HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kevinc@ups.com (Kevin C. Castner)
Subject: Re: WB Fax Upgrade
Organization: UPS Research & Development
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:03:47 GMT

Larry Snyder (larry@gator.use.com) wrote:
: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
: 
: >duncan@ravel.ati.com (Jim Duncan) writes:
: >>
: >>Yesterday I received the fax/ROM upgrades for my Worldblazer. The kit
: >>basically adds fax capability and provides the latest v. 7.01 ROM's.
: 
: Is the upgrade in the 7.01 ROMs or are others chips required to
: enable FAX?
: 
: I'm just wondering.  I have no interest in FAX (at this time) but I 
: now have 7.01 ROMS (thanks :)..
: 
No, the added capability is in a PAL chip that comes as part of the 
upgrade package.  When I spoke to Telebit Tech Support about getting the
5.01 ROMS (I have 5.00) to see if that would solve a problem I was having,
I mentioned that I had ordered the FAX upgrade.

That was when the Tech told me to just hang tight and I'd get the 7.01 ROM's
with the FAX upgrade.  We then had a short discussion on what enabled 
the FAX.  It turns out that there is no physical difference b/w a WB and 
a T3000.  It is just the PAL that turns things on and off.

As a matter of fact, when I received my WB, I got a T3000 manual with a
WB addendum.
-- 
    ======================================================================

      Kevin C. Castner                           kevinc@ups.com
      Unix Administrator                         United Parcel Service
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: alla0008@student.tc.umn.edu (Graham Allan)
Subject: Re: A Telebit FAX upgrade FLAME (Was: "Re: WB Fax Upgrade")
Keywords: Telebit  FAX  documentation
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:23:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.100623.15326@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov> isolar!earle@elroy.JPL.NASA.GOV writes:
> [about lack of documentation for fax commands]
>In the future, I would appreciate it if Telebit would take into consideration
>the fact that a customer who pays Real Money for a PROM upgrade which contains
>new features deserves to have every one of those new features documented *fully
>and completely*, and does NOT deserve to have proprietary software solutions
>pushed upon him/her from vendors who apparently have been provided with this
>information.  The customer deserves the right to have sufficient information
>provided to him/her in order to pursue their own software solution, be it free
>or otherwise.

Actually, no fax modem I have seen has ever had any documentation on the
commands to control the fax capabilities. Admittedly, that's only a sample
of 2 different modems, but it looks as if it's standard practise not to
supply this information (possibly because its not useful for the average
end-user).

You can get hold of documents describing the Class-1 and Class-2 protocols
from several BBS's - I saw a copy which had originated from Supra.

Graham.
From: Lars_jorgensen@p7.syntax.bbs.bad.se
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra busy again ??
Date: 8 Jan 93 23:56:56 GMT
Reply-To: Lars_jorgensen@p7.syntax.bbs.bad.se

to:all

Okay, now I know that I cant do anything about the busydetection on my Supra 
modem with the new chipset. So when can we expect a brandnew chipset from 
Supra???


/Lars

+++ Author: Lars_Jorgensen@P7.Syntax.BBS.Bad.Se, Syntax BBS, Denmark

--- GoldED 2.41.B1207
From: aland@informix.com (Colonel Panic)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: PPI EPROMS (Re: PPI repair charges)
Date: 9 Jan 93 04:32:15 GMT
Organization: Helen Keller Bondurant's Performance Driving School for the Blind

In article <6629.2b4c0c44@hayes.com> tnixon@hayes.com writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.061457.15927@informix.com>, aland@informix.com
>(Colonel Panic) writes: 
>
>> In the case of my modem, they sent me a wholly different one, so the
>> repair must not have been trivial...
>
>Actually, there's no correlation between getting back a different 
>modem and the difficulty of repairing yours.  ...

Agreed, absolutely.

I failed to mention that the support tech said that he'd personally
be testing mine and they'd replace it only if they verified the problem.
Between the screening conversation and this fact, he seemed utterly
convinced that the problem was pilot error on my part.  (This wasn't as
esoteric problem: the modem just plain quit dialing out.)

