HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jtt@tct.com (John Tombs)
Subject: Re: Gateway Telepath Modem
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:06:26 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

In article <1992Jul23.055446.24750@ssc.wa.com> tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) writes:
>
>What is NEUTRAL?  Phone lines have a Tip lead and a Ring lead.  Ring is
>negative with respect to Tip.  The line has 48 vdc on it when idle.
>
>What is this "voltage across neutral" that "the vast majority of home
>lines" have?
>

I think he means common mode: a voltage (DC or AC) with respect to local
ground which is _common_ to Tip and Ring.

I measured a 60Hz 10V peak-to-peak common mode voltage across my phone
lines the other day while trying to troubleshoot a modem - much larger
than the audio signal.

-- 
John Tombs at Teltronics/TCT        <jtt@tct.com>,     <uunet!myrddin!tct!jtt>
                     Real Modem Users Do It Internally.
From: H.Koepke@hkhh.hanse.de (Holger Koepke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V.32(bis)-pocket-modem(DC-power-supply)?
Date: 30 Jul 92 05:37:10 GMT
Organization: Goblin Research

dirksch@rama.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Dirk Schlossmacher) writes:

>Did anybody see or is currently developing a V.32(bis)-modem for
>mobile use??
>Possibly there is one to integrate in a notebook, and to be passed
>by the german TELEKOM for their stupid FTZ/ZZF-Number?

>Please give me a hint!!

Have a look on the WorldPort 9600/V.2 Modem. It is pocketsized, batterie-
powered and able to be used with optional acustic-cups.

>Thanks 
>Dirk
--
Disclaimer: Expressed opinions are mine and not necessarily those of MMS GmbH.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Holger Koepke         |      U.S.Robotics -    |   tel.: +49 40 211591    *
* Eissendorfer Str.43   |        WorldPort       |   fax : +49 40 211598    *
* W-2100 Hamburg 90     |      Distribution      |   H.Koepke@mms2.rmi.de   * 
* Fed. Rep. of Germany  | MMS communication GmbH |   H.Koepke@hkhh.hanse.de *
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve_Gale@transarc.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Telebits in Israel
Date: 22 Jul 92 04:26:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: transarc.UePJECE00k00F3EW8L
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Are any Telebit modems approved for use in Israel?

Thanks,
Steve Gale
gale@transarc.com
From: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Date: 25 Jul 92 14:59:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 

 > I believe the Constitution of the United States of America, which
 > grants the Federal Government the duty to manage patents, says
 > something like "to promote the progress of science".

COrrect -- the full text is:

      "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing
for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to
their respective writings and discoveries;"

Best regards,
John
                                                                                         
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,can.uucp
From: res@colnet.cmhnet.org (Rob Stampfli)
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' vs. MNP & V.42
Organization: Little to None
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 16:18:54 GMT

>Anybody running MNP at any level with UUCP 'g' should have their modem
>and UUCP configurations examined!  :-)

Perhaps, but it can be made to work fine.  I originally experienced
problems with throughput on uucp-g with MNP enabled.  I saw 500-600 cps
throughput as opposed to 700 cps on a straight connection.  Experimenting
revealed that the bottleneck was the uucp window size of 3.  Increasing
this to 7 resulted in a throughput increase to ~850 cps, independent of
whether a straight, MNP or v.42 connection was made.

I now turn off reliable mode when originating a uucp connect, but allow
whatever the other end wants to establish when accepting one, and it
doesn't seem to make any difference.  Note that the numbers mentioned
above are for v.32 (not bis), and for precompressed news batches.  If
I were sending a significant amount of compressible data, I would expect
MNP5 or v.42bis to be a win, even though the uucp-g ACKS and the reliable
mode packetizing might interact with each other to increase overall delays
to some extent.
-- 
Rob Stampfli  rob@colnet.cmhnet.org      The neat thing about standards:
614-864-9377  HAM RADIO: kd8wk@n8jyv.oh  There are so many to choose from.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: richard@bnr.ca (Richard A. Dault)
Subject: Re: 14,400 bps:  Does any comm software support it?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ontario, Canada
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:23:53 GMT

In article <csjohn.711865104@knuth> csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu (Bullwinkle) writes:
>
>I will be getting a 14,400 bps v.32/v.32bis/v.42/v.42bis
>fax/modem soon.  I have noticed that on all of the MSDOS
>and OS/2 communications software that I have seen there is
>no setting for 14,400 bps, although there is for 9600 bps and
>19,200 bps.   Is there any way to access the 14,400 bps
>speed, or am I stuck at 9600 bps for now?  Is there any software
>out there that supports 14,400 bps?  Thanks. 

