Re: TI-H: radio link...what's stopping us?
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: radio link...what's stopping us?
----- Original Message -----
From: David Knaack <dknaack@geocities.com>
To: <ti-hardware@lists.ticalc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 4:17 PM
Subject: Re: TI-H: radio link...what's stopping us?
>
>From: Alex <tihardware@gmx.net>
>>Who would design [a radio link requiring software]?
>>The only logical one
>>is just simply taking the stuff from the port and transmitting it.
>>The software one would be 1. more complex 2. useless
>
>
>Not necessarily true in either case. If one were to find an
>integrated transmitter/receiver that would work except
>required input different than the TI-Protocol (I2C for example),
>it might be simpler to use it instead of designing a new transmitter/
>receiver pair, even if that use required software to drive the port.
>
>Any type of functioning radio link would not be useless, although
>it could be inconvenient.
>
>>so I think you must fu**in stupid to if you build a software one.
>
>Not necessarily, there would be nothing wrong with building an
>application specific radio link that required software to drive it,
>particularly if the software could transmit at a higher data rate
>than the TI-protocol (which wouldn't be particularly suprising,
>TI-protocol isn't all that fast). It just wouldn't be as convenient to
>as many people.
If that protocol was faster, it would be limited by the fact that you have
to write the data through the ti protocol to the controller that used the
transmitter. In fact, unless the controller was just an interpretter, it
would be slowed down in fact becasue you would have to send it commands and
such
>DK
>
>
Follow-Ups: