Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!stretch.cs.mun.ca!leif!jgarland
From: jgarland@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Baud vs. bps.
Message-ID: <130108@kean.ucs.mun.ca>
Date: 30 Aug 90 10:40:15 GMT
References: <849@idcapd.idca.tds.philips.nl-> <4188@trantor.harris-atd.com> <5001@pegasus.ATT.COM> <936@bilver.UUCP>
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Lines: 23


 
<<<<<<<<<Multiple Discussions of Bit/Baud defn's deleted>>>>>>>>>

As a psychologist I can't really follow all the esoteric discussions 
going on here but--again as a psychologist--I can't help wondering 
*what's* going on here.  Why is there no standard def'n of "baud?" Why 
is it open to such interpretation?  

[This whole discussion reminds me of discussions in psychology w.r.t. 
scaling techniques or factor analytic techniques...but it doesn't seem
right that it should.  I mean *everybody* knows that psychologists are 
fuzzy.  Aren't *you* talking about quantifiable, measureable phenomena?]

Is there a senior member of the telecommunications fraternity who can 
enlighten the rest of us?

Just curious.

John Garland

jgarland@mun                     Bitnet
jgarland@kean.ucs.mun.ca         Internet