Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!David
From: David@cup.portal.com (David Michael McCord)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V32 will smash TB+ in a year (?)
Message-ID: <11078@cup.portal.com>
Date: 8 Nov 88 17:48:15 GMT
References: <10805@cup.portal.com> <1417@percival.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 46

In <1417@percival.UUCP> nerd@percival.UUCP (Michael Galassi) wrote:

>Obviously you did not read the responses to your previous posting.  The
>point most here have made (and you missed) is that by using the TB+s we
>are all saving bucks today, in most cases enough to cover the cost of the
>TB+s and report a tidy savings on the side to boot.

I assure you that I have read ALL of the responses.  Including yours.

See a later posting of mine which you apparently have not read which 
discusses the cost of doing business in a non-standard manner.  When you 
(as well as many of the other postings of similar ilk) claim this cost 
savings I think you are ignoring certain factors.

Perhaps a few questions will clarify my position.

How many sites presently using trailblazers will find it necessary in the 
near future to buy an additional 9600bps modems (v.32, natch) to support high 
speed applications, instead of simply re-using their existing equipment?  
What is that cost going to be?

What if you are a new site, just starting to use uucp; and because all the 
other uucp users talk telebit, you find you have to buy one too.  Yet, 
because you have need to talk to the rest of the world, you have to buy 
another modem type (v.32 again) for those applications.  What is your opinion 
going to be regarding the original netadmins who bought telebit?  Aren't you 
being forced to buy a modem and dedicate it to a particular application 
rather than using a single type in ALL your applications?  What about the 
possible economies of scale you are losing?  What is the cost of that?

My position was, and remains, that there are many hidden costs to the 
trailblazers.  Maybe *you* haven't had to pay them...yet.  But you will.

>Most of us don't argue what we will be doing in a year, we know technology
>well enough not to try to foresee the "state of the art" at that time.

Both v.32 (echo cancellation) and PEP are old technology, so I think it is a 
little silly to drag in the phrase "state of the art", because it doesn't 
apply to either.  And if you seriously believe that v.32 will not be the 
dominant modulation technique for high speed modems a year from now, or 
decide to close your eyes and ignore the situation, I suppose you are 
entitled to do so.  Obviously, I disagree with that, and time will tell whose 
opinion corresponds more closely to reality, and who responded in a more 
effective manner.

David@cup portal.com