Re: another one bites the dust.

From: Jim Carlini <carlini_at_nwu.edu>
Date: Tue 04 Sep 2001 11:40:53 -0500

TERRELL MITCHELL <Terrell.Mitchell_at_bigfoot.com> WROTE:

>You are being way too hard. While you are correct there
>is a technical distinction, I have never heard or seen
>anyone treated as you described for making that mistake,
>UNLESS they claimed to be some type of communications
>expert. Casual users are not expected to know the
>difference. They only know what they read and hear. And
>for all practical purposes, the baud rate of a modem is
>how many bits per second it can send.

>This is a marketing mailing list not comp.dcom.modems !


You are absolutely right - it's not a technical discussion
group, but in reading so many comments here everyone (in
marketing) seems to "know" so much about network
communications especially when it comes to developing
their website, their network linkages and everything else
network-related.

They don't.

I pointed out a simple issue to help clarify the right
definition for non-technical marketing folk. Maybe now
you'll be able to pick out those "experts" (read that
"network salespeople") that are trying to sell you a
solution to see if they really know what they're talking
about. If you did - you wouldn't be buying off on some
of the bad solutions that they offer for your websites
and network connections.

And the definition that you put up is wrong - some textbooks
are wrong. Period.

BELL LABS ENGINEERING HANDBOOK---
The BAUD rate and the bit per second rate are a one-to-one
ratio up to 1200 BAUD (BAUD is the smallest discrete
signalling event that can be measured). A plain telephone
line (like the one you probably have) has a BAUD rate of
1200 (maximum) - the way you get more speed is to encode
more information bits per second - i.e. eight info. bits
per second times 1200 BAUD gets you 9600BPS, not BAUD.
BAUD is still 1200 on a telephone line.

BAUD and bits per second are NOT interchangeable.

Now most people will write in and say - who cares, too
technical - but then you're the same people that probably
signed network contracts and other agreements for your
websites and network carriers that may not have done
what you thought they were going to do.

And if you - as a "marketing person" - have never seen anyone
called on network issues, you haven't been to any of the
lawsuits regarding network failures as they relate to ISPs,
user connections into mission critical networks, or other
web site-related failures all tied to on-line "marketing
efforts".

Face it - you are not casual users - on-line marketing is
more technical and is intertwined by network services. The
more you know about about the network your E-Commerce
applications run on - the more successful you'll be.

I have seen both good and bad implementations of E-Commerce
applications. One common problem on the bad ones is the lack
of understanding of network concepts. People gloss over it -
until they have a failure.

Then, when they are called on it in a deposition - they start
reacting like Ralph Cramden "Hamna Hamna Hamna....."

My two cents. Now go back to talking about click thru rates
and residual branding created by banner ads.

Jim Carlini



Received on Tue Sep 04 2001 - 11:40:53 CDT