HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nenaas@ulrik.uio.no (Nils-Eivind Naas)
Subject: Re: V.42bis in LHarc, Arc, Zoo, Zip, etc.
Organization: University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:05:12 GMT

In article <H.vd14K9LDhLw@kynes.bison.mb.ca> rdo@kynes.bison.mb.ca (Russell Ochocki) writes:


   If V.42bis provides 4:1 compression, why can you not use the same algorithm in
   the various compression programs (ZOO, ARC, etc.)?  They only get between
   2:1 and 3:1 right now.  V.42bis would be a SIGNIFICANT improvement.

I believe you are mistaken here. I have several files that are compressed
by more than 90 %. It is dependent on what the data look like.


   Somehow, I don't think it is possible...but I can't think of any reason why.
   -- 
   ____________________________________________________________________________
   | _   /|  |  Russell Ochocki
   | \`o.0'  |  rdo@kynes.bison.mb.ca
   | =(___)= |-----------------------------------------------------------------
   |    U    |  A closed mouth gathers no foot.
   |_________|_________________________________________________________________
From: davidg@aegis.or.jp (Dave McLane)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Scout+
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:15:20 GMT
Organization: Aegis Society, Kyoto Japan

eadie5295@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

>  Anyone out there use the Scout Plus (by Digicom)?  Anyone have any problems
>with it?  Would it be better than the USR Sportster 14.4 or the ZyXEL U-1496B? 
>Does the fax software work well?  Would anyone recommend any of the above 3
>modems over the others?

I know five people with Scout Plus' and they work well for
modem<->modem links. There was a slight problem with connecting to a
USR v32bis, but a new ROM fixed that. 

There is only one problem. If you cut the DTR when using a pulse
(i.e., non-tone) line, sometimes the telco makes a slick 'click' and
this is interpreted by the Scout as RING and it tries to answer the
phone if you have S0 ~= 0. 

As a fax modem the situation is a bit iffy. I don't use it for such
and the people who do say that it will only connect to certain faxes.

Please note that I am talking about Japan, not the U.S.

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

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: eamonn@next.qualcomm.com (Eamonn Coleman)
Subject: T2500 & SLIP problem : -(
Reply-To: eamonn@qualcomm.com
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 22:29:39 GMT

I have set up my '040 NeXT and Telebit T2500 at home to dial into a  
NetBlazer at work.  I can get a SLIP connection made from the NeXT to the  
NetBlazer without a hitch. When the SLIP connection has been established  
in this way, I can telnet etc. into the NeXT from work. The problem arises  
when the SLIP connection is down and I want to bring it up from work. The  
modem at home simply will not pickup and answer. The connection is made  
briefly then dropped. I am using hardware handshaking. I have getty  
running on the appropriate device (ttydfa). I have been through everything  
that I could think of with zero results! Is there anyone who can tell me  
what I'm missing because I surely can't figure it out?!?! Maybe someone  
has a working SLIP configuration for a T2500 setup they could send me?


Many thanks!
ec
--
.. writing from home.

Eamonn Coleman                            Qualcomm Incorporated
eamonn@qualcomm.com                       10555 Sorrento Valley Road
Tel. (619) 597-5280                       San Diego, CA 92121-1617   
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: huntting@advtech.uswest.com (Brad Huntting)
Subject: Re: 16450 & 16550
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 18:38:49 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.220738.18264@klaava.Helsinki.FI> somerist@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Jussi T Someristo) writes:
>James.Woo@ebu.ericsson.se writes:
>: Can someone tell me the difference between 16450 and 16550?

>	The main difference between these two is that 16550 has a (as far
>	as I remember) 64 - byte FIFO - buffer. It means that this UART 
>	is capable of buffering incoming data  when using high speed, say
>	14.4K V.42bis modem connections.

Actually its 16 bytes.

>	These UARTs are pin-compatible, so if you have a 16450
>	installed, you can replace it with a 16550 and everything
>	should work just fine.

