HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rob@genrad.com (Robert S. Wood)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: T2500 ACUCAP
Date: 24 Jul 92 19:17:27 GMT
Organization: GenRad, Inc.


If you have an acucap for a Telebit T2500 modem, would you share it with me?
It seems the Trailblazer one distributed on my system does not work when
swapping a T2500 into the Trailblazer's place.

		rob@genrad.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: brenner@crab.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de (Martin Brenner)
Subject: Re: Supra problems & their BBS
Organization: TAT (Theoretical Astrophysics Tuebingen), U. of Tuebingen, FRG
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 10:46:23 GMT

barrett@aminet.uucp (Keith Barrett) writes:


>I have NEVER been able to connect to the Supra BBS, and I was
>hoping to get answers to the following questions (perhaps someone
>can post the answers for us here?):

>1) Why can't people connect to the Supra BBS? What settings would give
>you the best chance of connecting?

Supra claims it is because they have line noise on their line. They
suggest to use a lower bps rate for calling. Until they have a correct
working fallback in their ROM software, you should try
ATN0 S37=9 to try a 9600bps connection (or a lower S37 value for lower
bps rates). Supra promised to have the fallback fixed in their free ROM
upgrade.

>2) What are S registers S44, S49, and S50 for?

No idea... but one writer in the BBS said that S44, S49 and S50 are not
editible in the NOVRAM and result in an ERROR message. Probably they
are changed as the result of an AT command.

>3) When are the new PROMS shipping? How are they going to handle the board
>changes needed to address other problems?

The first announced date was mid July, now it is August, 1st. The ROMs
are automatically shipped to all registerd owners.

>4) I have the following problems -- are these being addressed:

>	1. Performing a ATZ use to drop DTR/DSR on the old Supra 2400,
>	   but doesn't on the new one. This made it easier for UNIX
>	   and UUCP users because a DTR drop or ATZ would cause a dataset
>	   disconnect - it no longer does. Please put this back!

This has been asked recently (7/28) in the bbs, but no reply was given.
Oh, well, just saw that it was YOU who asked that.. :-) well, I'll post
this followup anyway as a benifit for all other supra owners.

>	2. BUSY response is sooooo wrong it's not worth looking at. All of
>	   the BUSY problems have already been posted here by others.

I have read Supra knows about it and tries to improve it.

>	3. When the phone is never answered, the modem returns "NO CARRIER".
>	   It should return "NO ANSWER".

Is this a common feature with other modems? The way to check for no
answer is probably checking for a certain timeout period.

>	4. I cannot get a connect to a ZOOM V.32/.42bis modem. I've tried
>	   everything.

Perhaps try using the above method (setting the bps rate to 9600)

>	5. WHY CAN'T I CONNECT TO THE BBS?! You'd think they'd at least
>	   debug this before going public!

THis is the most asked question on their bbs.. They should really get a
better line.

Hope that helps,
-Martin
--
Martin Brenner, Institut f. Theoretische Astrophysik, Universitaet Tuebingen
brenner@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de    <Deepthought the Nightfall Sourcerer>
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:10867 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:20011
From: REC102@psuvm.psu.edu (BOB CONN)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: Gateway Telepaths shipping (long)
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:01:35 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

FYI:
Gateway can be reached via America On Line.  Their internet
address is GATEWAY@AOL.COM.  I just spoke with one of their
sysops (CYNDY LLOYD) who says she can handle most problems,
complaints, inquiries over internet.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: farzin@protocol.com (Farzin Guilak)
Subject: Problems with T1600 - T2500 communication
Organization: Protocol Systems, Incorporated
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:01:02 GMT

    I have had a lot of problems and only limited success in 
    getting a T1600 to communicate with a T2500.  The T2500
    is configured in its default mode.

    The T1600 differs from default in the following settings
    and registers (I'm including all differences for 
    completeness):

    &C2 - DCD Control. DCD always on except at disconnect.
    &D3 - DTR Interpretation. Reset when DTR switched off.
    
    S0=1    - Auto Answer.  Number of rings.
    S25=15  - DTR Delay Timing.  150 msec.
    S26=0   - RTS to CTS Delay Interval.
    S50=6   - Modulation Speed.  9600 Baud, V.32.
    S51=5   - DTE Interface Speed.  19200 bps.
    S58=2   - DTE Flow Control.  Full duplex RTS/CTS.
    S61=0   - Local Action on Break.  Go to command mode.
    S68=2   - DCE Flow Control.  Full duplex hardware flow control.
    S111=30 - File Transfer Protocol.  UUCP 'g' protocol.
    S180=3  - Error Control Request.  MNP

    
    I originally had S50=0 (for automatic speed determination),
    but this did not seem to work at all.  After changing it to
    S50=6 (9600, V.32), it works on one out four or five attempts.
    I talked with tech support at Telebit, and they suggested 
    setting error control for the T2500 (S95=2, S97=1, S106=1).
    However, these settings caused problems on the T2500 and were
    abandoned.

    Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Please email responses to:  farzin@protocol.com


--
farzin@protocol.com
(503) 526-4389
From: erik@pdnfido.fidonet.org (Erik VanRiper)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: USR DS Info needed
Date: 25 Jul 92 03:21:20 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: The Source for Source Pub Access Unix

In article <1992Jul24.150311.6932@tdb.uu.se> t88smb@tdb.uu.se (Martin Bergstroem) writes:
>I have finally decided to buy a new modem, and since I want to be able to use
>both HST and v32bis I have come to the conclusion that I should buy a USR 
>Dual Standard. However a few seconds of looking through ads left me with
>the impression that USR uses one name for a number of different options.
>Could someone please tell me what a HST,v32bis/v42bis 57600bps-capable USR
>Dual Standard modem is officially called?
>

Sure.  I have one.  That actual name on the modem is:

"Courier HST Dual Standard (tm) with ASL (tm)"

It does 16.8K in HST mode with another like-modem, 14.4 in V.32bis, V.32, 
V.42bis, V.42, and you can lock the DTE at 57.6K.

Dial 1-800-DIAL-USR for more info, or drop me a note, be glad to tell you
about it.

/* Erik */
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield)
Subject: Re: Using SLIP w/PEP on T1000
Organization: Morning Star Technologies
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 17:47:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.180417.9196@intrepid.com> vladimir@intrepid.intrepid.com (Vladimir Vukicevic) writes:
   I would like to use PEP for slip ... [but] ... it's ssslllooowww.
   If I connect using 2400 baud, it speeds up visibly.  What am I
   doing wrong?

Your SLIP probably doesn't do RFC-1144 "VJ" TCP header compression,
which would turn it into something that's commonly called CSLIP.  VJ
improves SLIP or PPP performance on any slow link, and it's
particularly helpful with PEP.  Without VJ, the minimal telnet packet
won't fit into a PEP micro-packet, so the whole line must be turned
around between your type-in and the character echo.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
Subject: Re: Serial and Parallel interface ??????
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 01:38:15 GMT

Thomas,

Get with the program.  A parallel port is just as, if not more demanding
to the resource of the CPU as a serial one.  If you want real SPEED at
the modem interface you are going to need something buffered, and/or a
little closer to the bus.  Actually in this case a SCSI device wouldn't
be such a bad idea.  Most SCSI controllers have a 50 pin connector on
the back already, and you could cable straight into the modem.  The
MODEMS are already driven with a couple of CPU's and buffers inside. 
Adding the SCSI logic shouldn't be a major hurdle.  Then the SCSI bus
controller could use mastering and say 32 bit (EISA) transfers to really
move the data with very slight CPU overhead.

Using a parallel port, and Programmed I/O There is no way you will
exceed 8MB/sec (8Mhz bus 1 byte at the time) HALF-DUPLEX.  That means
4MB/sec bi-directional, and in reality you can't even hope to move CLOSE
to 1 byte per clock accross the lower half of an ISA bus to the parallel
port.  Consider if it is comming from/ going to disk the disk is gonna
need the bus to get it in memory too, immediately halfing the bandwidth
before you start.
-- 
Keith Smith          uunet!ksmith!keith            5719 Archer Rd.
Digital Designs      BBS 1-919-423-4216            Hope Mills, NC 28348-2201
Somewhere in the Styx of North Carolina ...
From: nazim@cwis.unomaha.edu (The Unknown)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Infotel V.32bis Fax/Modem
Date: 31 Jul 92 19:31:58 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha


Hi,
stay away from Midwest Micro, those idiots don't know anything about the 
products they sell, besides they don't care about you after the product is
sold to you and the price is charged.
I bought a regular faxmodem from them, they told me that there is no restocking
fee and I can return the product with no question...
But that was before the purchase, I was not satisfied with modems speed and
return it, they charged me a restocking fee of %20 and when I called them they
just didn't care...

