Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!netcom!gandrews
From: gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: PEP vs. v.32
Summary: Gee, I'm sorry.
Message-ID: <27673@netcom.COM>
Date: 11 Mar 91 05:12:52 GMT
References: <6957.27D86C0A@zswamp.fidonet.org>
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  UNIX System {408 241-9760 guest}
Lines: 29

In article <6957.27D86C0A@zswamp.fidonet.org> root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) writes:
>Greg Andrews (gandrews@netcom.COM ) wrote:
>
> >First of all, the modem typically uses only about 400 
> >carriers.  Those
> >at the top and the bottom extremes of the frequency range 
> >aren't often
> >used because the line isn't good enough.
>
>   I'm fully aware of how a *typical* Telebit connection works, and you are 
>doing nothing but distract attention from the issue, which is that Telebit has 
>not introduced any improvements in the carrier technology since the 
>introduction of V2 ROMs (and the emergence of the Telebit Trailblazer, as 
>opposed to the DCA IRMA FastLink... I *do* go back that far, thank you)
>

Gee, I'm sorry Geoffrey.  I was under the impression that I was addressing
an aspect of PEP where someone was displaying some misconceptions (i.e. the
fastest modulation available on a carrier and the distribution of modulation 
types across the various carriers).  

I see Toby also responded to that very same point.  Are you going to accuse 
him of attempting to distract attention from the issue of PEP improvements 
also?

-- 
.-------------------------------------------.
| Greg Andrews      |   gandrews@netcom.COM |
`-------------------------------------------'