There are minor differences in the pinout, but the 1 or 2 pins in
question are almost never used in 16450/8250 implementations.  I have
two PC/AT serial cards built for use with 16450's, and both work fine
with a NS16550AFN.


brad
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: sknkwrks@unlv.edu (Scott Alfter)
Subject: Re: SupraFAX Modem Config for Supra BBS ???
Organization: Skunk Works Software Co.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 17:36:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep24.032349.8383@polari> jsanchez@polari.online.com writes:
>I have just about given up on getting connected to the Supra BBS with my
>SupraFAX modem.  The configuration listed below works on LOTS of bbs and
>other things but does it work on Supra's own bbs NOOO! not a chance.  I
>tried the default (at&f0, at&f2) settings and no soap their either.  Seems
>like this outfit should configure their own bbs to connect with their own
>products - naw too reasonable.

I just called their BBS with my Supra V.32bis last night to order
bug-fix ROMs...no problems connecting or with staying connected--and
that's with 1.0D ROMs, no less!  The configuration was the same as the
one I use with my BBS, except for turning on the speaker...remind me
to send the modem settings.

  _/_   Scott Alfter                             Internet: sknkwrks@cs.unlv.edu
 / v \  Call the Skunk Works BBS today!
(IIe (  (702) 894-9619 300-14400 V.32bis Apple II/IBM/Star Trek/Aerospace
 \_^_/  Ask me about SoftDAC--digital audio for your IIe/IIc! Apple II Forever!
From: Boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl (Paul Kolenbrander)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Supra New ROM (ordering info)
Date: 1 Oct 92 23:35:15 MET
Reply-To: boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl (Paul Kolenbrander)
Distribution: world
Organization: System Information 2.0 Development
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith

In article <1377@proa.es> alberto@proa.es (Alberto Poblacion) writes:
> In article <1992Sep30.180805.19954@ntmtv> west@ntmtv.UUCP (Andrew West) writes:
> >Can anybody clarify what feature these provide? 
> > [...] I've never heard of V23.
> 
>      V23 is an asimmetrical mode of connection, where you receive data at
> 1200 bps and send data at 75 bps. It is widely used here in Europe for
> Videotex. This is a service provided by the PTT's, and they only let you
> access it using V23, or through the X25 packet switching network.
> 
>     I consider that supporting V23 is a very important feature for a modem
> that is to be used in Europe.

I think that depends on your country. Here in the Netherlands I can
connect to Viewdata at other, cq faster speeds also. And I think that
most PTT's will go the same way as 1200/75 is just too slow in this
day and age... I for one wouldn't touch ViewData at 1200/75 as I am
used to 14000 on my connections... :-) 

> Alberto Poblacion
> E-mail: alberto@proa.es

-- 
Paul Kolenbrander  \ InterNet: boinger@myamy.hacktic.nl
Turfveldenstraat 37 \ Fido: 2:284/114.3 Paul Kolenbrander
NL-5632 XH EINDHOVEN | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Voice: +31-40-415752 | Timezone:GMT+1 | Fax: +31-40-426446
From: ccastrb@prism.gatech.EDU (Rick Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: USR sportster conversion announcement.
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:29:58 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


Trojans in a modem?!  Bah!  I wonder if they meant that someone had copied
the eprom code and inserted a virus?  Still, even then, that would just be
a data file, and it could not cause damage such that they mentioned.  The
only way a "trojan" could be included is if the eprom code was in A) a 
self extracting archive of some sort that had been rigged, B) the trojan
was included in the eprom burner software, or C) Ronald Reagon walked up
to your computer and installed it!


-- 
[         Rick Brown         ][ Given a dollar and a beer, man can do ]
[  ccastrb@prism.gatech.edu  ][   most anything he sets his mind to.  ]
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: zinzow@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Mark S. Zinzow)
Subject: Gateway 2000 email delays
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 21:23:19 GMT

  Forwarded per request:

From: gateway@aol.com
To: markz@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu
Subject: Gateway 2000 & Internet
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 15:21:39 EDT
 
Mark ...
   This email is to ask a favor of you.  I have no way of putting general
postings on Internet so am asking you to post the following so that folks
will better understand if there are delays in getting replies from me to
their emails.  I would appreciate it very much if you could do this.  Thank
you!
 