Once a guy in the net wrote me to stay away from Midwest Micro, I didn't
believe him, now I know better.

There are so many other Companies/Resellers, it's just not worth it to hassle
with Midwest...

Regards, Nazim.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: dms2@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Darewood Michael Steinhoff)
Subject: bbs or ftp for Telix ?
Originator: dms2@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 02:59:05 GMT

hello out there
         I'm looking for a bbs or ftp number to reach exis inc. or Telix.
if you can help me out it would be appreciated. thanks
mike
-- 
'it's 106 miles  to chicago,we got a full tank of gas,
half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses.'
'hit it'
-Jake and Elwood Blues                 please send email to dms2@csd4.uwm.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: johnson@tigger.jvnc.net (Steven L. Johnson)
Subject: Re: Why is my WB that slow in PEP-mode ?
Originator: johnson@tigger.jvnc.net
Organization: JvNCnet
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 19:37:13 GMT

kreed@telesys.tnet.com (Kevin W. Reed) writes:
>mccrate@netcom.com (Joe McCrate) writes:
>>john@jwt.UUCP (John Temples) writes:
>>>>Have to disable compression at all ( ATS190=0 ).
>>>>Then I have the same rates with either T2500 or WB.
>>>I would say it's more correct to set S191=6.
>                                       ^^^^
>>But in my Telebit manual there is no such register as S196.
>                                                       ^^^^
>Read Again....

...and S191 isn't in the manual either.  It's in the separate addendum.
"This register applies only to PEP connections when data compression is
enabled (S190 is not equal to 0)."

S190=1S191=7 allow both old PEP compression and V.42bis; prefer V.42bis.
S190=1S191=6 would disable old PEP compression but would allow V.42bis
             to other WB's.
S190=0       disables compression (s191 doesn't matter).

At least that's how I read it, and maybe that's what Joe said also.

-Steve
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:26:30 GMT
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI

In article <7274.2A6A7681@psycho.fidonet.org> Alan.Gilbertson@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Alan Gilbertson) writes:
>"Hayes?"  "Monopolistic?"  Are we talking about the same company?  They aren't even a Big League player in the modem market!  Patents are a fine and necessary part of protecting people who invent things from being ripped off by people who don't. There aren't exceptions just because a particular invention happens to be something *really useful*, even if it was *really obvious*, and even when it makes someone into "one of those big companies that everybody hates".

You have just described two reasons why people are against the Hayes
patent:

1. Hayes used to be a big-league modem maker.  Now they're being
upstaged by other companies, like Telebit and USR.  Instead of
innovating and producing a *better product* in order to beat their
competitors, like companies used to do, they decide to hire a bunch of
lawyers and sue the pants off all their competitors.  (Note that I am
not commenting, at least not yet, on whether or not the Hayes patent
is valid.)  So, instead of getting neat new technology, the industry
stagnates because the other companies either knuckle under to Hayes
and fork over the bucks, or face a huge lawsuit.  The smaller
companies, who can't afford to defend themselves against a big suit,
end up either going out of business or paying the bucks.

2. Part of the requirements for being granted a patent on an idea is
the provision that it be non-obvious to someone working in that field.
It's been shown that using a guard time to distinguish a control
sequence from data -- what the Hayes patent covers, I believe -- was
in use long before Hayes started using it.  Therefore, the patent
never should have been granted in the first place.

The debate is similar in many ways to the debate over software and
user-interface patents.  Should Apple be able to patent the
windows-and-menus IU?  Even though they stole it from Xerox?  And if
they can, should Ford be able to patent the steering wheel and
floor-mounted gearshift?  There is a very strong argument against
IU patents here; should companies be able to patent such basic
technology when the result would be making computers harder to use?

