Re: Does more bits-per-character but less characters-per-second make better use of bandwidth?

in

I bet Radium is thinking bit maps (like a TV) but the others seem to be thinking ASCII (like computer people). One question. When you're in the word processor and change the typeface, does it change the data of the text?

GG

No. Changing the typeface does not change the text data. No offense but why does you ask and how is it relevant to my question below?

Would "more bits-per-character but less characters-per-second" use less bandwidth than "less bits-per-character but more characters-per-second"?

Okay. So when you say 'character', you're talking about whatever number of bits you can transmit at once, using multilevel signalling, is that right?

The usual use of 'character' means some logically-defined grouping of bits, e.g. an 8-bit byte, which is not related to any particular signalling scheme.

So with that understanding, your question can (I take it) be rephrased, "does multilevel signalling save bandwidth?"

The answer is, "Yes, if you have enough SNR."

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Well, you have a _lloonngg_ history of nonsense questions. See? More bits per character.

GG