Steve,
Thanks for finding and posting the URL. I'm not sure whether I understand less...the market or the posters on SI. I would have thought that there would have been much discussion on the articles at the referenced URL. Particularly what caught my attention was:
"At MCI Developers Lab in Richardson, Texas, Network Computing tested ADSL modems from Amati Communications Corp. (ATU-C, ATU-R), Aware (Ethernet Access Modems) and Paradyne Corp. (5170/5171 ADSL Modems) to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of ADSL.
We gave these ADSL units quite a workout and, in the end, found no major problems with the technology: ADSL is technically ready for deployment. Couple that with the fact that its costs are dropping as the technology is maturing, and you should be hounding your telephone company for it right now."
and especially in light of my recent request to see testing results comparing CAP and DMT:
"Of the three, DMT is considered superior, offering better performance, more flexible bandwidth options and an easier implementation. For this reason, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) has adopted it as the standard for ADSL line coding.
However, some don't agree that DMT is better than CAP, so we
decided to include both in our tests. Although the modem units
used in our tests are early releases, all performed at exceptional
levels. Overall, we found that the DMT-based ADSL modems
were robust in signaling and were able to perform over longer
distances (up to 18,000 feet)."
Thanks again.
Best Regards,
Jim
P.S. I can hear the CAP supporters now, "the modems were early releases....just wait until the new CAP modems are delivered". However, I also remember CAP supporters talking about how Paradyne's chipset is in 3rd generation and so much ahead of DMT...
P.P.S. Is the absence of Westell notable? |
