4 ms·
It might have something to do with the high fidelity voice calling having a reasonably large bandwidth that you could theoretically use as a data channel - many
by ormaaj 4y ago
It might have something to do with the high fidelity voice calling having a reasonably large bandwidth that you could theoretically use as a data channel - many times larger than an old v.92 modem. Maybe that's not so relevant these days with more people having unlimited data plans.
- eru 4y agoWhy would the phone manufacturer care? (And in any case, as you suggest most people pay more per bit transmitted on a mobile voice call than they pay per bit as data.) Purely for fun, it would be interesting to hack up two smart phones to transmit data over a voice call. Presumably, you can keep everything binary, if you control the end-points.
- kevin_thibedeau 4y agoThat's how SMS works. It's running a baseband modem over the voice channel.
- lxgr 4y agoSMS is transmitted over digital signaling or transport channels. There was never any analog coding involved (except for a few retrofitted implementations on landlines in Europe).
- lxgr 4y agoThat would give you a 128 kbit/s channel under absolute ideal conditions (the maximum bandwidth supported by the EVS codec). Practically, you‘d be better off using a throttled (after exceeding the included data volume) native data connection.
- ormaaj 4y agoI see. Yeah pretty terrible.