How to access RAC Traffic Master from Virgin without going through the menus

hairydog:
>I don't need another (reason). It was utter drivel. You are spouting crap.
>It
>is not true. It is balderdash.

Well argued Sir !
Clearly you one of these superior people who already know everything.
There is no point bothering you with facts, or better still bothering with
you at all, full stop.
Plonk.
No regards,
Martin

---

› See More: How to access RAC Traffic Master from Virgin without going through the menus

deadmail:
>In any case VOIP doesn't use the GSM CODECs within the phone, does it?
>What have I misunderstood here?

Yes, you have. VoIP calls are transmitted over the internet using various
codecs (compression algorithms).
You can select which one to use, provided it is also available at the
receiving end.
One of them is GSM, same as used for mobile phones, this is particularly
'lossy', and uses least bandwidth.
However, as the packets on the internet are nearly always subject to some
delay, the sound you hear isn't quite continuous, the loss of some of the
sound gets more noticeable and your brain can't quite guess what is being
said. Often the conversation becomes impossible.
Other, less 'lossy' codecs, are much better allowing normal conversation,
but of course use more bandwidth.

Mobile phone networks are designed to carry GSM voice traffic with minimum
delay, allowing your brain to subconsciously make up for the loss. But you
would be aware it's not as good as std. telephone line.
Regards,
Martin

On Sat, 24 Dec 2005 02:09:24 -0000, "Martin²" <[email protected]> wrote:

>deadmail:
>>In any case VOIP doesn't use the GSM CODECs within the phone, does it?
>>What have I misunderstood here?
>
>Yes, you have. VoIP calls are transmitted over the internet using various
>codecs (compression algorithms).
>You can select which one to use, provided it is also available at the
>receiving end.
>One of them is GSM, same as used for mobile phones, this is particularly
>'lossy', and uses least bandwidth.
>However, as the packets on the internet are nearly always subject to some
>delay, the sound you hear isn't quite continuous, the loss of some of the
>sound gets more noticeable and your brain can't quite guess what is being
>said. Often the conversation becomes impossible.
>Other, less 'lossy' codecs, are much better allowing normal conversation,
>but of course use more bandwidth.
>
>Mobile phone networks are designed to carry GSM voice traffic with minimum
>delay, allowing your brain to subconsciously make up for the loss. But you
>would be aware it's not as good as std. telephone line.
>Regards,
>Martin


Sorry Martin, but I have to agree with the other poster in that is utter
cobblers.

VOIP does use various compression algorithms like G.711 and G.729 but it
most definitely does not use GSM (Global System for Mobile communications).
Some of these algorithms use very high compression which produce calls of
GSM-like quality, but usually this is only where bandwidth is limited.

True VOIP is currently only available on 3G devices running some sort of
client (like Skype) which can provide an always on broadband-like
connection.

As to your assertion that mobile networks are also designed with deliberate
"gaps" that your brain has to fill in...well I don't think I've ever heard
such nonsense. In telephony terms, the human audio range is considered to
be from about 3-3000Hz. When VOIP compression is used, this range is
considerably shortened to something like 250-2000Hz, meaning that any loss
in quality is not from the crucial mid-ranges, but the top an bottom, the
result is the "flat" tones that you get on VOIP and funnily enough ..GSM

VOIP is also particularly sensitive to packet loss and jitter, as well as
round-trip delay and if any of these criteria are exceeded, the VOIP link
normally drops.

Whilst I *know* what you have posted is erroneous, you have stated that you
have a source for you (mis)information.

Please be so kind to share those sources with the group.
--

Regards

John [Essex, UK]
Remove the obvious spamtrap to reply

JC:
>VOIP does use various compression algorithms like G.711 and G.729 but it
>most definitely does not use GSM ..

Yes it can and does. X-Lite and X-Pro have GSM codec, other software /
devices can use it too.
But in practice it's rarely used, because, as I already explained, on
internet / VOIP in doesn't work well.

> As to your assertion that mobile networks are also designed with
> deliberate
>"gaps" that your brain has to fill in..

That's NOT what I said ! Read it again.

GSM doesn't just lose frequency, it deliberately loses data / sound.
Researchers proved that human brain can manage without complete 'words',
and the GSM algororithm takes advantage of that.

As I said, this has been reported on TV science program way back when GSM
mobile phones were introduced. It was said that this 'lossy' codec
breakthrough will allow increased capacity of the mobile networks.
Regards,
Martin

On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 02:35:49 -0000, "Martin²" <[email protected]> wrote:

>GSM doesn't just lose frequency, it deliberately loses data / sound.
>Researchers proved that

Er, no. Researchers can never prove anything. They can only test a
hypothesis.

>human brain can manage without complete 'words',

Yes. If I call what you wrote b*llocks you get the message.

>and the GSM algororithm takes advantage of that.

No, that's not even nearly true. GSM compression is specifically
designed not to do that.

>As I said, this has been reported on TV science program way back when GSM
>mobile phones were introduced.

Ah, yes. A good source of information. For morons.

>It was said that this 'lossy' codec
>breakthrough will allow increased capacity of the mobile networks.

I'm sure this was said. Lots of drivel is said on television.

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 02:35:49 -0000, "Martin²" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> GSM doesn't just lose frequency, it deliberately loses data / sound.
>> Researchers proved that
>
> Er, no. Researchers can never prove anything. They can only test a
> hypothesis.
>
>> human brain can manage without complete 'words',
>
> Yes. If I call what you wrote b*llocks you get the message.
>
>> and the GSM algororithm takes advantage of that.
>
> No, that's not even nearly true. GSM compression is specifically
> designed not to do that.
>
>> As I said, this has been reported on TV science program way back
>> when GSM mobile phones were introduced.
>
> Ah, yes. A good source of information. For morons.

Merry Christmas to you too, you obnoxious twat.

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 11:26:06 GMT, "Paul D" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Merry Christmas to you too, you obnoxious twat.

Some people seem to find it hard to cope with facts. Why don't you get
back under your stone?

--

Iain
the out-of-date hairydog guide to mobile phones
http://www.hairydog.co.uk/cell1.html
Browse now while stocks last!