home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 03:31:14 -0600 (CST)
- From: John Edward Bauer <jbauer@plains.nodak.edu>
- To: Fred Salerno <salernof@gate.net>
- cc: executor@nacm.com
- Subject: baud compared to bps, ignore if you really don't care, WAS: Re:, 1.99p6 for everybody!
- In-Reply-To: <Pine.A32.3.91.951112211707.53823A-100000@hopi.gate.net>
- Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.951113024833.6663A-100000@plains>
- MIME-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- Sender: owner-paper@nacm.com
- Precedence: bulk
-
- On Sun, 12 Nov 1995, Fred Salerno wrote:
-
- > Sounds true. With a limit of 5 FTP users at ARDI, and a connection of
- > 28.8 baud, each user gets around 5000 baud.
- > At that rate, a three meg download would take three hours or so!
-
- Not to get on your case, or flame you at all but I thought I would correct
- you on something. Baud and bps are two different things. Baud is the
- number of times a signal changes state in one second, so 2400 baud
- straigt up would be 2400 bps. However, with compression, v.32 for
- example, 14400 bits are being transfered within 2400 signal changes.
- Damn good compression. 6:1. As I understand it, every household can do 2400
- baud with newer phone lines capable of 9600 baud. As for 28.8 Kbps and
- v.34 I don't know if it requires higher than 2400 baud.. anyone know?
- 12:1 compression seems *real* high. Again, this is not to disrespect you in
- anyway, I know I like learning about these things... if anyone can set me
- straight about something let me know.
-
- Sorry about the unrealated content to the list.
-
-
- John Edward Bauer <jbauer@plains.nodak.edu>
-
- It's not how high you jump, it's how you walk away.
- <unknown>
-
-