--
Alan Denney      aland@informix.com      {pyramid|uunet}!infmx!aland

  Smith and Wesson: the Ultimate Point-and-Click User Interface.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: Class 2 FAX modem AT commands documentation (Re: Telebit FAX upgrade)
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 04:28:58 GMT
Organization: MCSNet, Chicago, IL

In article <C0Jr0o.MHI@zoo.toronto.edu> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In article <C0Jout.43t@telebit.com> ronal@telebit.com (Ronal Thompson) writes:
>>But, did you call Telebit customer service and tell them that you are
>>a developer of fax software and ask for the Developers agreement?
>
>Why should I need a Developers agreement just to get proper documentation
>on my own modem?  Will Telebit stop shipping manuals entirely to people
>who don't sign such agreements?  After all, the logical conclusion of
>this line of argument is that only people developing communications
>software need to know what *any* of the S-registers do...
>
>What, precisely, does the Developers agreement entail?

I happen to agree.

Look, Gents.  Telebit, and others, listen up:

	We are intelligent consumers here.  We have for over a DECADE NOW
	gotten manuals with every S register (or at least, in the case of
	Telebit, the important ones) documented.  NOW you put out product
	with an ENTIRE COMMAND SET which is undocumented in your manuals.

	There is NOTHING wrong with you documenting your own command set.
	CCITT or otherwise.

Publish this info.  It is part of your product's specification and should 
be in the manual.

Period.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900]
From: eng10081@nusunix1.nus.sg (PAN SOON KEONG)
Subject: Re: INTEL VS AT&T
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 06:49:21 GMT

Larry Snyder (larry@news.rn.com) wrote:
: eng10081@nusunix1.nus.sg (PAN SOON KEONG) writes:
: 
: >How about the AT&T Paradyne Dataport modem?   It seem to be getting a
: >lot of praises.    What is  this Optical Phone Line Interface?   Is 
: >it good ?    Any one have comments about that?
: 
: Where have you seen info on the AT&T modems besides here on the net?
: 
: -- 
: Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com


: keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
  

Well, I have read about it from the adverts in the PC magazine.   I have
also read about it in the BBS.   Besides that , I heard it from my
friends and those dealers in modems.

However, all that I got is not comprehensive enough.   It is just pieces
of information here and there.   People have been saying that it is very
good value for money.   It seems to have a lot of good points.

I wonder if there is any catch or loopholes that I don't know of.
That's why I need opinions and suggestions about the two modems ( Intel
vs. AT&T ) from you knowledgeable people out there and I sincerely hope
to hear from you all.

Thank you.
 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu (LAiRD j. NeLSoN)
Subject: Hookup problems with Zoom AMZ 2400
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 14:31:04 GMT

I hope this is the place to post this...
If not, I would appreciate someone crossposting this into the Zoom forum on
Compuserve...

I am the proud owner of a mac 512KE, and figured that if it can't do anything
else, at least it could be a terminal.  So I bought a Zoom AMZ 2400 Modem and
a 9-pin to 25-pin serial cable.  Hooked them up and fired up the software,
and lo and behold it couldn't find the modem.

I did everything from checking the chooser and using a different comm program
to changing the cable--and even the modem itself.  I checked the modem on
another machine and it worked fine.

So, I figured, here was a case where the age of the 512KE might come into play.
The only thing the modem did when connected to the 512KE that it *didn't* do
when connected to the other machine that I tested it on, was to light up the
RD/SD (receive/send data) lights immediately upon powering up the computer.
I figured that the serial port put out a constant voltage or something that
would account for this, but these lights did *not* light when I tested the 
modem on the other machine (an SE).  Herein, I bet, lies the problem.

Does anybody know if any of the soft DIP switches have to be set on the modem
for it to work with the old paperweight?  Does anybody know how to connect 
this beast?  Advertising on the package says it'll work.

Again, I can't get through the busy signals for Zoom's so-called customer
support, so I thought I'd try here.  Thanks in advance,

LAiRD

--
ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu           |
ljnelson@amh.amherst.edu            |          The Quintet-essential.
(413) 542-2932                      |
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: ziegast@godzilla.UU.NET (Eric W. Ziegast)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
Subject: Re: Detecting TurboPEP
Date: 5 Jan 1993 16:58:48 GMT
Organization: UUNET Technologies - Falls Church, VA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: godzilla.uu.net

Ken Mandelberg writes:
|> Is there a way to detect from the connect message, whether a WB
|> has reached another WB with TurboPEP, as opposed to hitting a
|> TB+ or T2500 with PEP. All the variations of X settings and 
|> S59 seem to give me "FAST" one way or another.

