Intel embarrassed by own report

[keith]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:13:17 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:

> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>> Nope, it went all the way back to the CO, rather than a
>> "slick" in the neighborhood.
>
> Yes, but if it's a long or boraderline run, it could get
> load coils.

No load coials anywhere around, at least on the local loops. I asked.

>> Oh, we're talking about different things. I thougth we were
>> talking POTS. If you take the POTS DACS out of the line you can
>> up the frequency, which is the other data-rate knob to twist.
>
> Yes. I was thinking specifically of DSL. For POTS, that
> prof's estimate of 20k being max isn't really all that far
> of 53k. Only a factor of 2.6
>
>> Let me back up... As people ditch their phone lines,
>> the rest become quieter. ;-)/2
>
> Of course. Particularly if they aren't carrying modem
> signals for hours on end.

;-)

--
Keith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Robert Redelmeier" <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:ThAse.1862$Nz2.715@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>> I had two line a few years back. The original line wouldn't
>> go over 26K, while the newer one was reliably 53K.
>
> Sounds like load coils on the old line.

Might be, might be a phantom or bridged line.
Telco will fix those things when you fuss at them.
Had to do that here ...

>> Any discontinuity at a splice is peanuts at these
>> frequencies. That's like the people replacing their internal
>> house wiring with cat-5, expecting to see better perfromance.
>
> And they usually won't. But push the distance and you also
> get more splices. It doesn't help at 1.1 MHz.
>
>> No, I meant get rid of their land-lines completely.
>
> Fine for short ranges or low bandwidth.

Satellite works fine here, much better than the land line internet.

>> structures in the village. The loop isn't quite that old
>> though. ;-) He has no problem at 53K. Old wire isn't noiser
>> than new wire (assuming twisted pair, not the individual
>> wires on the tree).
>
> My parents house is also much older, with older wiring they
> only get 48k . That's still no load coils, but the line is
> starting to limit. At 8kft, they probably could get DSL 1.5 .



--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

"Robert Redelmeier" <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:q%qse.1952$kX4.1734@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Hank Oredson <horedson@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> For phone lines see BSTJ, lots info ...
>
> In the MHz for subscriber loop? Maybe for inter-office
> trunking before it was mostly replaced by fiber.


The data is the characteristics of the loop.
Run it at whatever frequency you like.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

The worst discontinuities are "split trunks" (?? I forgot exact words). I
mean, a trunk, connected from the middle of a live local loop. But DSL
modems can handle that.

"Robert Redelmeier" <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:5Qsse.1972$kX4.552@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>> Discontinuities? PLease. The fact is that the local loop
>> has becoem far quieter than in years past
>
> New or rewired loops, yes. I'm not sure how old loops
> magically improve
>
> But there still are discontinuities at splices. Maybe
> not much with the newer ones, but every little bit hurts,
> especially at higher frequencies.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

In article <3hga5lFgua3aU1@individual.net>, cecchinospam@us.ibm.com
says...
> Robert Myers wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 07:01:26 -0500, "Del Cecchi"
> > <dcecchi.nospam@att.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >><rbmyersusa@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1118959746.898811.150630@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>>Del Cecchi wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>And did you notice that some brilliant outfit came out with a
> >>>>statistical timing analysis program for timing chip designs?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>As you know, I try to keep track of everything under the sun, but I
> >>>missed this one. Can you suggest a link?
> >>>
> >>>RM
> >>>
> >>
> >>Why, certainly.
> >>
> >>http://www.ibm.com/investor/news/jun-2005/03-06-05-2.phtml
> >>
> >
> >
> > Thanks. One piece of news there, of course, is that IBM is offering
> > its own tools (and, I suspect, your services) to the public.
> >
> > That news says something about the importance of process variability.
> > It doesn't say how fast the problem is getting worse, and
> > electromigration is a problem on top of that.
> >
> > Most of the scaling predictions we've seen (Moore's law will break
> > down at some particular scale) have turned out to be wrong, but sooner
> > or later, this (process variability, leakage, electromigration) all
> > has to catch up with us. I suppose a great many people would like to
> > know when.
> >
> > RM
>
> IBM has been offering the services of a goodly number of expert
> designers at all levels from silicon wafer to system to software "to the
> public" (assuming said public has enough money) for a few years now as
> E&TS.
>
> My personal opinion is that the problems you mention will slow progress
> in a gradual fashion, rather than acting like a wall. The improvement
> between generations will gradually become less, and the time span greater.
>
....and the cost higher. We've been seeing this for a couple of
generations now. ...increasing difficulty/cost with less payback.

--
Keith

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.intel (More info?)

In article <%QBse.5295$hK3.3120@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
horedson@earthlink.net says...
> "Robert Redelmeier" <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote in message
> news:ThAse.1862$Nz2.715@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> >> I had two line a few years back. The original line wouldn't
> >> go over 26K, while the newer one was reliably 53K.
> >
> > Sounds like load coils on the old line.
>
> Might be, might be a phantom or bridged line.
> Telco will fix those things when you fuss at them.
> Had to do that here ...

No, that was the first thing I checked. It's just a long (~8km) noisy
line.

> >> Any discontinuity at a splice is peanuts at these
> >> frequencies. That's like the people replacing their internal
> >> house wiring with cat-5, expecting to see better perfromance.
> >
> > And they usually won't. But push the distance and you also
> > get more splices. It doesn't help at 1.1 MHz.
> >
> >> No, I meant get rid of their land-lines completely.
> >
> > Fine for short ranges or low bandwidth.
>
> Satellite works fine here, much better than the land line internet.

Much expensive too. At least here they're about 5X the cost of cable,
plus about $1K in equipment. Better than nothing though (as he sits in
a hotel room where there are no local Internet POPs).

> >> structures in the village. The loop isn't quite that old
> >> though. ;-) He has no problem at 53K. Old wire isn't noiser
> >> than new wire (assuming twisted pair, not the individual
> >> wires on the tree).
> >
> > My parents house is also much older, with older wiring they
> > only get 48k . That's still no load coils, but the line is
> > starting to limit. At 8kft, they probably could get DSL 1.5 .

--
Keith