No communication programs have a 14.4K baud setting.

You set the comm speed to 19.2K baud for regular communication, or you set
it to 38.2K baud when using data compression.  I always set mine to 38.2K
baud and when calling somewhere and the 'auto-detect' will slow it down if
necessary.
I use telix 3.15, you can set the comm speed to 38.2K baud.

>John Wallace
>csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu 
-- 
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
 Richard Dault                     2A CS/EEE Co-op University of Waterloo
 Work:  encrypt2@x400gate.bnr.ca   Univ:  rdault@descartes.waterloo.edu
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- My opinions are my own. -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
From: prashant@ca.merl.com (Prashant Avashia)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Cordless Modems
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:59:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Sunnyvale, CA.


I have been "stumped" with this unusual query.

Someone uses a generic modem (2400 baud) to link up his home PC to our
workstations at the office. However, the individual has a phone jack in his
KITCHEN only. He connects the PC to modem, using the serial ports (RS-232C)
and then the modem line to the phone jack on the kitchen wall.

Fairly standard setup, however, he does not like working in his kitchen!!!

As a simple alternative, a long RJ11c to RJ11c extension cord of about 50
to 75 ft could allow him to move his PC to a different room, however the
individual does not like long cords!!!!

Now, I am in search for a modem that is built like a cordless
telephone.

I am thinking that it has a "base unit" hooked to the kitchen wall
and the "portable unit" hooked to the modem (connected to the PC)
maybe in another room. I know, it could be expensive compared to the
75ft extension cord, but that does not matter to this individual.

Does anything such as a cordless modem exist, or is it the end of my
options on this issue.

Thanks to everyone. My apologies in advance, if this posting is posted
to incorrect newsgroups.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prashant Avashia
Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories Inc..
E-Mail: prashant@ca.merl.com, [or], prashant@mela.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Subject: Gateway Telepath (was Re: **Info on 14.4 kbaud mode)
Reply-To: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 03:26:37 GMT


In a previous article, john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) says:

>
> > I am interested in learning what is the best 14.4 kbaud modem
> > around right now.  And for the best price.  I have heard things
> > about Gateway and Supra, but I am not sure what is the one most
> > worth it.
>
>The Gateway Telepath is known to be buggy.

With all due respect, the new "redesigned" Telepaths work
rather well.  I have seen a number of modems based on the
Rockwell RC144AC chipset, and the new Telepaths are amongst
the best ones.  The original Telepath was rather a dud
though.  We have two of the new modems, and they have been
performing flawlessly, connecting to every V.32bis modem
that we have thrown at them.  Sending and receiving faxes
from 3 different fax-machines (admittedly a poor sample)
has also worked without problems.

Ashok
-- 
  Ashok A. Aiyar   Department of Biochemistry   CWRU Med. School
   		       axa12@po.cwru.edu
		   aiyar@cwbio.bioc.cwru.edu
                Visit the IBM-PC Sig on Freenet
From: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Intex Satisfaxtion 400x d
Date: 25 Jul 92 16:02:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Transfer Station BBS, Danville, CA - 510-837-4610/837-5591
Reply-To: john.navas@uttsbbs.uucp (John Navas) 

 > I'm attracted by the Intel Satisfaxtion 400 modems feature and
 > company-wise.  I normally prefer external modems but in this case,
 > the internal one has a number o features lacking in the external
 > model. Does anyone know if these are firmware differences likely
 > (or possible) to be upgraded by a firmware revision (which can be
 > downloaded into the Intel since it uses flash-ram) or are they
 > permanent differences due to the hardware. Any insight as to why
 > the differences exist except in cases where the bus presence of the
 > internal is inherent to the feature (the 16550 UART emulation, for
 > example).

