there are pcncia cards for laptops that are rated for both standard landline dailup and cellular connections to certain phones, and they are listed as being 56k modems, that may only be for andline useage as you say gsm networks are limited to 9K6 data speed, but are seeminly trying to up that with a new system, that I've heard isn't working well for them at the moment, or that's what I've heard here in NZ anyway. cdma is a digital network, it stands for coded devisional multiple access, or something along those lines, it is replacing an older analogue system here in new zealand. At 10:43 AM 12/17/01 +0100, you wrote: > >I don't think so. Of course, I may be wrong. > >A mobile phone is constrained by technical limitations, that >are built-in the cellular network you are using. > >Current GSM networks, due to their architecture, cannot allow >you to have more than 9.6 Kbps of bandwidth -- this has nothing >to do with the type of transmission (digital or audio) but >with the speed of the GSM protocol itself. While I am not a >specialist of other (analog) cellular systems, I believe they >are even worse in this respect, since they do not have the >error checking and digital transmission GSM offers. > >More than that, but a "56" Kbps transmission depends on having >digital links (read: fiber optics) between your modem to the >other one. In short, it's an ugly kludge that takes advantage >of some possibilities of the telephone digital switiching >system to increase the available bandwidth. > >In some areas of the world, you'll never ever get 56 Kbps, since >the phone system is almost 100% copper wire and analog switches. >And even if your telephone system is all fiber optics and digital >switches, you'll never *exactly* get 56 Kbps: the best I can have >is about 50.xxx Kbps, and I am in an area which is almost pure >digital & fiber optics -- to the point that getting a DSL line >is a matter of days, not weeks. > >On GSM, again, you bump into the limitations of the GSM standard >itself: transmissions are limited to 9.6 Kbps -- period. Getting >an audio connection to go faster than this seems very dubious. > >Disclaimer: of course, everything I say here could be completely >wrong. In that case, I would be very, very, very interested in >getting one of these cards... Email and web access anywhere... >Oh, yes! <grin> > > >On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:26:42 -0500 (EST) >Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org> wrote: > >> Actually I believe there are cards that will let you use a mobile phone as an >> audio connection - in principle capable of giving you 56k... >> >> chaals >> > > >/-------------------------------------\ >| Gil Andre -- Technical Writer | >|Knox Software: http://www.arkeia.com | >| email: gandre@arkeia.com | >\-------------------------------------/ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Blinux-list@redhat.com >https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list > Dunedin, NZ Hm Ph: +64-03-4771633 mobile Ph: +64-027-4849896 Email: Blinky@earthlight.co.nz Fogsi461@student.otago.ac.nz