Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:25:38 -0500 From: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) To: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Microsoft "Get ISDN"? Message-ID: <199603182025.PAA01382@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> On Sat, 16 Mar 1996, dennis wrote: >> > >> > I still find it terribly interesting that people will spend a fortune >> > on horsepower of questionable necessity (like P6s and 166Mhz cpus to >> > run a terminal server) but want to use $30. async cards for the most >> > important bottleneck in their network. >> >> People will always be doing this because the level of knowledge >> required to make intelligent hardware purchases is beyond the average >> consumer. I agree with you, an ISP who sticks a bunch of high-speed >> serial ports connected to a bunch of Bitsurfrs to provide ISDN access >> is just asking for trouble. > There's nothing wrong with using bitsurfer....the issue that we were talking about was whether you run the data piece of the puzzle at 115,200 (minus the overhead) async or 128kbs sync. Same physical issues...just a different scenario. If I thought that people would use them I think a $195. sync solution (paired with a $265. bitsurfer would be a very efficient full 128kbs solution). But I don't think enough people would use it. Noone understands sync....and most isps wouldnt know how to sell it. Its amazing how many people pay lots extra for 28.8 modems but you cant convince them to pay (anything hardly) to get 30% more throughput. Dennis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com Synchronous Communications Cards and Routers For Discriminating Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame Relay, PPP, HDLC, and X.25 for BSD/OS, FreeBSD and LINUX
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603182025.PAA01382>