HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jim@n5ial.chi.il.us (Jim Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: 14400bps throuhput 
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 01:28:45 GMT
Organization: Me? Organized? Hah! :-)

In article <oDN3RB7w165w@surfcty.com> rlm@mcgort.com writes:

[other posts deleted...we've all read them, right?]

> DING!  Next contestant, please...  Excuse me, but v.42 allows the
> modems to run essentially synchronously between each other.  In stripping
> start/stop bits, you no longer need to send them.  Therefore, you should
> actually see a slight performance GAIN as a result of v.42, not a 
> reduction.

if you'd taken a few seconds to actually read the post you just followed
up to, you would have seen that this is precisely what was stated,
except for the fact that, in that post, overhead was also considered,
which is apparently what you're saying is not a correct move.

V.42 does strip the start/stop bits, almost everyone on this group knows
that.  V.42 also does have overhead associated with it.  almost everyone
on this group (except you, perhaps) knows this, too.

when you consider the initial improvement from V.42 (or MNP3) stripping
the start/stop bits, you see an increase in maximum *RAW* throughput
(from here on, all throughput numbers in this post assume NO compression
unless stated otherwise) from 1440 cps to 1800 cps.  this is all fine
and everything, but guess what...you forgot the other factors involved.

as the person who you're saying is so dead wrong stated, there is also
overhead associated with the error-control protocol.  surprise...nothing
is absolutely free.  this overhead basically brings the max raw
throughput down to around 1724 cps, assuming no errors on the line, etc.

and, since someone had requested that this all be explained again,
here's a brief summary of the formula used to estimate the throughput.
this was posted some time ago by Toby, when a similar debate was in
full-flame mode.  any errors are mine, not Toby's.  as just stated, this
is an estimate, not a solid number, but it tracks very nicely with
results people (including myself) see all the time:

   Throughput = raw cps * 256/263 * 62/63

or, for your V.32bis/V.42,

   Throughput = 1800 cps * 256/263 * 62/63 = 1724 cps (approx).

sorry if I'm a little grouchy...haven't been able to sleep much at all
the last week or so.....
   --jim

--
#include <std_disclaimer.h>                                 73 DE N5IAL (/9)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNET:  jim@n5ial.chi.il.us  |  grahj@gagme.chi.il.us  |  j.graham@ieee.org
ICBM:  41.70N 87.63W                    UUCP:  gagme!n5ial!jim@clout.chi.il.us
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@n9hsi (Chicago.IL.US.Earth)    AMTOR SELCAL:  NIAL
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: dsdd@okcforum (Roy Barrett)
Subject: USR Warranty Excerpt
Originator: news@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 02:43:21 GMT
Organization: Engineering Computer Network, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Here is an excerpt from the USR Warranty:
 
U.S. Robotics, Inc., warrants to the original consumer or other end user
putchaser that this product is free from defects in materials of workmanship
for a period of two years from the date of purchase. During the warranty
period, and upon proof of purchase, the product will be replaced (by the same
or similar model) at our option, without charge for either parts or labor. This
warranty shall not apply if the object is modified, tampered with, misused, or
subjected to abnormal working conditions.
 
---------------------------------------
 
That means we can't do shit to our USR modems...
 
Well, being the hardware hacker that I am, I'll void my warranty..


--

Roy Barrett, InterNet: (dsdd@okcforum.osrhe.uoknor.edu), FutureNet: #1@#31
Double-Sided Double-Density (405/943-9496), FutureNet Site #31, Apple ][!!
 "Yes. but I didn't inhale" -- Bill Clinton, "Potatoe" -- Dan Quayle
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Eric Sybesma)
Subject: 286 COM Ports and installing modem-need info
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:47:05 GMT

He has an I/O card with a printer on COM2 using IRQ4 (I think)
and a mouse on COM2 w/ IRQ3.  
I am not even sure if the 286 has COM3 and COM4, but he also has 
a music computer using a PORT (perhaps shared?)

He doesn't need to use anything simultaneously w/ the modem, how
can we get it to work?

Other info.  (The I/O card doesn't seem to have adjustable IRQs)
(Not sure if the modem does...)

