Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mar 19, 11:49�am, wrote:
On 19 Mar 2007 10:07:30 -0700, " wrote: On Mar 19, 7:45?am, "an_old_friend" wrote: On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote: Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data communications, strange ... debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite * Not "whining." *It's a technical barrier to reach "high speed" * approaching T1 rates on small slices of bandwidth. *ALL radio * services face that same problem. well I plead a matter dates at first it did just seem to be whing more debate like discussion seems to ensued Mark, please slow down on replies and try to think of what you wrote. Now, I'm fairly good at interpreting what was written, including intent, but that single sentence has me baffled. I will repeat. RATE of information conveyed in ANY radio or wired communications service is a function of the comm circuit BANDWIDTH. That is a definite law of information theory. Except for the amateur 10m band, the bandspace on amateur HF frequencies is LIMITED for any "high speed" (presumably Internet-quality data) communications. That presents a technical barrier that is immune to human legislation, emotions, desires, whatever. "High speed" information transfer is itself a subjective label. An adaptation of the common 56 KBPS method used by most modems might put such rates into US amateur radio but right now the regulations hold it to an equivalent 300 WPM rate. Now, to some that is "high speed." To someone selling DSL or "better" service it is very low speed. Just saying "high speed" without quantifying it doesn't make it an argument pro or con. Saying one "must have high speed" isn't an argument or debate or discussion, it is just a troll, a phrase looking to be a flame war igniter. 73, Len AF6AY |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ups.com... On Mar 19, 11:49?am, wrote: On 19 Mar 2007 10:07:30 -0700, " wrote: On Mar 19, 7:45?am, "an_old_friend" wrote: On Mar 19, 1:26 am, John Smith I wrote: John Smith I wrote: Over in RRAM there seems to be much debate on the need for HS data communications, strange ... debate I call it whing maybe you are being polite Not "whining." It's a technical barrier to reach "high speed" approaching T1 rates on small slices of bandwidth. ALL radio services face that same problem. well I plead a matter dates at first it did just seem to be whing more debate like discussion seems to ensued Mark, please slow down on replies and try to think of what you wrote. with the punce gotcha he wonders why I simple don't bother to ty impoving my spelling do u hav anyting cognet two say? -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
need help with xmission line xformer | Homebrew | |||
meltdown in progress | Policy | |||
Moderator Policy for proposed rec.radio.amateur.policy.moderated | Policy | |||
Bend in xmission line | Antenna | |||
Series-Section Xmission Line Impedance Matching | Antenna |