Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
En el artículo , FranK Turner-Smith
G3VKI escribió: That's the bit I have trouble getting my head around. Back in the 1970s and 1980s digital transmissions used a much greater bandwidth than their analogue equivalents. Sampling at 2.2 x max frequency x number of bits plus housekeeping bits etc. etc. One word: compression. If we all took the same attitude as the OP we'd still be using Strowger exchanges for the phone system. Thankfully, some people understand the need for progress and aren't stuck in the past. Times have changed and left me behind, but I've still got me beer so who cares? Good man ![]() -- :: je suis Charlie :: yo soy Charlie :: ik ben Charlie :: |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message
... If we all took the same attitude as the OP we'd still be using Strowger exchanges for the phone system. Thankfully, some people understand the need for progress and aren't stuck in the past. There you go again with your one-sided infantile outbursts. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2/24/2015 1:28 PM, gareth wrote:
"Mike Tomlinson" wrote in message ... If we all took the same attitude as the OP we'd still be using Strowger exchanges for the phone system. Thankfully, some people understand the need for progress and aren't stuck in the past. There you go again with your one-sided infantile outbursts. lol! -- Rick |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|