-- 
Marc Unangst                | Real men don't make backups.  Real men never
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | accidentally delete files that they're going
<backbone>!sharkey!mudos!mju| to need later.
From: lupe@ukw.uucp (Lupe Christoph)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Europe <---> US
Date: 23 Jul 92 08:57:28 GMT
Organization: cic

bertoldi@macondo.Princeton.EDU (Frank Bertoldi) writes:

>I will be moving to Paris this October, and want to buy
>a high speed modem to dial back into networks here in the
>US, and wonder what features I should pay attention to
>in a modem that can handle the lines from France (and later
>Germany) to the US.

>My brother just tried to call some modems in the US with
>his new Zyxel from Germany, and despite that the lines
>sound pretty good acoustically, the effective speed he got
>was more like 300 baud.
>What's the problem there?
>Does anyone have experience and advise? Thanks!

The major problem with interactive logins from this
sode of the pond is that you will most of the time
end upo using a *satellite* link. Such a link gives
you a round-trip delay in the order of 1 second.

If you use a modem with reliability mode on a bad line,
you can end up with the modems talking to another
with this delay until the block comes through OK.

For batch transfers, I recommend a Trailblazer, as PEP
can cope with this kind of delay better than MNP4
or V.42 (I heard, I only used PEP overseas myself,
not MNP4 or V42).

For interactive work, try to find out if you can
get a way to get a link on a cable for sure, or
find out if you can use an X.25 link. The PDNs
are linked with point-to-pont *cables*.
-- 
| ...!unido!ukw!lupe  (German EUNet, "bang")     |  Disclaimer:            |
| lupe@ukw.UUCP       (German EUNet, domain)     |  As I am self-employed, |
| suninfo!alanya!lupe (Sun Germany)              |  this *is* the opinion  |
| Res non sunt complicanda praeter necessitatem. |  of my employer.        |
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu)
Subject: Re: Question about BOCA 14.4k
Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:04:49 GMT

In article <4133@news.duke.edu> alan@acpub.duke.edu (Alan M. Gallatin) writes:
>Based on the collective experiences of three friends who own the Boca v.32bis
>modems, I'll try to correct the answers The Unknown <nazim@cwis.unomaha.edu>
>received from Boca as reported in article <nazim.712341629@cwis>:
>
>>        Yes, the Boca can distinguis between fax/data/voice...
>
>Er, uh, not really...  None of my panel has been able to get it to
>distinguish fax carrier from data.  Once it answers with one, it seems to
>be stubborn and not switch to the other.
>
>>        Yes, the Boca can operate in pulse and tone mode....
>
>Sure... atdt vs. atdp should do the trick...
>
>>        No, the Boca doesn't have a UART 16550 but it has a equivalent
>>        Chip from Boca-Technologies on board...
>
>True, it doesn't have a 16550 on board; however, the replacement chip did
>not permit it to get maximum throughput in a multitask environment as did
>a Zoom internal (with the built-in 16550).  The Boca chip, however,
>out performed an external v.32bis connected to a 16450.  Advice in this
>area:  either get an internal with a real 16550 or get an external and
>connect it to a 16550 port.

What is the advantage of the 16550A anyway. Using the BOCA I have been 
able to get 1650cps downloads using PC+ and DSZ. Under Windows 3.1
using Unicom it drops to about 1580-1620cps but I am not multitasking -
I am more interested in watching the xfer rate to see how it's going.
Would I be able to get that rate also and do something else.
>
>>What should I be aware of, if I buy this Faxmodem?, any suggestions for
>>a cheap place to order(buy)?.
>
>Best price I've ever seen is J&R Computer World (in New York) - they do
>mail order as well.  Internal goes for $229, external for about $260 or
>$270 if memory serves.  (I'm sure of that internal price).

Yes I paid $229 from J&R though I have seen someone say he saw it for $219.
Just make sure you have the latest ROMs which I think are 1.2. You can
get them by calling Boca if you can ever get through on their Tech Support
lines.
>
>From the scouting reports I've received, I chose not to buy the Boca since,
>despite some known problems, the Zoom seems a bit more reliable (and has
>the 16550) and is available for as little as $260, also from J&R.
>
>Good luck.
>-- 
> Alan M. Gallatin <alan@acpub.duke.edu>     |  The opinions contained in this
> Duke University School of Law; Durham, NC  |  post are statements of fact.


