1 Jan
2007
1 Jan
'07
10:43 a.m.
Fred Csin wrote
Well, smoke signals may have lower latency, but bongos would have
higher possible switching speeds and so better bandwidth. Things don't
change much, do they?
Scott
Keep it in
historical context... Bongos were a significant speed
increase over smoke signals.
??
~1100 feet per second v 186,000 miles per second
But bongos could operate without line of sight,
and with or without ambient light.
1 Jan
1 Jan
11:02 a.m.
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007 10:43:23 -0800, Scott Quinn wrote:
Fred Csin wrote
Well, smoke signals may have lower latency, but bongos would have
higher possible switching speeds and so better bandwidth. Things don't
change much, do they?
Keep
it in historical context... Bongos were a significant speed
increase over smoke signals.
??
~1100 feet per second v 186,000 miles per second
But bongos could operate without line of sight,
and with or without ambient light.
Scott
Smoke signals have much better point to point side channel noise rejection.
Bongos have a poor signal to noise ratio.
Just my two copper, in the well ...
Bob
11:28 a.m.
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007, Bob Bradlee wrote:
Smoke signals have much better point to point side
channel noise rejection.
Bongos have a poor signal to noise ratio.
Bongos are not well suited for full duplex, even with asymmetric FSK.
Bongos can control data rate (and legitimately use "BAUD"!);
smoke signals rely on ambient conditions for their data rate.
Smoke signals permit virtually unlimited simultaneous transmissions, until
the media is saturated (like LA)
With special hardware (specially equipped plane), smoke signals can be
plain text, with a limited selection of fonts.
As near as I can tell, Smoke Signal Broadcating company (like Vector
Graphics) never produced the products implicit in the company name.
Just my two copper, in the well ...
best to
stick with silver in wells
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
11:16 a.m.
New subject: National MA2000 parts.
Hi
I was just digging though my stuff ( actually, doing some early spring
cleaning ). I came across some of these components. I was wondering
if anyone else had heard of them before.
These are modules that stack to form systems. They are based on the
CMOS version of the NSC800 processor. This was pin compatable with
the 8085 but used the Z80 instructions ( or so I've been told ).
Here is waht I have:
MA2000 base unit ( damaged by a leaky NiCad but looks repairable )
MA2800 Processor unit ( some I/O, ROM with monitor and some RAM )
MA2232 RS232 interface
MA2301 Forth in ROM
MA2016 16K CMOS RAM's( used the bad NiCad to hold data ) I'f got 3 of these.
MA2017L 16K RAM with its own battery ( hope it isn't a NiCad ).
MA2732 Holds two 2716 or 2732 EPROMs
MA2802 Another with Real Time Clock.
Manual with data sheets for these and others. Also a lot on how to
use these, monitor listing and NSC800 instruction set are included.
I'm not thinking of getting rid of these but would like to know if anyone
else has played with these. A web search doesn't show a hold lot.
Dwight
_________________________________________________________________
Type your favorite song.? Get a customized station.? Try MSN Radio powered
by Pandora. http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001
6346
days inactive
6346
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
caveguy＠sbcglobal.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
compoobah＠valleyimplants.com -
dkelvey＠hotmail.com