Xref: utzoo comp.sys.ibm.pc:30899 comp.periphs:1873 comp.misc:6465 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!unmvax!aplcen!haven!ames!amdahl!oliveb!tymix!antares!pnelson From: pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.periphs,comp.misc Subject: Re: RS-232 protocol primer (long) Message-ID: <471@antares.UUCP> Date: 1 Jul 89 02:03:19 GMT References: <1538@mtunb.ATT.COM> <592@megatek.UUCP> <1989Jun26.155855.1680@utzoo.uucp> <821@cf-cm.UUCP> Reply-To: pnelson@antares.UUCP (Phil Nelson) Organization: Tymnet QSATS, San Jose CA Lines: 29 In article <821@cf-cm.UUCP> sme@computing-maths.cardiff.ac.uk (Simon Elliott) writes: |In article <1989Jun26.155855.1680@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: || ... The way these || particular connectors are built, the male connectors are much more || durable (solid post, as opposed to the springy sleeve on the female end), || so they ought to be used in the position where the connector is harder || to replace. | |Now I am confused. I always thought that the male connector was the one |with the pins, rather than the sockets. It's been a long day, and I may be |reading Henry's article incorrectly, but he seems to be saying that the solid |block with the sockets in it is male, and that the flimsy shell with the pins |in it is female. Do I need a basic biology lesson? No, you're right. Henry is wrong. Amazing, isn't it? |-- |-------------------------------------------------------------------------- |Simon Elliott Internet: sme%v1.cm.cf.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk |UWCC Computer Centre JANET: sme@uk.ac.cf.cm.v1 |40/41 Park Place UUCP: {backbones}!mcvax!ukc!reading!cf-cm!sme |Cardiff, Wales PHONE: +44 222 874300 -- Phil Nelson at (but not speaking for) OnTyme:NSC.P/Nelson Tymnet, McDonnell Douglas Network Systems Company Voice:408-922-7508 UUCP:{pyramid|ames}oliveb!tymix!pnelson LRV:Component Station "What we face is government troops and we have no guns." -Chinese student