> Any other FXO card will look just like the present one. A winmodem is > nothing more or less than an FXO card. It deals with the line > signalling, and analogue conversion and leaves everything else up to the > software. In the case of a modem that "everything else" is mostly modem > DSP. In the case of an FXO it is routing and switching. The hardware is, > however, identical.
I call bullshit and you should know better -- You can match Part68 and still have an absolutely horrible interface. All Part68s aren't created equally, and IMO the X100P's is crap. > I think you are the zealot. You seem to have a kind of "if it isn't > custom made for my job it must be second rate" attitude. Not at all. Any of the channel banks I've tested have better echo and audio quality than the X100P. I believe it comes down to the Part68 interface being better able to accomodate different lines but YMMV. I have never had decent results with an X100P. All of the tricks and hacks you see on the wiki with it are proof that it's a substandard card, IMO. > What is wrong with it? It is a perfectly good FXO card. See above. > Well, a TDM400P is essentially just 4 winmodems plugged into a base board. Well their FXS interfaces first, but I'm not going to get into a semantics war with you -- I am positive that the FXO modules will also perform better than the X100P. I haven't had any issues with the FXS interfaces on the TDM400P -- the act just like any FXS channel bank I've used. Regards, Andrew _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users