Talk:Serial communication

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Networking (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Networking task force (marked as High-importance).
 

I am proposing to make ATM a subsection under "Packet-based communications", as I think it's useful to compare the general concepts for TDM and packet-based. Each of these would list and link to the corresponding articles: T-1, E-1, SONET, etc. for TDM, and Ethernet, Frame Relay, ATM, X.25, etc. for packet-based. Is this the appropriate article for this?Bert490 04:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

ATM networks has nothing to do with serial communication, which is a physical layer issue. I have removed it as well as TDM.
Packet mode communication or packet oriented communication is an alternative name to your article. What you suggest is also described in statistical multiplexing, asynchronous communication and packet switched communication. Mange01 21:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

There's a page for serial port and one for serial communications. There's one for parallel port, but none for parallel communications, which redirects to parallel port. IMO it would be best to combine the first two and turn one into a redirect, but I'm not sure and I'm not necessarily knowledgeable enough to do it. Any comments? Fpahl 14:51, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. Serial communications is much more broad, and doesn't necessarily involve a serial port. Also, many kinds of serial communications ports are not called "serial" ports, but are given more appropriate names like "Ethernet" ports. --Rick Sidwell 2 July 2005 00:20 (UTC)
I've got to second that disagreement:- Serial Communications are a pretty broad concept, used in all manner of places. On the other hand, a serial port is a computer connector (and associated bits). To draw an analogy, we wouldn't merge USB with serial communications even though USB is a method of serial communications. If anything, parallel communications needs a writeup. Mike1024 (talk/contribs) 23:36, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I created a parallel communications stub. Bushing 07:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this an RS232 or a serial communications page? I propose that RS232C stuff be moved to its own page. At least, right before "COMMON BAUD RATES" make a section that delves into RS232.

Like RS-232? --IanOsgood 18:19, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


Frame-based vs. stream-based[edit]

Hi. I came here looking for information on frame-based (is this packet-based?) vs. stream-based, and didn't see anything. If I knew anything, I'd write it in, but I don't. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.80.157.192 (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Merge[edit]

Serial communication and serial transmission should be merged, like parallel? Djmr (talk) 14:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Serial transmission is a 2-sentence stub anyway with only a few links to it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:38, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

'Bold text'''''''Bold text''''Bold text''''Bold text''''Bold text'Bold text'''''''''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.242.94 (talk) 20:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Underlying "physical layer" specification?[edit]

Both specifications documents for IEEE1394 and USB call out the same underlying serial communications physical layer but the standards have different packet formatting. Both specifications are not public per se but one can find copies. I would like to reference the physical layer but can't locate my spec sheets right now. Shjacks45 (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

"Bit jitter"[edit]

The reference to clock skew in serial vs parallel isn't quite right. In fact "bit jitter" is addressed in the USB 3.0 Standard, it is an issue with any synchronous communications over wire. Bit jitter refers to the fact that although electrons travel at "the speed of light" over a wire, the speed at which higher frequency (or more rapidly changing signals) is slower than lower frequency signals. This "velocity factor" is used in designing RF circuitry (e.g. antennas and transmission lines). A Parallel example would be output from a counter: the LSB changes rapidly but the MSB changes slowly, if the data is sync'ed to the counter clock, the MSB data arrives earlier than the LSB signal. Circuit board traces, twisted pairs in cables, act as transmission lines (used as delay lines) also introducing delays. Of course one of the examples of serial (narrow bus) being "better" than parallel is the infamous RAMBUS memory, holding that 16-bit wide memory can be reliably clocked at higher speed than 128-bit wide dual channel RAM. Shjacks45 (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2013 (UTC)