He hasn't gotten any response w/ the modem on COM1.  He has tried
both COM2 and COM1 I think.  Any ideas??

			Eric Sybesma
sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu
PLEASE E-MAIL!!!!!



-- 
Eric Sybesma
University of Michigan
sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu
sybesma@maize.engin.umich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mike@vort.cuc.ab.ca (Mike Nemeth)
Subject: looking for best prices on Telebit T3000 modems
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 21:57:41 GMT

the subject says it all. recomendations on places to buy from / places
to avoid are welcome. 

-- 
Quayle is a twit, but he's smarter than the people that'll vote for him.

Mike Nemeth       VORT Computing      Calgary, Canada
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: 14400bps throuhput
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:16:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Oct7.181619.7968
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

In article <Bvq235.Fz5@inews.Intel.COM> mfineman@cad018..intel.com ( Mark S. Fineman ) writes:
>
>Various people have said that the modem strips the start/stop
>bits and therefore only sends 8 bits/character, compared to
>10 bits/character from the serial interface.  Thus, the serial
>interface to modem path should be set at a higher speed than the
>nominal modem speed even when no compression is being done
>by the modem.
>
>My question is:
> is there a way to specify that the serial interface uses
> less than 2 extra bits per byte? (Using normal DOS or some
> widely used UNIX.)
>

Not if you're using asynchronous ports and software.  Asynchronous RS232
data (Asynchronous = non-synchronous = non-synchronized) must use the
start bit and stop bit in addition to the data bits.  The start/stop bits
provide "framing" around each character so the receiver can tell when
one character ends and another begins.  Without the proper framing, the
receiver might slip a little and decode the bit patterns wrong.

Synchronous ports use clock signals on another pair of pins to keep the
receiver in step with the sender.  When the clock signals are being used,
the extra framing bits aren't necessary.


-- 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Greg Andrews   |       UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg        |
 |                 |   Internet: gerg@netcom.COM                    |
 `------------------------------------------------------------------'
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:14669 misc.forsale.computers:36144
From: koolkid@milton.u.washington.edu (Only the BEST!!)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.amiga.markerplace,misc.forsale.computers
Subject: USR 9600 Courier for sale for $225 O.B.O.
Date: 7 Oct 92 15:44:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct7.154451.20805
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle


I have a pratically new US Robotics 9600 Courier HST modem for sale.  Used for
only one year, includes original manual (in mint condition).  Modem is still
in it's best condition, reason for selling is that I am moving on to getting
the faster dual standard modem.  I am offering this modem for $225, but will
consider selling to the best offer given.  Please respond by e-mail. . .


                                        Thanks,

                                                Tim
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: tiger@netcom.com (Tiger Zhao)
Subject: Re: ZyXEL U1496-B just hangs! Help!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: comp
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 03:58:38 GMT

Petri.Wessman@hut.fi (Petri Wessman) writes:

>Ack, my almost-brand-new (PC internal card) ZyXEL 1496B has freaked.
>When it started, the modem would go online as soon as the PC was
>powered on, and usually stay that way -- sometimes it would drop the
>line and free up the phone after a while. Now it doesn't go online by
>itself, but neither does it do anything else! DTR etc. are up like
>they should be, but it won't echo characters or acknowledge any kind
>of input. I've tried setting it up as COM1 (was COM2), no effect.

>Either the thing has broken down totally for some unexplained reason
>or the modem settings have gotten seriously scrambled. Is there any
>way to reset the thing? The manual leaves a bit to be desired where
>the B model is concerned :-)

>Any ideas? The ROM version is either 4.10 or 4.12 (I think 4.12). I'd
>hate to send the card back for a warranty replacement, I'm in Finland
>and the card was bought from the States :-(

>groan.

>//Petri
Have you tried to jumper connect the two reset jumpers near the speaker
for about 20 second and then remove the connector and see what happens 
when you power on the computer again?

Tiger

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: dorst@netcom.com (Steven J Dorst)
Subject: EMAIL Address for MultiTech?
Summary: Anybody have an EMAL address for MultiTech?
Keywords: Multitech email
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 20:00:46 GMT

The title just about says it all. Im looking for an alternative to their
(long distance charge) BBS. Reply by email please, requests for the same
info, if mailed to me, will be emailed.
Steven J Dorst   <dorst@netcom.com>
-- 
Steven J Dorst  N6VMK   dorst@tcomeng.com
From: critchie@austin.ibm.com (Chris Ritchie)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Documentation for IBM internal modem
Date: 12 Oct 92 16:31:03 GMT
Reply-To: critchie@innerdoor.austin.ibm.com
Organization: IBM AWD Graphics Subsystem Development
Originator: critchie@risk.austin.ibm.com



I don't follow this newsgroup, so sorry if this is a FAQ.


Can anyone gove me a pointer to documentation for an IBM 2400 bps intenal modem?
Part # 6164829.

I need to know how to set the jumpers for an IBM AT. I also would like to have
a listing of command sequences.


Thanks.



-- 
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 ~ Graphics Subsystem Development                       | My opinions are     ~
 ~ inet: critchie@innerdoor.austin.ibm.com              | just that !!!!!     ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Craig Macbride)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Not detecting/transmitting breaks in MNP
Date: 12 Oct 92 00:42:43 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

I have been using V32 modems made by Interlink which have MNP4 and MNP5 and
work up to 14.4k bps (depending on the model). The manual notes that
"The modem will not detect or transmit a break when in MNP mode" and Interlink
claim this is due to the chipset they use.

Needless to say, with operating systems that autobaud on breaks and
terminal servers which return to command mode on breaks, this is a real pain.
How common is this problem? Do most modems transmit breaks when in MNP modes?

-- 
 _--_|\		Craig Macbride	<lhscmc@luxor.latrobe.edu.au>
/      \			<s900387@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au>
\_.--.*/
      v
From: swinokur@pbs.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: ZyXEL EPROM or EEPROM?
Date: 14 Oct 92 12:21:14 EDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: PBS:Public Broadcasting Service, Alexandria, VA

> 
> 1.) if you have a U-1496, U-1496E or U-1496B and 28 pin sockets: use
>     512 kBit eproms, 27C512 type, 150 ns or better. On the chip, this
>     usually translates into "27C512-15". Do NOT use 200 ns eproms, since
>     unpredictable results may occur. Use only firmware version denoted
>     with a "k", like "RK502.U24 / RK502.U25". All Zyxel modems are
>     upgradeable to 32-pins though (in one or the other way) - and it is
>     certainly worth the effort, since caller ID, distinctive ringing,
>     ZyX 16.800 bps and voice mail are available only in megabit eproms.
> 

Caller ID and Selective ring features are available in the 512 kbit eproms,     
version 4.10 and higher. That is why they started using the RK and RM 
designations on the eproms. This was done to accomodate users who wanted 
those features but didn't want to upgrade sockets and for those internal
B model users who at the time had no upgrade path available since the
1 megabit eprom sockets would not fit on the internal card B model. Zyxel
has since come up with a daughterboard upgrade for the internal which
allows the upgrade to the 32 pin eproms. The only caveat is that the RK
versions had akll the AT command help menus removed to allow the Caller ID
code and Selective ring code to be added. The 16.8K speed and voice are only
available in the 1 megabit versions, unfortunately. I am a beta tester for Zyxel
so just wanted to clarify the situation.

Stu Winokur
Public Broadcasting Service
Alexandria, Virginia
From: birchall@pilot.njin.net (Shag)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: How to turn modems sound off?
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:58:46 GMT
Organization: Screaming in Digital, the Queensryche Net Digest

cstila@uta.fi (Timo Laitinen) writes:

>Could you tell me that command.

On a hayes-compatible modem, the following commands would affect sound.

ATL0, ATL1, ATL2, ATL3 - Volume lowest, low, medium, highest.

ATM0 - speaker always off
ATM1 - speaker on until carrier is detected
ATM2 - speaker always on [i don't know why anyone would choose this!]
ATM3 - speaker on after dialing until carrier is detected.

I believe those are standard Hayes commands, since my modem is made by PPI,
a subset of Hayes.

-Shag
-- 

     Freedom belongs to only those without video screens for eyes and mouth.
		- Queensryche
From: mbaffoni@skat.usc.edu (Michael Baffoni)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Don't Order Supra ROM Upgrade
Date: 13 Oct 1992 17:00:54 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: skat.usc.edu
Keywords: Supra

In article <12643@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> thorh@sail.LABS.TEK.COM (Thor Hallen) writes:
>The ROM "upgrade" does not fix the inability of the SupraFAXModem V.32bis
>to connect at 14.4 kbps where other brands will and the new work-arounds
[stuff deleted]
>These are my personal opinions and standard disclaimers apply.

	Hmm.  Is this from personal experience?  I mean, did you sit down with 
a Supra with the new ROMs and another equivalent modem and dial the same sites
to compare connects?  Is this second(third?)-hand info?  Is this guessing?
Please qualify your opinions.

	I'm not doubting your convictions, it's just that I value a reasoned 
opinion.

-Mike
From: mwilson@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Monty Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Legality of using products in unintended manners
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:10:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: twisto.1992Oct7.191050.29758
Distribution: na
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.

Companies, including USR, do not have the power to enact laws.  Just because
they say something is illegal doesn't make it so.  The legislative branch of
the United States (if that is where all this is occurring) enacts certain
laws (copyright, etc.) to protect certain entities from others.  In this
case, book publishers were protected from people making copies of books
without the proper royalties reaching the proper persons.  The law has
been extended to include software to the point that it is not legal to copy
software (including chips) and in some cases even to disassemble the code.
This is where the manufacturer comes in.  It is up to them to decide whether
their respective firmwares are so protected.  Just because they find out
that extended capabilities for which they have not been paid can be had by
cuts/jumpers, hidden commands, or whatever method, and announce that such
mods are illegal, that does not make it so.

Besides all this, what is the difference in cost between the cheaper modem
and the more expensive one which enables these capabilities by default?
$300 maybe?  You think USR is going after an individual, which they could
doubtfully find in the first place, and tie up their lawyers over that?

It is possible, of course, but the overall attitude in many of these cases
is to concentrate on more important matters at hand; e.g., how to get the
next product to market before the next guy, avoiding corporate takeovers
and layoffs, etc.  Not that I can speak for any company in particular.

It is a fact that many immoral acts are not illegal, and vice versa,
considering the eye of the beholder, etc.  But this may be a confusion of
the two.

..........Monty.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal)
Subject: Re: Hacking USR ROMS  [4.2 - 4.1]
Keywords: Supervisors.ROM.Hacks
Organization: Univ. of Texas at Dallas
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:52:25 GMT

>>   This is HIGHLY illegal!!!!  Why I think people who purchased a Sportster
>
>Why is this illegal?  If I were to buy some software, disassemble it, and 
>
>modifications illegal.  Has USR expressly forbidden modification of the ROMs?

Yes.  USR stated in their press release that it is against the law to
alter any USR ROM or even, I think, use any USR modem in a manner not
intended.

(saying the end user is breaking the law by issuing an AT command making
it into a HST)

I'm not sure about the 2nd part.  One guy told me that he is trying to
get a definite answer from USR but doesn't expect them to give one.

I'm surprised that people have found out so recently (September) about
the HST capability of some non-HST modems.

I have a friend with a Shared Accesss modem with ROMS that were made in
Februrary of this year that has this "feature".
From: craig.ford@yob.sccsi.com (Craig Ford) 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hacking USR ROMS [4.2 - 4.1]
Date: 11 Oct 92 23:05:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: craig.ford@yob.sccsi.com (Craig Ford) 

From: craig.ford@yob.sccsi.com
Keywords: Supervisors.ROM.Hacks

panizo@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Maria Panizo) was overheard saying in part:

 > There's a big difference between pirating satellite transmissions and
 > taking advantage of an undocumented feature in a piece of hardware.
 >
 > Hacking a modem doesn't involve receiving copyrighted material others
 > are paying for the rights to view.

The copyrights to the HST protocol are held by US Robotics, Inc. Are you
inferring that the purchase of a Sportster with v4.1 ROM, gives one a de
facto license to use this copyrighted material?

Is use of the patch to enable HST functionality really any different
than using an undocumented OS function?

