss. I enjoy regular connections at 18Mb/s
Over ISDN, too! Everyone with a little dick brags about their size.
Cable, you retarded fucking ditz.
Oh, now you're bragging that your little dick is a cable.
Quote:
If you were any more dirt dumb, I'd
swear that you were related to the Thompson retard.
That's the nicest thing you've said to anyone, but you're AlwaysWrong.
JosephKK
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 3:24 am
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
Quote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Vladimir Vassilevsky
DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant
http://www.abvolt.com
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Vladimir Vassilevsky
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 3:36 am
JosephKK wrote:
Quote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
Huh?
V.90 is V.34-like uplink and 8 kbaud 8 bit downlink.
V.92 is 8 kbaud 8 bit both ways.
Quote:
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Bla-bla-bla ?
VLV
Michael A. Terrell
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:38 am
"krw_at_att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote:
Quote:
Keep it up, ALwaysWrong. Sooner or later you'll pop a cork.
Again?
--
Greed is the root of all eBay.
JosephKK
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:38 pm
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:36:21 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
Quote:
JosephKK wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
Huh?
V.90 is V.34-like uplink and 8 kbaud 8 bit downlink.
V.92 is 8 kbaud 8 bit both ways.
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Bla-bla-bla ?
VLV
Not that i consider Wikipedia a proper reference source, but check the stated speeds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU-T_V-Series_Recommendations
V.34 seems to be 28kpbs both ways, a bit short of V.90 56kbps down 33.6 kbps up.
Haven't had my hands on any of the actual standards for many years.
Jim Thompson
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 5:21 pm
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 07:38:20 -0800,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:36:21 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
Huh?
V.90 is V.34-like uplink and 8 kbaud 8 bit downlink.
V.92 is 8 kbaud 8 bit both ways.
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Bla-bla-bla ?
VLV
Not that i consider Wikipedia a proper reference source, but check the stated speeds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU-T_V-Series_Recommendations
V.34 seems to be 28kpbs both ways, a bit short of V.90 56kbps down 33.6 kbps up.
Haven't had my hands on any of the actual standards for many years.
Just got a notice from Cox, new speeds (CHSI Premier)... 20Mbps
download / 4Mbps upload, and I think the actual upload is actually
faster than claimed.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at
http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
The only thing bipartisan in this country is hypocrisy
amark
Guest
Sun Mar 07, 2010 10:21 pm
On Mar 4, 4:02 pm, pauling...@oslotec.com (Paul Ingram) wrote:
Quote:
Does anyone know what are the highest and lowest frequencies that can
be transmitted as CW over a commercial wired telephone network?
Could bypassing the mic and speaker extend this range?
Paul Ingram
The standard bandwidth of a telephone system outside USA is 300Hz to
3.4 kHz, as a telephone transmission technician like myself knows.
Outside USA, the CCITT specifications are used, whereas within USA the
usual system is the one defined by Bell. I was trained in New Zealand.
In the olden days of frequency division modulation, we would send each
telephone call at a different frequency down the long-distance line,
and we would have a system of demodulators (like very sophisticated
radios) at the other end, tuned to each signal. So if there was too
much bandwidth transmitted with some particular signal it would
interfere with nearby channels, degrading the network. For this reason
it was necessary to use hard filtering.
Nowadays most telephone traffic is digital, meaning that analogue
signals are sampled 8000 times a second and the voltage measurement
digitally sent to signal reconstruction equipment at the distant end.
By reason of the sampling rate, the highest frequency that can be
represented in the signal is less than half of 8kHz. In practice, we
prefer much less (than half), and we limit the signal reaching the
sampling equipment to the same 300 - 3.4kHz that we used in the
analogue days.
JosephKK
Guest
Mon Mar 08, 2010 4:43 am
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 09:21:32 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon_at_My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
Quote:
On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 07:38:20 -0800,
"JosephKK"<quiettechblue_at_yahoo.com> wrote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:36:21 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
Huh?
V.90 is V.34-like uplink and 8 kbaud 8 bit downlink.
V.92 is 8 kbaud 8 bit both ways.
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Bla-bla-bla ?
VLV
Not that i consider Wikipedia a proper reference source, but check the stated speeds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU-T_V-Series_Recommendations
V.34 seems to be 28kpbs both ways, a bit short of V.90 56kbps down 33.6 kbps up.
Haven't had my hands on any of the actual standards for many years.
Just got a notice from Cox, new speeds (CHSI Premier)... 20Mbps
download / 4Mbps upload, and I think the actual upload is actually
faster than claimed.
...Jim Thompson
Wonderful for you. But those are seriously different modems and line conditions.
Martin Brown
Guest
Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:15 am
JosephKK wrote:
Quote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:36:21 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:25:14 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam_at_nowhere.com> wrote:
JosephKK wrote:
2400 symbols per second and about 12 bits per symbol maximum. Trellis coded
QAM both directions.
I have no idea what are you babbling about, however V.34 provides symbol
rates of up to 3.429k, with 960-point constellation.
Try V.90 and V.92, Huge constellations, requires very good SNR.
Huh?
V.90 is V.34-like uplink and 8 kbaud 8 bit downlink.
V.92 is 8 kbaud 8 bit both ways.
I may not have enough bits per symbol though. V.34 does not have quite
the bitrate of so called 56K modems. Of course, the transmitted
symbol stream is compressed then scrambled from the incoming data stream.
Bla-bla-bla ?
VLV
Not that i consider Wikipedia a proper reference source, but check the stated speeds:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITU-T_V-Series_Recommendations
V.34 seems to be 28kpbs both ways, a bit short of V.90 56kbps down 33.6 kbps up.
There was an important difference. On most lines you had a sporting
chance with V.34 of getting the top speed. On a V.90 connection you were
doing well to get more than 80% of top rated speed in either direction.
Quote:
Haven't had my hands on any of the actual standards for many years.
By the time 56k chipsets were around the analogue V.34+ (1996) was
capable of 33k6 both ways on a good day. On a DACSd line V.34 was always
better than 56k because it tolerated the signal abuse better.
On a good line the 56k modem would be something like 50k down and 28k
up. So for uploading big files it was worth forcing a V34+ connection.
Regards,
Martin Brown
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