Cynthia Lloyd
Online & Onsite Services
Gateway 2000
-----------------------------------------------------------
The information below will help to explain why Internet mail to and from
GATEWAY@AOL.COM has and may continue to experience delays.  Thank you in
advance for your patience.
 
 
"America Online is not directly connected to the Internet; we receive our
mail through PSI, a commercial Internet feed provider.  As our traffic on the
Internet mail gateway grows, we try to tweak our system to provide better
performance.
 
We're in constant contact with PSI's technicians in an attempt to speed up
the flow of mail.  Last week, we installed new communications equipment,
which greatly improved mail delivery times.
 
One problem is that due to the way we transfer mail, the more backed up the
mail is, the more backed up the mail gets.  When there is a large amount of
mail waiting to be transmitted to us, it takes a very long time to access
each piece of mail and send it.  This causes a vicious cycle of delays.
 
To make matters worse, PSI's system went down temporarily on 9/30, causing
longer backups.
 
To address this problem, we've decided to start fresh.  Mail from before 9/30
will be delivered manually; this process will take a while.  days.  However,
this will mean that any mail sent from this point on should be delivered
fairly quickly (within the usual two to three hour time frame). Mail from
before 9/30 will be delivered slowly, but it WILL be delivered."
 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: rslin@engin.umich.edu (Lin Rong Shine)
Subject: Re: USR sporster can sup
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 23:09:30 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

It's a great news to me that the USR sporster can support DS.
Does both Sporster 9600 and 14400 can support this feature?
If anyone knows, please post or reply e-mail to: 
    rslin@caen.engin.umich.edu
Thanks in advance.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bac2@engr.uark.edu (Brett Cato)
Subject: Help on init strings for Intel 14.4EX w/Telix??
Organization: University of Arkansas
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:51:38 GMT

     Can someone give me some suggestions on a GOOD initialization string for
using an Intel 14.4EX modem with Telix 3.15 on a 386??  What strings do other
Intel owners use???

Thanks in advance...
-Brett

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: Info on Telebit vs ZyXEL please
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 07:24:29 GMT
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

In article <1992Sep25.162933.11736@eskimo.celestial.com> johnn@eskimo.celestial.com (John Navitsky) writes:
>
 [...]
>modems are upgradable.  Can anyone comment on the hardware?  Could the WB
>support fax capabilities as an upgrade?  Does Telebit have any plans to do
>this?  As you can see I do have a fairly strong bias and my only real 
>reservation with the WB is the lack of fax capability.  
>

Telebit announced a fax upgrade for the WB back in March or April.
At that time, the fax capability was quoted for the third quarter of '92,
but it has slipped that schedule (obviously).  I don't have any other
information on when fax will be available.


-- 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Greg Andrews   |       UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg        |
 |                 |   Internet: gerg@netcom.COM                    |
 `------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: gerrit@laosinh.stgt.sub.org (Gerrit Heitsch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Supra New ROM (ordering info)
Date: 2 Oct 92 09:23:21 GMT
Organization: Lao-Sinh project (private UUCP site)

In article <blaby.717741060@sfu.ca>, John Edward Blaby writes:

> Hmm..I notice that the latest upgrade still does not include the
> promised mnp10. Has anyone heard anything about the lately?
> 
> If I am not mistaken, MNP10 is mentioned on the box the modem came in!
MNP10 is not mentioned only on the box, its written in the manual
and on the front of my modem too (serial #14E003461).

Gerrit

-- 
         Gerrit Heitsch  Moenchweg 16  7038 Holzgerlingen  Germany
  Logical adresses: UUCP: gerrit@laosinh.stgt.sub.org FIDO: (2:247/706.9)
                 If you are from outer space, please use:
  universe!local-cluster!milkyway!solarsystem!terra!europe!laosinh!gerrit
From: colonius@dino.dinoco.de (Stephan Muhs)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: ZyXEL ROM V5.01 vs. V5.02
Distribution: world
Date: 5 Oct 92 03:19:23 CET
Organization: Private

In article <3094@unieinf.UUCP> claes@sparc2.ikb.uni-essen.de (Heinz-Josef Claes) writes:
>
>
>Does anybody knows the difference beetwenn ROM-Versions 5.01 and 5.02?
>

I include the original release notes for 5.02:


                        Firmware 5.02 release note
          -----------------------------------------------------------

        1. AT detection has been tuned for plus model.

        2. "RINGING" response is restored, set bit 6 of s42 can disable
           this function.