Here's a nifty one if you don't like LZ compression:

	Set S191=6 (Allow V.42bis compression, but not LZ)

If you connect with a T2500 (TB+, et. al.) you won't get compression.
If you connect with a WorldBlazer, you'll get compression (thus returned
with COMP in your CONNECT message).
--
Eric Ziegast
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: povlphp@uts.uni-c.dk (Povl H. Pedersen)
Subject: V.42bis/LAP-M questions
Organization: UNI-C, Danish Computing Centre for Research and Education
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:39:39 GMT

How come that I sometimes have to get retries from Z-modem when
using a modem with MNP-5 or V.42bis/LAP-M ? Both include error
correction, and I thought that would ensure that all packages
would be transfered as sent. I also thought that the RE or TE
messages I see on very noisy lines on my Supra V.32bis would
mean that the modems resent the packages.

So, is error correction in modems good ? Or is it something
that helps a little on quality ?
-- 
Povl H. Pedersen   -   Macintosh specialist. Knows some DOS and UNIX too.
pope@imv.aau.dk    -   povlphp@uts.uni-c.dk
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: hshulman@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Harvey G Shulman)
Subject: Re: SupraFaxModem Internal UART?
Keywords: modem,supra,fax,uart
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:41:59 GMT


The Supra internal FM includes circuitry that exceeds the
capabilities of a 16550.  The important characteristic of a 16550
is it's internal 16 byte receive buffer that helps prevent
overruns at high baud rates.  The Supra 14400 FM has a larger
buffer than that (I think 100 bytes, but not sure).  Discussions
I've read on Compuserve's Supra forum seem to indicate that the
internal SFM is superior in this respect to an external modem
connected to a 16550 based COM port.



-- 
Harvey Shulman
Ohio State University, Dept of Psychology
614 292-2759 / h.shulman@osu.edu
From: ab016@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scotty Meredith)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: USR modems..
Date: 9 Jan 1993 12:44:01 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ab016@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scotty Meredith)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, Steven_Lam@mindlink.bc.ca (Steven Lam) says:

>I notice that there isn't too many messages on here concerning US Robotics
>products.  Especially the Sporster and Courier v.32bis fax and dual standard
>fax products.  Is there anybody out there who use them?  Any comments or
>critisim?  I sell USR modems and would like to find out people's opinion on
>them.  BTW, I have a Dual Standard with fax and am VERY happy with it.
>
>

I also, have a DS w/fax and LOVE it.  Worth evry penny!!


I have *NO* problems connecting with systems ran by Supra, Intel, Hayes or
USR modems whatsoever.  It is a GODSEND!!

--
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Distribution: world
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 08:25:01 -0800
From: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Is 19.2K for ZyXel available yet?
Comment-To: Harald_Milz@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/701

 >|> 19.2 is not available just yet.  We will release the the roms
soon.
 >|>
 >|> Tyrone Horton
 >|> (Zero One)
 >|> Tech Support
 >|> ZyXEL USA

 > Will they fit in all ZyXELs?
They will *FIT* in all ZyXEL's with 1 meg sockets.  The will only
*WORK* in the Plus models.

Tyrone Horton
(Zero One)
Tech Support
ZyXEL USA

--- FMail 0.92
 * Origin: ZyXEL USA (1:202/701.101)
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V.42bis/LAP-M questions
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 15:16:02 EST
Organization: Izot's Swamp

povlphp@uts.uni-c.dk (Povl H. Pedersen) writes:

> How come that I sometimes have to get retries from Z-modem when
> using a modem with MNP-5 or V.42bis/LAP-M ? Both include error
> correction, and I thought that would ensure that all packages
> would be transfered as sent.

   They correct errors that occurr between the modems.  They can not correct 
errors that occurr between each modem and its host computer.  This is why it 
is usually not advisable to use protocols such as YMODEM-G, which cannot deal 
with such errors. 