The 400 and 400e are completely different in design.  Note that the
SatisFAXtion 400 does not use Flash RAM, so the firmware has to be
downloaded each time you boot your system.  Note also that Intel only
supports DOS to download the firmware!  For that reason, the poor
support I've received, and a number of annoying problems, I just
decided to return my 400.  You may have better luck with the 400e.

Best regards,
John
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: 18 Jul 92 17:37 MDT
Subject: Re: Has anyone used a 8250 UART w/ a 14
Nf-ID: #R:BrH8wD.7oJ@news.cso.uiuc.edu:-1754616284:1992Jul18.133743.3523@qiclab.scn:-180664497:001:771
Nf-From: qiclab.scn.rain.com!leonard    Jul 18 17:37:00 1992


mingmar@cs.mcgill.ca (Ming MAR) writes:

>I am using an 8250 uart with my v.32bis v.42bis modem.  I'm using
>ProComm+ at a DTE speed of 19200 baud.  I'm using an 8-MHz XT and
>I don't have any problems.
> 
>You realize, of course, that if you get yourself an NS16550AFN
>uart, you'll have to use some software to enable the FIFO buffer.

Actually, you need to run software that can handle the buffer *itself*.
I ran a program that *couldn't* and had the buffer active. It was
pretty ugly. :-)

Oh yeah, Procomm+ recognizes and uses the 16550A chips.

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/56	 Leonard.Erickson@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: ged@phantom.cs.hut.fi (Camillo S{rs)
Subject: Supra V1.200-C commands
Reply-To: Camillo.Sars@hut.fi
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 17:39:27 GMT

Could anyone mail me a brief summary of the most important commands in
the leaflet describing ROM v1.200-C? Apparently I was among the first
ones to get this version, and my leaflet doesn't mention %G...

--
ged@hut.fi                   Amiga 500 //
ged@niksula.cs.hut.fi             2.04// Aim for the impossible and you
Department of Computer Science    \\ //   will achieve the improbable.
Helsinki University of Technology  \X/     --- Camillo S{rs
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: Jonathan A. Duke <jonathan@hermes.bc.edu>
Subject: Flow Control LED flashes?
Organization: Boston College
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:06:40 GMT

I have a Zoom VFX v.32bis modem and I've just noticed that
on an upload of data (not typing text, but a ZModem xfer),
the FC (Flow Control) LED will flash in time to the blocks
sent (or thereabouts).

I can't seem to find anything in the manual about this.

I am set for HWHS and on receipt of a file the LED does not
flash.

Suggestions?  Ideas?  INIT strings?

BTW, this modem is connected to Mac IIci (no snickers in the
peanut gallery, please).


Thanks,
Jon
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: stefan@norlin.se (Stefan Norlin)
Subject: Re: Dallas Fax Financial Problems?
Organization: Norlin Data AB
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 22:29:34 GMT

jimv@hienergy.Eng.Sun.COM (Jim Vienneau  - Sun Microsystems) writes:

>In article <1992Jul18.000713.104@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> z_kupkams@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>>Is Dallas Fax having financial difficulties? I noticed that they do not have an
>>Anyone have any info?
>I had to have American Express chase them for my refund. Amex gave me credit
>for it, but I think they are still chasing Dallas Fax for it. I was glad
>I saved the UPS receipt! From my dealings with Dallas Fax, my feeling is
>they are a garage shop that contracted with some board stuffing house to
>build them were not prepared for the volume of orders they received. Their 
>modem had/has problems, their BBS stinks, and their tech support is minimal. I 
>would not be surprised to see them chapter 11 in the near future, then what's 
>that lifetime warranty worth?

I think you are just a bit unfair, since my experiences with companies
in the US is that tech support often sucks and BBS:es are often in bad
shape or quite useless.

We distribute D Fax' modems in Sweden and so far we have had no problems
with them although our clients use them in all kinds of applications.
One thing that we noticed with one modem that went stone-dead (I think
e are not the first to have this experience) was that there were "cold-
solderings". After heating'em up and letting them cool off, the modem
worked perfect... So they being under pressure might show sometimes
but generally I think they are doing OK.

Though their tech support phone line is often busy, if you have access
to a fax, you will receive your answer without too much waiting.

