You dont see the artifacting then?
It can never be better than analoge because it has a d/a and a/d converters and the transmiter and receiver then it just goes in the same analoge socket my phone would go in.
Yea they are cheap and also easy to set up an exchange with, but a bit like comparing wireless to wired LAN, wired is best.
I once tried my *expensivish* phone in the analoge port of my old T/A and I can say its a pitty we cant have a fully digital phone network:(
Thanks to all who replied to my question. You'll be pleased to know that I got it fixed :)
The discovery of the actual problem was purely chance. I was opening the extension socket box for about the fourth time to check my connections when the pin 3 wire(orange with white stripes) popped out - but not at the connection. Looks like the wire had severed at the point where the outer sheath of the telephone stopped but the point of breakage was just enough inside the sheath to hold the wire in there so you couldn't see that it had snapped.
Stripped the wires back and reconnected...sorted!
Thanks again. Ronnie
Analogue has artefacts too (non-linearity, diff. phase and gain errors, PAL cross colour, etc., etc.). I find I rarely notice MPEG artefacts, but find almost all off-air analogue TV pictures look slightly noisy now. I'm firmly in the digital's miles better camp, but others will disagree.
[DECT]The comparison was with analogue cordless phones. The noise and distortion introduced by the DECT codec is much less than that introduced by the analogue radio link in the older systems. DECT is a really good system.
I'm not quite clear what you mean. I frequently record off the phone line, and a DECT phone sounds pretty much the same as any other good hardwired one. BT restrict the bandwidth at 'their' end.
Aspect ratio apart, most would be hard pressed to say which was which, assuming good reception.
You don't see the PAL footprint?
I don't watch fitba so the most common one is of no interest. If you are comparing overall picture quality Freeview is superior to analogue.
It can (and often is) considerably better in that the opportunity to do some nice signal processing exists and has low implementation costs. Whilst one could do similar on a POTS phone (and a few do) it would make it more expensive.
The PABX is a hard wired ISDN one :-)
The comparison is invalid. There are numerous technical and security differences between wired and wireless networks. No such differences exist between DECT and POTS (except that DECT has a considerable amount of call management capability which POTS by itself does not).
We have, at least to the handset. The Siemens DECT are ISDN, the Phillips and Panasonic DECT use analogue POTS extensions. There is no noticeable difference between them.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.