I hate downvotes. I usually upvote when I think someone has been unfairly downvoted. I veryrarely downvote, and yet I was one of your downvoters.
It's clear that you're "ignorant" of the black magic involved in high speed communication. I felt that your post amounted to "I don't understand this stuff ... therefore it is probably a scam".
As others have pointed out to you, at high enough speeds things become very analog instead of digital. You can literally fit entire Ethernet packets into a twisted pair cable. Packets can be short enough that they exist completely "in the wire". That's a lot different than what a "premium audiophile cable" does.
If you ever want to learn just how much "black magic" there is, read Howard Johnson's books.[1] The information is somewhat dated, nowadays things are even weirder.
It's clear that you're "ignorant" of the black magic involved in high speed communication. I felt that your post amounted to "I don't understand this stuff ... therefore it is probably a scam".
"ignorant"? That's really jumping to conclusions...
I've worked with DDR, DDR2, PCI, PCIe, and USB (2.0 only, but that's still 480MHz), in mass-produced designs. Also some proprietary busses operating in the 600-800MHz range. It doesn't have to be perfect. That is what is so great about digital signaling.
My post is more of a "I know from experience how much you can get away with, and fancy test equipment that can tell the difference does not always reflect how something performs in practice."
On the other hand, I won't comment on high-frequency true analogue stuff like microwave/RF.
It is a bit funny that your verdict is that someone is "ignorant" of the black magic in high speed communication, and you're linking to someone who literally has called two of his books "Black Magic".
Now I don't happen to agree with 'userbinator's skepticism -- indeed I think that a lot of engineers who work with digital stuff tend to forget that it is analog under the hood, with all the associated crosstalk and BER problems. But creating this atmosphere of "Ooooooh, it is something you probably don't understand" isn't very productive, if you know what I mean. I wish Johnson had titled his books, "High-Speed Digital Design: Quite Simple If You Do the Math and Physics".
I see the point that you and 'uberbinator' were making; "ignorant" was a poor choice of words on my part.
I intentionally used the words "black magic" because I was going to link to Johnson's books. While Johnson's publisher (not Johnson) probably named the books, I like the titles. The words you suggest may be more appropriate but the actual titles are definitely "catchier".
Comments
I hate downvotes. I usually upvote when I think someone has been unfairly downvoted. I very rarely downvote, and yet I was one of your downvoters.
It's clear that you're "ignorant" of the black magic involved in high speed communication. I felt that your post amounted to "I don't understand this stuff ... therefore it is probably a scam".
As others have pointed out to you, at high enough speeds things become very analog instead of digital. You can literally fit entire Ethernet packets into a twisted pair cable. Packets can be short enough that they exist completely "in the wire". That's a lot different than what a "premium audiophile cable" does.
If you ever want to learn just how much "black magic" there is, read Howard Johnson's books.[1] The information is somewhat dated, nowadays things are even weirder.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Johnson_%28electrical_e...
It's clear that you're "ignorant" of the black magic involved in high speed communication. I felt that your post amounted to "I don't understand this stuff ... therefore it is probably a scam".
"ignorant"? That's really jumping to conclusions...
I've worked with DDR, DDR2, PCI, PCIe, and USB (2.0 only, but that's still 480MHz), in mass-produced designs. Also some proprietary busses operating in the 600-800MHz range. It doesn't have to be perfect. That is what is so great about digital signaling.
My post is more of a "I know from experience how much you can get away with, and fancy test equipment that can tell the difference does not always reflect how something performs in practice."
On the other hand, I won't comment on high-frequency true analogue stuff like microwave/RF.
I see the point that you and 'parennoob' are making. The word "ignorant" was a poor choice on my part.
It is a bit funny that your verdict is that someone is "ignorant" of the black magic in high speed communication, and you're linking to someone who literally has called two of his books "Black Magic".
Now I don't happen to agree with 'userbinator's skepticism -- indeed I think that a lot of engineers who work with digital stuff tend to forget that it is analog under the hood, with all the associated crosstalk and BER problems. But creating this atmosphere of "Ooooooh, it is something you probably don't understand" isn't very productive, if you know what I mean. I wish Johnson had titled his books, "High-Speed Digital Design: Quite Simple If You Do the Math and Physics".
I see the point that you and 'uberbinator' were making; "ignorant" was a poor choice of words on my part.
I intentionally used the words "black magic" because I was going to link to Johnson's books. While Johnson's publisher (not Johnson) probably named the books, I like the titles. The words you suggest may be more appropriate but the actual titles are definitely "catchier".