I think their problem is too quick expansion, not too little money.


Stefan Norlin

-- 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* PSN-Data, Stefan Norlin          *                                          *
* Box 9022, 121 09 JOHANNESHOV     *   Nothing compares to a good ..ck!       *
* SWEDEN                           *   hack,fsck,...                          *
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mac1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mubashir Cheema)
Subject: Supra V.32bis Faxmodems for $265 only
Summary: Supra
Keywords: Supra V.32
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:57:40 GMT


  

 Hello World,
             I still have some of the Supra V.32bis Faxmodems left
 These are all brand new, shrink-wrapped and come with latest ROM 1.200C

  Model #     : SUPFAXV32BIS
  Description : SupraFaxModem V.32bis
  Type        : External
  Speed       : 14,400bps data (upto 57000bps with data compression)
  Fax         : 14,400bps send/receive fax
  errors      : MNP-5 V.32bis
  other       :
                non-volatile memory; autoanswer/autodial (tone or pulse); 
                extended AT commands and result codes; includes diagnostics, 
                phone jacks, cable and subscriptions to free online services.
                5 year warranty.

  Asking : $265 + $7 (S&H)
   
     I also have few with WinFax software for Windows
     Can be had for another $25
     Thanx alot for dropping in.

Mubashir
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mubashir Cheema: Computer Engineering student at Mississippi State University.
Amiga User and Star Trek Fan (me too :)
I can be reached at Fax/phone : (601) 324-7324 
Internet : mac1@ra.msstate.edu          Bitnet   : mac1@msstate.bitnet
US mail  : PO Box 4887, MSU             UPS/FedEx: 144 College Station Appts
           MS State, MS 39762-4887                 Starkville, MS 39759 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: 18 Jul 92 17:42 MDT
Subject: Re: Why not PEP over cellular?
Nf-ID: #R:BOB.92Jul17141605@volitans.morni:-1007531751:1992Jul18.134221.3638@qiclab.scn:2066605635:001:1707
Nf-From: qiclab.scn.rain.com!leonard    Jul 18 17:42:00 1992


bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield) writes:

>In article <clemon.08f0@lemsys.UUCP> clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:
>   Generally it is accepted, however, that when trying to carry on a
>   high-speed data connection via cellular, you will have the sense to
>   stop driving :-).

>Why would I want to restrict myself to not driving while my connection
>is open?  After I conduct my interactive business and hit the road,
>there may still be a long FTP transfer or source tree rdist or NNTP
>update (often all the above, simultaneously) that don't require my
>attention.  I can pitch my SPARCbook in the other seat, with its disk
>and modem still grinding away, and forget about it.  After my notebook
>and the office server are in sync and the traffic dies down, the PPP
>link will idle out and hang up the cell call.  And shortly after that,
>the SPARCbook will shut itself down to conserve its batteries (unless
>I have it plugged into the car's power bus, which Mazda has cleverly
>camouflaged as a cigarette lighter socket :-).

Perhaps you will want to stop because driving is equivalent to *really*
trashing the bandwith. Things like dynamicly varying multipath distortion
as you move.

Last I heard they'd not guarantee *full duplex" data except when you are
stationary. They suggest 300 bps *max* if you insisted on driving.

The nature of a cellular signal *while moving* is such that the modem
can't possibly retrain fast enough while driving thru the city.

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/56	 Leonard.Erickson@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bsmith@access.digex.com (Barry Smith)
Subject: Zmodem file transfer time calculation?
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:29:07 GMT

Is there a good program that calculates, from DOS, how long it takes
to transfer a file or set of files using ZMODEM at a given baud rate?
If not, does anyone have an equation or algorithm for calculating the
CPS rate of a typical ZMODEM transfer, thus applicable to file size
count?

