🚀 go-pugleaf

"Horry" <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:p6dk72h9q68gntpjfvk7pk3f63hrt5cgtr@4ax.com
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 09:34:30 +1000, "Kwyjibo."
> <kwyjibo@Removeozdebate.com> wrote:
>
>> <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7qgj725ag4ugm6232uvujlokmong874g4p@4ax.com
>>> On Sun, 28 May 2006 23:39:23 +1000, "Kwyjibo."
>>> <kwyjibo@Removeozdebate.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:ohpi72la2sd1avqr1o5u4rg262jp223qno@4ax.com
>>>>> On Sun, 28 May 2006 11:29:25 +1000, "Kwyjibo."
>>>>> <kwyjibo@Removeozdebate.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> And pity about the D in ADSL, DSL, ISDN, etc etc etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pity it doesnt show up with normal dialup modems, fuckwit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmmm. Let's see.....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ISDN - you end up with an analogue representation of digital data
>>>>>> being passed along a copper pair using 2B1Q encoding.
>>>>>> Dialup - you end up with an analogue representation of digital
>>>>>> data being passed along a copper pair using (for example) V.90
>>>>>> encoding. ADSL - you end up with an analogue representation of
>>>>>> digital data being passed along a copper pair using constelation
>>>>>> encoding.
>>>>>
>>>>> If that is the case, why does DSL have any greater claim to being
>>>>> "digital" than ISDN?
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't. They are both as digital (or not) as each other.
>>>> What I was disputing was Rod's claim that "ISDN is DSL". It's not,
>>>> and never has been.
>>>
>>> But, if an ISDN line:
>>>
>>> (1) provides for digital data transmission (to the same extent as
>>> does what is called "DSL")
>>>

Yes.

>>> (2) over a wire line
>>>

Yes.

>>> (3) to which one subscribes
>>>

Yes.

>>> surely is it just as much a Digital Subsriber Line as is what is
>>> marketed as DSL?

No. The term DSL is specific to a set of technologies that do not include 
ISDN, despite what Rod claims.

>
> <snip>
>
> Could you answer the above question please?
>
> I get your network vs line point; but an ISDN network must include, as
> one of its constituent parts, an ISDN line, yes?

Correct but even the line compenent is not related to DSL. In terms of what 
it achieves it is (partially), but it's not even close in the method used.

>
> Rod's point appears to be that the expression DSL (Digital Subscriber
> Line) includes more types of service than simply those services which
> are marketed as DSL services (whatever the official specs might say).

And the official spec is all that matters. Rod's claims are just the usual 
ignorant shit he has been coming up with for years.

> A similar situation would have arisen had they decided to call the
> service currently marketed as DSL by the name "Faster Data Line / FDL"
> instead.

Not if there are official specs that determine what is classed as 'FDL', as 
there are with DSL.

>
> In that case you'd be having an argument over whether Foxtel Cable was
> FDL.

Nope.

> In one sense it would be.  In another it wouldn't.

Nope.

> But it was perfectly clear (at least to me) in which sense Rod was
> referring.

-- 
Kwyj