Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!apple!ntg!dplatt
From: dplatt@ntg.uucp (Dave Platt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Another 9600 protocol!
Message-ID: <13@goblin.ntg.uucp>
Date: 5 Mar 91 19:13:58 GMT
References: <1991Mar2.005717.14483@qiclab.scn.rain.com> <3826.27d2479a@hayes.uucp>
Reply-To: dplatt@ntg.UUCP (Dave Platt)
Organization: New Technologies Group, Inc., Palo Alto CA
Lines: 43

Al Peterman writes:

>                                                                 The v.32 
> standard originates from The International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative 
> Committee, CCITT.  Unfortunately, the committee overlooked something 
> important...YOU...the PC user.  It was biased toward main frame, not PC 
> communications, thus cost wasn't an issue.  v.32 technology is intrinsically 
> too costly to achieve the required performance/cost goal.  

and Toby Nixon responds:

>This is simply not true.  We've seen dramatic reduction in the cost 
>of V.32 modems over the past year or two -- from almost $3,000, down 
>to street prices under $500.  Many analysts believe that the price 
>will go even lower.  There is nothing "intrinsically too costly" 
>about a V.32 modem that makes it more expensive; but it _has_ been 
>costly because of the available technology, until now.

I suspect that Toby's analysis is more accurate, and that history will
repeat itself to some extent.  Back in the early '80s, I got fed up with
my lowly 300-baud modem, and looked around for one which could handle
1200 bits/second using the Bell 212 modulation.  The least expensive one
I could find at the time was a Racal-Vadic modem board intended for OEM
users... I bought one and wired up an RS-232 interface for it myself.
The cost... $475 plus tax, title, and parts for the converter.  It's a
large board, uses lots of power, runs rather hot... and by today's
standards it's completely obsolete.  1200-bps modems today are
jellybeans; you get them in boxes of Crackerjack (well, not really, but
they're almost that inexpensive).  Today's low-power, highly-integrated
2400 bps modems are about 5% (!) the physical size of my old 1200-bps,
and use correspondingly less power.

I have no reason to doubt that similar Good Things will happen in V.32
modem technology.

My old Racal-Vadic board-in-a-cardboard-carton still works fine... and
in fact it's rather less noise-prone at 1200 bps than a number of more
modern modems I've tested out.

-- 
Dave Platt                                                VOICE: (415) 813-8917
                    UUCP: ...apple!ntg!dplatt
 USNAIL: New Technologies Group Inc. 2468 Embarcardero Way, Palo Alto CA 94303