        3. Fast Rate re-Negotiation fall back/forward range change from
           16800-7200 to 16800-4800.

        4. Improve the silence/quiet detection in voice mode.

        5. Fix caller ID & distinctive ring bugs.

        6. Can send to fax machine which has no answer tone.

        7. Correct response messages associated with ATX2 & ATX3

        8. Fix compatibile problem with some fax machchine which can
           not response to MPS signal correctly without some delay between
           fax message and MPS.

        9. Add Austra country code (233) for 120 ms flash time.

       10. Add Japan country code (234) for 20 pps pulse dial and
           ring detector spec.

       11. Correct remote digital loopback problem in async non error
           control mode.

       12. Correct frequency range problem of ring detector.

       13. Correct 1300 Hz calling tone to be recognized as fax calling tone
           problem.


I hope this helps...


--
stephan muhs      colonius@dino.dinoco.de
wilhelmstr. 51    ...!unido!easix!dino!colonius
5000 koeln 60     Genie: s.muhs
germany           voice: +49 221 7393484
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: lag39853@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Lawrence Alan Gust)
Subject: Zoom v.32bis dialing delay after 1st (Q)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 00:27:54 GMT
Keywords: zoom v.32bis dialing modem

My external Zoom v.32bis has this weird delay when I send a dialing string
such as "ATDT5551212".  The first digit is dialed, and then there is a
short but noticable delay before the remainder of the number is dialed.

This appears to be largely independent of the value in the S11 register,
which I usually have set to a very small value (about 60ms).  It is almost
as if this delay was inserted in case I was dialing through a PBX, because
the delay sounds about right to allow a leading "9" to be recognized.

However, when I use the Quick-LinkII software that came with the modem to
dial a number 'automagically', the delay is not present.  So I know there
has to be some magic parameter I need to set to eliminate this delay.  I've
read every page in the manual for any mention of such a register, and there
is none.  There are plenty of references to "wait-for-dialtone", "wait-
for carrier", "DTMF-dialing-speed", etc, but this particular delay seems
to be--let's be kind here--an "undocumented feature."

This isn't a serious problem with the Zoom; overall I've been very happy
with the perfomance and feature set.  It is just this irritating, nagging
little problem, and I'd like to put something in the initialization string
once and for all that will take care of it.

Any advice or pointers on this topic are greatly appreciated.

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Can't go above 1400CPS
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 06:22:46 GMT

dliao@aludra.usc.edu (David Liao) writes:
>I just bought Zyxel 1496E and a 10 foot serial cable from Egghead.
>When I do transfer with local BBSs, my modem receives CRC or ZHEADER errors
>if the rate goes above 1400CPS.  I used the same modem from my friend during
>the summer and I had no problem at all.  I also replaced my IDE card.

>So, which is the source of the problem?
>1) Zyxel 1496E
>2) 10 foot serial cable
>3) cheap serial chip in IDE

Not 1, almost certainly not 2 unless it's a really crummy cable (I
have a 15 foot cable on mine), almost certainly 3.  What speed is your
computer, and are you multitasking? 

And, do you have hardware handshaking on?  It mayt just be a
configuration error.

-- 
Of all my relations I like sex the most.
From: Zero.One@p6.f356.n103.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Zoom vs Supra vs ZyXEL
Date: 23 Sep 92 16:23:51 GMT
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Sep 21 1992


 > Hello netters,

 > Very soon now I have to make a decision in order to
 > purchase about 30 modems in order to construct a dialup
 > pool for our Unix network.

 > I would like to use rackmount, but all rackmount modems
 > I have looked at (multitech & telebit) are *mucho* more
 > bucks than purchasing same speed external modems from
 > the likes of supra, zoom, and even ZyXEL.
 > (for rackmounts, I did not check digitech's prices; do
 >  they compare to supra et all, i.e. upper 200s?)

