joel%TECHUNIX.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Yossi (Joel)) (06/01/90)
In article <8413@accuvax.nwu.edu> mcb@presto.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 396, Message 12 of 12 >The obvious next question is, is there any hope in sight for changing >the TDD standard to something more, uh, *modern* than 45.5 or 48 baud ^^^^^^^^^^ I think I may have inadvertantly started the 48 baud rumor with a typo. I beleive the baud rate is 45ish. >[...], but are deaf people going >to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever? I can't imagine that given >today's miniaturization of components and automated manufacturing >techniques, a device can't be built that will communicate at least 2 >orders of magnitude faster at an order of magnitude less cost than >TDDs of the 1970s... The logical thing to do would be to use standard 300 baud ASCII-type modems. (Most humans can't type 300 baud anyway). They're readily available, and very cheap. But the problem is that the existing TDD's are the existing TDD's, and no one wants to be the first on the block to get the new, non-backwards comptable, technology. Would you buy a new phone that offered CD quality sound (suppose!), or, even, Star-Trek like universal language translation, if it meant that the only people you could call were people like yourself who had invested in the new technology? And that you could no longer call your neighbor and ask for a cup of sugar? I wouldn't. Or, at least, I'd buy both, but if financial constraints forced a decision, I'd stick with what I had. Joel (joel@techunix.technion.ac.il -or- joel@techunix.BITNET) [Moderator's Note: Curtis Reid, the reader who started this entire thread several issues ago, has crafted a comprehensive reply to several issues raised. It will be in a Digest on Saturday. PT]
mjw06513@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Mary Winters) (06/03/90)
In article <8526@accuvax.nwu.edu> "Yossi (Joel" <joel%TECHUNIX.BITNET writes: >>[...], but are deaf people going to be stuck with 45.5 baud forever? >The logical thing to do would be to use standard 300 baud ASCII-type >modems. (Most humans can't type 300 baud anyway). They're readily >available, and very cheap. But the problem is that the existing TDD's >are the existing TDD's, and no one wants to be the first on the block >to get the new, non-backwards comptable, technology. In California, they have TDDs which have two operating modes: the "normal" 45.5 baud/baudot code mode, and an ASCII/300 baud mode, changeable by a simple flip of a switch. I saw one of these back in 1985 or so. I was told that these units were loaned to deaf people free of charge. It seems like a very nifty way to sidestep the problem you mention. uv@f69.n233.z1.fidonet.org Suffering from PMS (Presentation Manager Syndrome)