How unreliable is the Boca or how much better is the Zoom? I've seen
people say who bought it from egghead that they had to return it since it
was no good. 

Laurence Chiu
From: victor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (V Menayang)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: What exactly does this EPROM fix? (Re: PPI 1.14g EPROM available)
Date: 31 Jul 92 00:05:21 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


In article <1992Jul28.153502.18163@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> au141@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Amber M. Spillers) writes:
>
>In a previous article, schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) says:
>
>>Jesus Christ.
>>
>>ZyXEL bends over backwards to get new code in the hands of owners as
>>fast an humanly possible. Why do companies like PPI continue to play
>>such stupid games with owners of their products?
>>
>   I imagine it is an attemp to support the illusion of reliability, 90%
>of users willl belive you if you tell them nothing is wrong it must be
>something you are doing....  as noted before, after they realize you are
>not one of these users they give in and send you out the proms.  but it
>is better to have people say "I had a hard time setting up their modem"
>than people saying "their roms have bugs".  it shifts the blame.
>

Funny you should mention this.  That's exactly my impression
when I learned that PPI doesn't release the information about
fixes done in each EPROM upgrade. That way they can always
claim that an EPROM upgrade addresses any bugs you can come
up with.  About a month ago I wrote the following on 
comp.dcom.modems:

.>Date: 27 Jun 92 20:55:03 GMT
.>Subject: Re: Practical Peripherals 14.4k question...
.>Message-ID: <74808@ut-emx.uucp>
.>
.>
.>From a correspondence with a PPI's support person it is apparent
.>to me that it is against PPI's policy to release information
.>about the fixes contained in each EPROM release.
.>The only way to tell whether or not a problem is solved
.>by the new EPROM is to test it out.  Of course, you can configure
.>the modem in many different ways so that it's difficult to tell
.>whether the new EPROM doesn't fix the problem or the modem is
.>set incorrectly.




-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Menayang                     victor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 
=============================================================
From: Petty@ralvm29.VNET.IBM.COM (Jack Petty)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 12:47:16 EDT
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 3.0

In <9277.2A6E80B2@psycho.fidonet.org> Alan Gilbertson writes:
>In fact, Hayes' share of the modem market has increased over the years.
>
I am always interested in market share estimates:
1) What market are we talking about - the entire switched market,
                                      9600 and faster only,
                                      or perhaps both switched and
                                      non-switched modems?
2) Is the market share measured in revenue or in number of units shipped?
3) What company or individual did the study?
Jack Petty
From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V.32bis connection between T3000 and Codex-Motorola 3266
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:51:59 GMT
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

sanjay@saathi.ncst.ernet.in (Sanjay H Pathak) writes:

>We have a Codex-Motorola 3266 modem which can operate in V.32bis.  Our
>connection to Internet is thru UUNET Technologies. We have attempted
               ????????

I think you mean small 'i' interenet, don't you? That is the ability
to send mail to addresses on various networks.

>connecting this modem  in  the 4-wire leased line mode to a Telebit
>T3000 modem at the other end in V.32bis. From the LCD panel of our
>modem we have observed that while negotiating an error-correcting
>connection, our modem receives a retraining request from the T3000
>modem.  So both modems begin retraining, and the connection negotiation
>starts from the beginning. The retraining request is sent by the T3000
>even though it is disabled on the modem. This continues and the modems
>fail to establish a connection.

>The noise level on the line has been measured by our colleagues at UUNET
>and they feel that it is at a level that should not hamper both modems
>to establish a V.32bis connection.

>We request suggestions and/or ideas to make this V.32bis connection
>work.

I tried to get two Telebit T1600s to link from Kyoto to Florida and
they would only connect intermittantly and when they did the
throughput was on the order of 400 CPS. 

The solution was to use PEP between a T2500 here and another in
Massachusetts. Initally the throughput was only about 500 CPS
but after the undocumented registers were set for the line
conditions by trial and error it gets about 1,000 CPS.

In sum, I question whether v32bis is what you want....

Dave

--
Dave McLane 
JUNET: davidg@aegis.or.jp (ONLY within Japan: post otherwise)
Nagaokakyoshi, Kyoto Japan Tel: +81-75-951-1168 Fax: +81-75-957-1087