On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:46:32 -0700, Tim Smith wrote
(in article <reply_in_group-693D12.21463218062007@news.supernews.com>):

> In article <137en4cr4233399@corp.supernews.com>,
> Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote:
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <0001HW.C29C4BB80102FD3AF0182648@news.comcast.net> ,
>>> George Graves <gmgraves2@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.msbtech.com/products/iLinkDetail.php
>>>
>>> It's kind of hard to take seriously an audio company that talks about
>>> "sign waves"!
>>>
>>
>>
>> Why? Sine wave = analog data. It's what your mouth makes when it
>> talks, and what your ears hear when you listen. Try less of the former
>> and more of the latter.
>
> Yes, that's a "sine" wave. But they talk about "sign" waves. When a
> company misspells the name of a fundamental area of their field, that
> does not instill confidence, and sine waves are a fundamental part of
> audio. (Yes, the pun in the previous sentence was intentional).
>
>
>

Well, they're a small company and whoever wrote that is probably not a writer
by trade and possibly no one proof read it afterwards. Anyway, I'd be more
interested in the accuracy of what they SAID about the "sign" wave than I
would be about how they spelled it.