I see that the board has returned to its usual
speculation on when the next split might be (and we haven't
even gotten to the current split yet). Add the trips
down memory lane recalling the ASC and the candy
factory, and it makes one long for a return of
voice_of_reason and his thought-provoking theories of the
defensibility of the DSP market.
I feel better now. Digital Signal Processing is
still what I remember it to be, its just been made
faster with special hardware support and become more
usable to everyone with the developement of
sophisticated graphical user interface applications.
My understanding is that DSP is a microprocessor
that is hardware oriented toward "multiply-and-add"
instructions, as opposed to the "add" orientation of the x86
class product. So higher level functions like FFTs can
be significantly faster in a DSP
Bandwidth still does mean frequency limits, but it also
means information capacity. My grasp of this from a
radar background perspective is that frequency limits
control information capacity. The added component to the
definition is what I would call signal-to-noise ratio [SNR],
or competition to your desired signal from other
unwanted signals. There's plenty of information in normal
level speech, but not much information when a competing
loud sound obscures it.
Hope this helps, and
of course I'm open to better, more accurate
I am not a techie, but my understanding of DSPs
is that they are they used to be except the fact
that the big development has been in the development
of programming tools to write the applicattions
running on DSPs, and the libraries of functions
available. This is what is differentiating TXN from LU and
MOT and DGI. Moreover, this is where TXN is putting
most of their efforts. So, to build the fastest DSP is
important, but not as important as making the software tools
to make this DSP useable to write and run your
application asap. That's why I am very comfortable with the
long-term prpospects of TI.
I hope it
"bandwidth". I use to know what that term meant
but it seems now that everybody uses the term. Heck,
at work someone asked me if I had the "bandwidth" to
work on another problem. Boy I got irate. And of
course it caught on and now everyone asks everyone if
they have the bandwidth. I'm still not sure that
bandwidth is appropriate for talking about network data
rates(bits/second). To me bandwidth is a function of the frequency
content of a signal.
I know this is off topic but
I am bored...
I thought I knew what Digital Signal Processing
was, once, when I use to analyze signal using things
like FFT's etc. But I get the impression that DSP has
taken on a different meaning and TXN is the inventor of
that new meaning. I would just like to know what TXN
means when they use the term DSP.
That's a good question and exactly why a lot of
people in expanding areas can't more than 28.8K or 33K
best out of a 56K modem. Of course you don't find that
out until you try it at home or read the fine print
on your ISP's site if they even tell you. It's just
a matter of time but that's not totally technology,
it's the stupid phone company's willingness to push
I recently spoke to SBC about DSL for our company
internet hook up and was told that we were to far from the
switching station ----how will that type problem be solved
for homes and business connections.---We are having
to get a T1 line in the company.
DSL stands for Digital Suscriber Line, a digital
transmission method that utilizes your current phone lines and
supports both high speed digital data and customary phone
service simultaneously. Potentially, any home or business
that has phone service is a candidate for DSL
For the home or small business user, ADSL (Asymetric
DSL) is offered which provides higher speed in the
download direction. Since it is bidirectional it has an
advantage over cable which traditionally is one way using a
phone connection for the return path. So you still need
to tie up a phone line in addition to subscribing
cable. Once a cable company upgrades to bidirectional
service that advantage is lost. Then, conceivably the
cable company could also provide phone service as
It's too early to say (even for Cisco) which will
dominate in the future. More than likely both will
co-exist for many years.
TI manufactures chips for
ADSL and also participates in the cable market through
its recently acquired Libit Signal Processing Ltd.
The Founder of CISCO is on record this weekend
saying that digital signal lines (? processors) will win
out over cable in fast internet service.
stated thats why cisco has not bought any cable
I hope the real techies on this board will explain
the basis of this type of reasoning as it has
enormous implications for TI.