Cat6A pairs

Cool. What's the difference between source termination and series termination?

I'd like to know too. Series R?

Creepy Crawler is the self-declared expert. We'll wait for his explanation.

Oh absolutely. That's what I had in mind.

But source termination is obvious. It's series that makes me wonder, since the name implies an impedance mismatch.

I guess you never matched an antenna.

You lose.

You are the retard who used the term, DUMBFUCK!

You don't understand any of this, do you?

--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc

Precision electronic instrumentation Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators Custom timing and laser controllers Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

I wasn't bragging, dumbfuck. I was responding to a retard who made a retarded remark.

Just like I did here.

And yes, asswipe, all you do is brag.

DimBulb isn't even bright enough to use Google.

No he didn't. Not many folks were doing optical then, and most folks who went with the cheaper Arcnet did so over copper on a token ring configuration.

It eventually did utilize non-proprietary protocols, but they started out absolutely proprietary.

Note when I said I worked with it. Right at the start-up, in Cincinnati. Now ask him where some of the early development took place, and see if he is familiar with any of it being there.

Fuck off, retard boy.

TCNS IS what they ended up as, dumbfuck. Not that you could grasp such a concept.

So RS-485 is proprietary, AlwaysWrong?

How much floor sweeping can a startup have?

Which is irrelevant to your attempted goalpost shift, DimBulb.

You are not following very well.

The first answer line was about physical layers.

The second was about protocols.

The same way he posted his query, dumbfuck.

RS-485 is not a protocol, it is on the physical layer.

"Proprietary" refers to the protocol used.

You lose, again, K_Retard_W.

Oh, RS-485 isn't a physical layer, AlwaysWrong?

Did I say anything about protocols, AlwaysWrong?

DimBulb, it's you who isn't "following very well".

You were asked about the physical layer, Dimmie.

Always wrong, AlwaysWrong.

But it IS what the system I used had.

Unlike cable TV, however, it had a different purpose.

AND it is on the hardware (physical) layer.

You lose again, little boy.

I never made that contention either, idiot.

What I said was that the bare heater would heat a chamber faster than the encapsulated bulb would.

That is still true.

Never once said "more heat than".

Stew in your utter stupidity, dumbfuck.

Only three responses to one post, AlwaysWrong. Come on, I know you can do better than that!

Why not, if it emits less light than the bulb? Sure the light will be converted to heat eventually, but all energy is.

DimBulb doesn't believe that. That's why he's called DimBulb, BTW.

His remarks bolstered mine, idiot.