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: USR vfast
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 01:24:03 GMT

rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>jvmg9796@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Doc) writes:
>>Question for anyone who knows:  The Dual Standards currently have HST and
>>v.32bis protocols in them.  When the v.FAST upgrade is available, will
>>the modem then become a "Tri Standard"?  If not, which one gets yanked out,
>>v.32bis or HST?  Or will v.FAST be backward compatible with v.32bis?
>                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>It's not at the moment, although it's expected that most modems would
>fall back to V.32bis if they couldn't do v.32bis.
                                          ^^^^^^^ again

Duuuuhhhh, V.fast.
-- 
We could do that, but it would be wrong, that's for sure.  -- Richard Nixon
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith)
Subject: Modem Interfaces (was: Re:    Serial and Parallel interface ??????)
Organization: Keith's Computer, Hope Mills, NC
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 03:15:29 GMT

In article <clemon.08ls@lemsys.UUCP> clemon@lemsys.UUCP (Craig Lemon VE3XCL) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.015453.19377@ksmith.uucp> keith@ksmith.uucp (Keith Smith) writes:
>>Hahaha,
>>

KEEPING in mind the discussion is for alternatives to RS-232 modem
interfaces ala a PC parallel port.

>>Can you say ETHERNET, TOKEN RING?  All SERIALLY transmitted data.
>
>Hahahahaha, yes I can.  Can you say SHIELDED CABLE, RF FREQUENCIES?  Maybe

Yes, but sheilded cable is not neccessary for very short runs, and
twisted pair 10baseT is available.  The RF problem is a problem at ANY
Speed,  An RS-232 cable can really hose up a TV.  A parallel cable is
often times even worse.  Try setting an FM radio next to an UNSHIELDED
printer cable.

>you can also say HIGH-PERFORMANCE DEDICATED PROCESSORS or ISA BUS
>CONNECTION?

Double big deal,  You already are paying $400+ for a name brand V.32bis
modem.  What's another $100 for an ethernet circuit welded down on the
card with a RISC CPU?

>
>>Not Likely ISDN is gonna fly past 10 Mbits/sec, but I will agree that
>>"standard" RS-232 is not going to go much past 115K.
>
>        The way I understand it, ISDN is currently a 64kbps scheme.  It may
>have been updated to 128kbps by now (yes? no?).  ISDN is also not "local
>area" and must be considered quite different than Ethernet or RS-232.  It
>is going to be significantly slower than anything local, that can be taken
>for granted.  Utilizing ethernet allows a good LAN/WAN interface to an ISDN
>"encoder" as well as guaranteed throughput.

Agreed, In fact, I think 10baseT ethernet or RS-422 is the way to go for
anything that exceeds the RS-232 Limits.  The standards are in place
already, and they offer a factor of bandwidth over any simple inexpensive
WAN interface connection (modem, isdn, 56K leased line, etc).

Now the day everyone get's fibre in the home, and their own T3 circuit
we may begin to push 10baseT or RS-422 speed limits, but until then I
think either would be a safe bet.

The ethernet may cause some trouble at the CPU end though, with device
drivers and the like.  I'm just not sure there's gonna be a lot of
DEMAND for this kind of bandwidth though. 

-- 
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: Paul Placeway <pplacewa@bbn.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Date: 25 Jul 1992 19:41:11 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

As always with real life, there are two sides to this.

On the one hand, I'm kinda surprised that Hayes Improved Escape With
Guard Time (<pause> + + + <pause>) patent has held up under court
scrutiny.  However, the fact is that it has, which makes it a much
stronger patent than one that has only been granted, but not challenged.

On the other hand, it is a GOOD IDEA.  Anyone who knows about datacom
knows better than to use a likely in-band escape sequence.  The
marketing campaign may be on the obnoxious side, but it is making
ordinary people aware of the existence of the issue.

Now considering that one of the companies Hayes is targeting is
Apple, who is known to be legally aggressive, it is not surprising
that Hayes is being a bit heavy-handed.

Personally, I feel sorry for all the non-techies who bought PowerBook
170s with overpriced 2400 bps modems included, only to discover that
their reward for sticking with their trusted vendor was to be burnt
with a bad product.  Apple may not realize that they are helping the
windows-on-a-386SL-laptop (or better yet 3V. AMD386SLX), but they are.

Meanwhile, I'm probably going to have to dig into the C-Kermit packet
encoding code and add something that escapes three character runs when
the run-length compression stuff is not set.  This still won't help
interactive use, but at least it will defuse the bomb (as pictured in
the Hayes ads).

		-- Paul Placeway <pplacewa@bbn.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems