Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!convex!swarren
From: swarren@convex.com (Steve Warren)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: A SURVEY  Please read (A HARDWARE PRODUCT IDEA)
Message-ID: <111162@convex.convex.com>
Date: 14 Dec 90 15:53:18 GMT
References: <4356@alliant.Alliant.COM> <36425@cup.portal.com>
Sender: news@convex.com
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx.
Lines: 28

In article <36425@cup.portal.com> thad@cup.portal.com (Thad P Floryan) writes:
                             [...]
>You're talking to a system that has touch-tone decoding, A/D conversion most
>likely through a DSP, voice playback through (possibly) the same DSP, and a
>rather large software support library, let alone the disk space required to
>record incoming voice email sampled at 16 or 24 (or even 64) kHz.
>
>The above fits on a printed circuit card that must pass BOTH FCC rule 15
>for EMI/RFI emissions ($$$ for testing) and FCC rule 68 for telephony
>interface.
                             [...]
Touch-tone decoding is quite simple and cheap to do.  That is why it was
chosen for telephones.  So is A/D at the sample rates required
for telephone-quality audio.  Audio samples compress well, so disk
requirements could be reduced substantially.  EMI blocking is a
straightforward process.  The device he was talking about is no more complex
than a standard 2400 baud modem.  I believe they are selling in the $100
range right now.

There is no reason for devices like this to cost $2000.  If it was necessary
to charge this much for it then it was overengineered.  The parts are cheap
and standard, and most of the engineering has already been done.

--
            _.
--Steve   ._||__      DISCLAIMER: All opinions are my own.
  Warren   v\ *|     ----------------------------------------------
             V       {uunet,sun}!convex!swarren; swarren@convex.COM