  Geoffrey Welsh, 7 Strath Humber Court, Islington, Ontario, M9A 4C8 Canada
geoff@zswamp.uucp, [xenitec.on.ca|m2xenix.psg.com]!zswamp!geoff (416)258-8467
                Now I've lost everything, I give to you my soul
           And the meaning of all that I believed before escapes me
                  In this world of none, no thing, and no one
                            - Genesis, _Afterglow_
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: srtest@netcom.com (Sunrise Test Systems)
Subject: Digicom Scout+ problems
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:30:36 GMT

About that noisy power problem and the modem on the SPARC-

It turns out that the problem is related to thermal and/or power
sensitivity.  After substituting the surge protector/filter, 
the modem still acted a little flakey.  I suspected thermal 
problems, and took the modem out if its case to try to keep it cool
(I had noticed that the modem worked better if I shut it off for
 a few minutes and turned it back on).  After this, it worked like
a champ.  No problems at all, every connection was negotiated 
correctly.  Multiple dialers tried the dial-in and got good
connections too.

Looks like I got a marginal board.  I think I'll verify the problem
is thermal and give Digicom support a call.
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:18983 biz.comp.telebit:1114
From: ewv@craycos.com (Eric Varsanyi)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
Subject: Re: Excuses for Telebit not shipping Fax Upgrade
Date: 6 Jan 93 04:52:30 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <C0EIGL.3vM@norstan.com> sfrazier@norstan.com (Superuser) writes:
>Has this happened to you?
>
>I was told "We are in the middle of inventory, we can't look up anything
>until the 14th of January".  I was amazed at this answer.  I asked what
>the date was.  "It is January 5th".  I asked to speak to a supervisor.
>"none is available, I will have one call you back".  I told that customer
>rep that if I couldn't find out where my shipment was, that the credit cardcompany would be instructed "NOT" to pay the charge. 
>would just not pay the charge.

My check was cashed in early December and I still haven't seen anything. When
I found out about the bug that prevents the WB from answering FAX vs Data
I tried to cancel and get a refund... they told me I would have to wait
until I got the upgrade and then return it. They are apparently unable
to keep track of their own shipping list.

Don't get me started on fraudulent tax charges...

-Eric
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: jemartin@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Martin)
Subject: Re: PPI EPROMS (Re: PPI repair charges)
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 21:41:43 GMT

In article <Jan.6.15.27.26.1993.12836@pilot.njin.net> birchall@pilot.njin.net (Shag) writes:
>jemartin@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Martin) writes:
>
>>Incidentally, I came across this in my manual: "Most products returned to
>>Practical Peripherals for repair are found to be in proper working
>>condition."
>
>Read: "Most people who think something's wrong with their modem are silly
>dips who don't know how to configure it."  Find a BBS network (such as 
>WWIVnet) with a networked PPI support SIG, and read the messages for a good
>laugh.  50% are posts by or to people who don't RTFM.  Another 10% are 
Yes, I have looked in on similar forums before, and things can be quite
amusing...

>[...]
>A suggestion:  Do NOT send your old EPROM back immediately.  PPI is not
>really going to notice.  Run for a week with your new EPROM to make sure it
>works.  Put it through its paces.  Once you're satisfied it's fine, send
>back the old one.  This way, if the new one has a problem, you're not up
>the creek.
>
>-Shag
Great suggestion - thanks

John
--
 John E. Martin    jemartin@nyx.cs.du.edu      University of Puget Sound '92
    Kent, WA     (formerly martin@ups.edu)   SeinfeldSuperSonicsBC++RushDWeckl
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gjjr@pool.info.sunyit.edu (Joseph Riolo)
Subject: Dallas Fax
Organization: State University of New York -- Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:02:10 GMT


Hi Modem fans, does anyone have any thing to say about a Dallas Fax Extermal
14.4k Fax/Modem ???  The chipset is Rockwell, and the Bios version is 1.200!
I have heard that anything less than a Bios version of 1.270 will have problems Can anyone confirm that??  Thanks ALL!!
Joe
-- 
 /---------------------------------------------------------------------------\
 |  gjjr@sunyit.edu                              __               |          |
 |  Joseph J. Riolo                              |_  | | |\ | \ / |          |
 |  SUNY Institute of Technology @ Utica/Rome    __| |_| | \|  |  .          |
From: tnixon@hayes.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Hayes lawyers intimidate competition (was: Hayes Press Releas
Date: 10 Jan 93 00:26:26 EDT
Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA

In article <H.eg.cctxHwMddEA@mips.ruessel.sub.org>,
naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org (Christian Weisgerber) writes: 

> In <6619.2b48254d@hayes.com>, tnixon@hayes.com writes:
>> that this is not true.  Group 3 fax specifies use of V.17 and V.33 
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> BTW, what's the difference between V.17 and V.33? V.17 was designed for
> 2W half-duplex operation, V.33 for 4W full-duplex which translates to
> half-duplex on 2W. Are the modulation schemes themselves any different?