In the first instance, I submit that the purchase does not give one
rights which were not intended by the manufacturer/copyright holder.

In the second, my opinion is not as firmly rooted, but strongly leans
toward yes. I think that the ultimate distinctions revolve around the
"value" of the commodity, and the ability to differentiate it from the
the whole. OS functions cannot be divorced from, and sold as distinct
entities apart from the complete package (though the same functionality
and code can be incorporated into other packages). HST functionality in
the ROMs of the Sportster, small chassis V.32bis, and Shared Access
modems, differs from an OS function in this respect, as well as being
uniquely identifiable and valuable asset of USR's.

IMHO, use of the HST protocol on products not specifically marketed or
authorized by USR to do so, deprives them of revenues they are
legitimately entitled to, and is the equivalent of theft.

[Note: Non-standard disclaimer applies - opinions expressed are purely
my own. I am neither an employee or stockholder of US Robotics, Inc.; I
am a semi-satisfied customer.]

---
Craig Ford                                   |"red is grey, and yellow's
Futures Past Systems, Ltd.                   |white, but we decide which
Usenet: Craig.Ford@yob.sccsi.com (Craig Ford)|is right, and which is an
Fido:   1:106/2000.10                        |illusion." 
CIS:    74276,2374                           |     The Moody Blues

... File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
--- Blue Wave/QWK v2.10
From: bender@oobleck (Duke of Canterbury)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Need some high speed callback modems
Date: 9 Oct 1992 22:50:43 GMT
Organization: SPARK's R US
Distribution: jadpc2
Reply-To: bender@oobleck.eng.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: oobleck
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

(someone writes):
: My company lets employees dial in from home using some 1200 buad callback
: modems from Anchor Automation and we are looking to upgrade to higher speed
: callback modems. The callback feature is a must, and that is where I'm
: running into problems.

I can't recommend any callback modems, but what we do on our modem pools
here is to use regular V.32bis modems with a callback package that runs on
our dialback servers (Sun workstations, in our case :-).  The package we use
is called Termserv, and has so far proven to be very reliable.  I'm usually
wary of any callback scheme, but I've been using Termserv every day for over
a month, and have never had ANY problems.  I don't know what type of system
you are connecting your modems to, so there might not be a callback package
available for your system.

Another option is to use an ethernet terminal server that has dialback.  You
can configure the terminal server to do the user authentication at the
terminal server itself, or to pass a message to a machine somewhere on your
network that will authenticate the user and supply the terminal server with
the dialback numbers and encrypted passwords.

Both of these options are obviously more complicated and expensive than just
upgrading to dialback modems (I think the Zyxel person posted that they have
a modem that might fit your needs), but the advantage of using a terminal
server or dialback software on your host machine is that if a modem goes to
lunch, you can just drop in a new modem and not have to reprogram the user
list into the new modem, as well as allowing the system administrator to
maintain a central database of dialback users and their parameters.

If you have a modem pool with a few modems, it's probably not a big deal,
but when you start looking at 32 and 64 port modem pools, administration
becomes an issue.

mike
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: USRobotics dual 14.4 upgradable to v.fast?
From: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Adam Frix)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 23:27:38 EST
Organization: FidoNet node 1:226/20.18 - cmhGate UF Gateway, Columbus OH

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

MKG> I don't know how the Sportster is built, but *only* the USR 
MKG> Courier DS, Courier v.32bis, and LAN Sharing modem will be 
MKG> upgradeable.

More correctly, at the present time the only USR modems eligible for upgrade
to v.fast when it's available are the Courier DS, the Courier v.32bis, and the
Sharing modem.

This does not mean that the Sportster _can't_ be upgraded, just that USR so
far hasn't said that it _will_ be.

In fact, what they say is that "no upgrade for the Sportster is planned at
this time."  That at least leaves the door open.  And yes, the Sportster uses
a modular design similar to that of the Courier, a design which would allow
field upgrades.

--Adam--
 
--  
Adam Frix via cmhGate - Net 226 fido<=>uucp gateway Col, OH
UUCP: ...!n8emr!bluemoon!cmhgate!20.18!Adam.Frix
INET: Adam.Frix@p18.f20.n226.z1.FIDONET.ORG