Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:16283 rec.ham-radio:28196
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!mozart.amd.com!reed
From: reed@mozart.amd.com (David F. Reed)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,rec.ham-radio
Subject: Re: morse code
Message-ID: <1990Dec14.150737.2609@mozart.amd.com>
Date: 14 Dec 90 15:07:37 GMT
References: <1990Dec12.231058.23895@engin.umich.edu> <1990Dec14.012315.7858@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Lines: 25

In article <1990Dec14.012315.7858@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <1990Dec12.231058.23895@engin.umich.edu> ssave@caen.engin.umich.edu (Shailendra Anant Save) writes:
>>  Say, why do people use morse nowadays anyway?
>
>For conformance with antiquated regulations, because they're old-fashioned,
>or because they're stranded on a desert island which is well-supplied with
>analog electronic parts but has no digital parts.  Morse is basically
>obsolete, since digital modulation techniques are far superior at punching
>clean signals through noise.

Silly me, Henry, all this time of being an old fart, I thought cw was the
first digital (on and off, modulated by keying) modulation technique...
and as far as punching signals through the noise, you will find it hard
to beat (without the military budget) that active filter most humans have
between the ears, occupying the cranial cavity.

hmmm, where did I go wrong all those years???

cheers!

-- 
____________________________________________________________________
"...just my opinion, not speaking for AMD." KK5D, 7J1AGO, XE1ZDR 
David F. Reed       4512 Clarno         Austin TX 78749
packet: KK5D@KB5PM      driving by? try 442.150 repeater