The constellations and encoding at 12000 and 14400 are identical.  
V.17 adds some things, though, including (a) 7200 and 9600 
trellis-coded operation (V.33 is only 12000 and 14400), (b) a 
fast-turnaround mode which is used for page transmission after the 
intial TCF training [shaves a second and a half off each page over 
V.33], and (c) "sacrificial" tones and echo protection tones to 
handle the vagaries of network echo control equipment (which V.33 
doesn't have because it was written for use only on leased and 
private circuits).

	-- Toby
           (Currently, officially, among the unemployed, until
            Monday morning)  :-)

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: williams@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu (Mark Williams)
Subject: Re: A Telebit FAX upgrade FLAME (Was: "Re: WB Fax Upgrade")
Summary: How do other vendors handle this?
Organization: Texas Christian University
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:00:30 GMT

We've seen a lot of flames for Telebit on their modal support of fax vs. data
calls.  What I haven't seen is anyone mentioning how other manufacturers are
doing this.  Do any of you have modems that DO perform the switch on incoming
calls?

Does the USR Courier Dual Standard Fax do it?

Does the Supra Fax?

Enquiring minds want to know.
From: 1012breuckma@vms.csd.mu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: PPI Modem IS REALLLLLLLY BAD!!!...NOT
Date: 6 Jan 1993 02:07:56 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Computer Services
Reply-To: 1012breuckma@vms.csd.mu.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: vmsf.csd.mu.edu

In article <1993Jan1.012149.1756@informix.com>, aland@informix.com (Colonel Panic) writes:
>I have a PPI pocket modem for my laptop which failed after about six months.
>These are "lifetime warranteed", so I sent it back, and they sent me a new 
>one in a reasonable timeframe.
>
>HOWEVER, there is a *charge* for warranty repairs -- I think it was $25 for
>the pocket modem, which is 25% of what I paid for it.  The "lifetime warranty"
>claim should be taken with a grain of salt...
>

They've never charged us for warranty repairs - when did this start??
From: jim@n5ial.mythical.com (Jim Graham)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Can I upgrade a 16450 uart to a 16550a? 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:11:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Me? Organized? Hah! :-)

In article <2To7wB1w165w@halcyon.com> puma writes:

> jim@n5ial.mythical.com (Jim Graham) writes:
> > 
> > usually (and there are exceptions), sales droids don't have a clue about
> > these things.  the guy you talked to probably doesn't know the
> > difference between a UART and a toaster, and just pulled out a term
> > (VLSI) that he'd heard in the past somewhere.  :-)

> He likely was correct, many systems don't use "real" UARTS, they use
> a VLSI chip that is programmed to emulate the uarts and other parts.

yes, but the original poster said specifically that this chip *IS* a
16450.  not a clone in a multi-function VLSI chip, a 16450, period.
the sales droid said it was a VLSI, while the original poster had
already determined it to be a 16450 (I'm assuming he knows how to read
the identification off a chip).

if I look at a chip, and the type designation on the label says it's
a 16450 (especially if it's in the familiar 40-pin DIP package), while
a sales droid tells me it's something else, my visual inspection of the
chip wins.  sorry.

> *flame on* - Why bother talking with your manufacturer who "doesn't
> have a clue," when you can talk with an equally clueless person on
> the net.  
> *flame off*

flame away all you want, but it doesn't change the wording of the data
sheets I've got sitting right here in front of me.  the question asked
was if the 16450 could be replaced with a 16550.  the answer is yes,
it can.  the data sheets tell us we can do this.  I've done it.  others
have also done it.  it works.  I guess National Semiconductor is
clueless, too?

   --jim

--
#include <std_disclaimer.h>                                 73 DE N5IAL (/4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNET: jim@n5ial.mythical.com  |  grahj@valinor.mythical.com
          j.graham@ieee.org       (OLD): jim@n5ial.chi.il.us
AMATEUR RADIO: n5ial@w4zbb        AMTOR SELCAL: NIAL       ICBM: 30.23N 86.32W
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems