Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!rutgers!cbmvax!grr From: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems Subject: Re: comp.dcom.modems lexicon Message-ID: <19552@cbmvax.commodore.com> Date: 6 Mar 91 04:55:06 GMT References: <1991Mar5.225546.6672@panix.uucp> Reply-To: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com (George Robbins) Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA Lines: 32 In article <1991Mar5.225546.6672@panix.uucp> schuster@panix.uucp (Michael Schuster) writes: > In article em@dce.ie (Eamonn McManus) writes: > > > >Full duplex. Able to send data in both directions at once. > > > >Half duplex. Able to send data in only one direction at a time. Some > > protocol is usually used to switch the direction as needed. > > > > Toby Nixon has stated on CompuServe that according to CCITT terminology, > "duplex" means transmitting simultaneously in both directions at the > same speed. Therefore "full duplex" is undefined and redundant. > (Toby, are you listening?) Oh, let's fight!!! 8-) The opposite of duplex is simplex, i.e. able to transmit one way, over on set of wires, period. Given this, and the fact that half-duplex technology probably preceeded full duplex, and the full was added to to make the distinction, I think it's still a meaningful modifier. > > -- > Mike Schuster | CIS: 70346,1745 > NY Public Access UNIX: ...cmcl2!panix!schuster | MCI Mail, GENIE: > The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MSCHUSTER -- George Robbins - now working for, uucp: {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!grr but no way officially representing: domain: grr@cbmvax.commodore.com Commodore, Engineering Department phone: 215-431-9349 (only by moonlite)