Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!virtech!cpcahil
From: cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: FCC doing it again...
Message-ID: <1989Nov28.011514.4193@virtech.uucp>
Date: 28 Nov 89 01:15:14 GMT
References: <21536@adm.BRL.MIL>
Organization: Virtual Technologies Inc.
Lines: 24

In article <21536@adm.BRL.MIL>, AGRISCS@umcvmb.missouri.edu (Don Ingli) writes:
> Please allow me to express my displeasure with the FCC proposal
> which would authorize a surcharge for the use of modems on the
> telephone network. This regulation is nothing less than an
> attempt to restrict the free exchange of information among the
> growing number of computer users. Calls placed using modems
> require no special telephone company equipment, and users of
> modems pay the phone company for use of the network in the form
> of a monthly bill. In short a modem call is the same as a voice
> call, and should not be subject to any additional charges.

Not that I want to pay a surcharge, but...

A modem phone call is not the same as a voice phone call.  Modem calls are
continuously transmitting tones on the line, while a voice call has lots 
of periods of silence.  This makes modem calls harder to multiplex on the 
phone network than voice calls.


-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Conor P. Cahill     uunet!virtech!cpcahil      	703-430-9247	!
| Virtual Technologies Inc.,    P. O. Box 876,   Sterling, VA 22170     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+