Re: TI-H: Okay I maybe overreacted
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: Okay I maybe overreacted
There are a variety of files at ticalc.org about the link protocol and
what actually traspsires during a link. Look in the technical reference
section...
Jan Zumwalt wrote:
>
> Could/would someone please tell me what transpires during a
> link. I would be interested in any information from generic to
> expert. Of special interest would be if it uses a proprietary
> protocol, bit rate (baud), how handshaking is accomplished, etc.
> Has anyone with a digital scope looked at it (I have only
> analog).
>
> Wow! I just thought of something after that last request. It
> should be simple to log the data because (no brainier) you are
> hooked to the parallel port. What I need then is to know what
> the protocol expects for handshaking. Then I could write a quick
> program to log the data. What puts the link into rx/Tx mode,
> etc.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Saturday, October 04, 1997 4:35 AM, Matthew H. Fogle
> [SMTP:cs239ac@chicoma.la.unm.edu] wrote:
> > Osma Suominen wrote: There's not much point in a RF or IR link
> that
> > needs its own driver to work.
> >
> > You see the problem though is to make a RF-link capable of
> working as
> > the normal link we must have two channels of radio that can
> both we
> > turned to TX and RX on the fly. This itself would need a
> driver I think
> > since we only have two data lines and the only way to change
> the RX TX
> > would be to control it via a line (I think). I suppose we
> could make a
> > tranciever that would auto switch like VOX or something. Maybe
> I should
> > look into that but I think that will cost far more to make and
> it might
> > already be on the expensive side for a pair. I'm working with
> one line
> > transmit and one line recieve now as this way we only need one
> > transmitter and one reciever each tuned to a different freq
> per calc. I
> > agree it would be good to be compatible with the normal link
> but that's
> > just very complex as far as I see it. The main problem with
> any RF-link
> > is the feedback we get for having a transmitter right next to
> a reciever
> > while both are working. We need to eliminate almost ALL noise
> emissions
> > to get it to work without errors.
> >
> > -=<Matt>=-
> >
--
''~``
( o o )
____.oooO__(_)__Oooo.__________
/ Jeremy Braun \
[ jtbraun@bellsouth.net ]
[ .oooO hoopy-frood@geocities.com]
[ ( ) Oooo. MHS, CCPSS ]
\__\ (____( )_________________/
\_) ) /
(_/
References: