Timeline for 56k Single Chip Modems
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 27, 2012 at 1:32 | vote | accept | Tristan | ||
| Mar 14, 2012 at 17:29 | comment | added | joeforker | The signal is "ruined" for v.92 purposes if it is run through two analog to digital conversions. Modem -> analog phone line -> digital trunk -> analog receive phone line -> Modem. This would not apply for the proposed phone system in a box. | |
| Mar 14, 2012 at 16:55 | comment | added | akohlsmith | edited my answer to address @TristanSeifert's theoretical question | |
| Mar 14, 2012 at 16:54 | history | edited | akohlsmith | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
address theoretical question in comments.
|
| Mar 14, 2012 at 15:31 | comment | added | Tristan | Well... writing a soft modem sounds like something I could waste my evenings during the next summer break off from school, mixed with throwing sharp objects at the wall and hoping they stay there. I'd love to get myself some of that equipment, but sadly I don't have the money at the moment. As for the "both sides can not be analog" requirement - would this mean that the miles of cable between both modems would ruin the signal quality to where only V.90 is possible, or does this have something to do with how the traditional PSTN works? | |
| Mar 14, 2012 at 4:16 | history | answered | akohlsmith | CC BY-SA 3.0 |