 > Thus, I am looking for opinions.  I need an external
 > V.32 (9600) or V.32bis (14400) modem with V.42, autofallback,
 > etc.  If I purchase a 9600 baud (instead of 14400), it had
 > better be significantly cheaper and/or much more rock solid
 > and reliable than a 14400 baud cousin.  I do not need FAX
 > capability.  I am especially concerned with reliability
 > and the ability to talk to anything else.

 > My search has come up with the following most likely candidates:

 > Supra Modems
 >    Supra has a good price but I'm confused by conflicting
 >    stories about whether or not it connects well with
 >    other modems.  Also, I am scared by the talk of it
 >    running super hot; for my dialup pool I will end up
 >    stacking about 60 modems on top of each other, and I
 >    am concerned about heat!

 > Zoom Modems
 >    These guys have a great price (esp cuz they have models
 >    without FAX, and I don't care about FAX).  And I have
 >    not seen many horror stories in this group, but I have
 >    the impression (possibly false) that they are less reliable
 >    and/or lower quality than Supra, ZyXEL.  True or False?

 > ZyXEL
 >    These cost a little more than the other 2.  Are they
 >    worth it?

 > Again, I would love to hear opinions about the 14.4 and the
 > 9600 baud versions of the above modems.

 > Also, are 9600 baud modems any more reliable than 14.4 ones?
 >
 > So, if anyone could impart some of their wisom
 > upon me with advice, I'd greatly appreciate it.
 > (Others would too, I'm sure!)

 > Thanks
Todd,

If you are interested in a rack mount then give us a call at 1-800-255-4101.

Tyrone Horton
(Zero One)
Tech Support
ZyXEL USA

---
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: USRobotics dual 14.4 upgradable to v.fast?
Organization: The Gator Conferencing System 219-289-3745 
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 12:52:50 GMT

goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal) writes:

>Sure, USR might be charging too much for a v.32bis modem, but that is
>up to each individual buyer.  I felt that $550 was a good price for
>everything I am getting.

but you are getting performance, reliability and an excellent
well supported product based on many years of being in the business

Don't get my wrong, I like my Worldblazers, I am just disappointed
in the slower throughput as compared against the USR V.32bis modems

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: jhughes@netcom.com (Jay Micheal Hughes)
Subject: Re: USR sportster conversion announcement.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 00:14:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <BvB1q0.wK@cs.psu.edu> fenner@postscript.cs.psu.edu (Bill Fenner) writes:
>In article <1992Sep28.053512.10555@cs.hope.edu> turkstra@smaug.cs.hope.edu (Chris &) writes:
>|	Also, please note that it has also come to our atention that 
>|versions of the firmware being disseminated contain disguised code 
>|("trojan horse") that may inflict irreperable dmmage to the hard dive of
>|the computer utilizing the programs.
>
>hee, hee!  *MODEM TRASHES HARD DRIVE*, pictures at 11.
>
>scare tactics at their best.  Hooray for USR.
>
>  Bill

hahahahahahah  THIS is the best they could do??  I 'bout fell out of
me chair with this one.  You wouldn't catch me using that ATGwhatever string
to activate HST  no way, not now....

BTW, did anyone see any mention of USR using the roms in the modem's?
I only saw mention of "burning eproms"

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
jhughes@netcom.com               |    | Do NOT write below this |
318-361-5067                     |    |   line OFFICE USE ONLY  |
Monroe, LA                       |    |-------------------------|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.protocols.misc
From: chatel_m@annecy.enet.dec.com (Marc Chatel)
Subject: Looking for RS-366 specification information...
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:19:02 GMT


Hello,

   I was wondering if anybody knows something about EIA RS-366. It is the
first time I hear about this standard, and I wonder if anybody knows more
than me about it (should not be difficult...).

   Of course, finding an on-line copy of the standard would be absolute
gravy...

                                       Regards,

                                       Marc Chatel,
                                       Digital Equipment Corporation,
                                       Annecy, France

                              E-mail:  chatel_m@annecy.enet.dec.com

Disclaimer: I am not a U.S. citizen, and I do not support ANY U.S. presidency
            candidate. What we need is a more colorful election. Why not have
            a 4-way presidential race with Harrison Ford, Michael Jackson,
            Arnold Schwartzenneger, and Weird Al Yankovic? That would be
            more interesting...

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems