From: interpol@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Interpol)
Subject: Re: Boycott Icom (fwd)
Followup-To: comp.dcom.modems
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 17:17:20 GMT

In article <Mike_Whalen.0c0o@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US> Mike_Whalen@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Mike Whalen) writes:
>
>   Well.. I will be the first to admit that I don't know the entire story
>when it comes to the 9600+ modem scene, but I do know a little bit. I will
>respond to your message as kind as I can considering your message was a
>little bile-ridden than it should have been. Try being NICE once in your
>life, why don't you.

Well, if you got the impression that I was flaming the hell out of you, then I
apologize.  However, what you said (and the way you said it) implied that you
knew exactly what you were talking about, which, as you admit, is untrue.
>
>  Anyway, there is no one standard in the 9600+ mart. This is the main
>reason why USR sells a DUAL standard modem for around $800 or so. There are
>two standards currently. I don't remember how they work but they are
>something to do with v.32, v.32BIS, and v.42.

Depends on what reference you use.  In the eyes of the international
community, there IS one, and _only_ one, standard in the 9600 (NOT 9600+) mart
- that which was adopted by the CCITT, which is v.32.  Other standards, like
USR HST, Hayes Proprietary, etc. are pretty much dead technologies.  The
reason why USR continues to make a dual standard modem is to keep themselves
out the the modulation hole they dug for themselves.
>
>  The main thing to look at hear is the modems that support their own kind.
>For instance, the CompuCom modems are very inexpensive for the 9600 buck,
>but for at least a couple of them, you can only call CompuCom modems. If
>you don't buy the DUAL STANDARD USR one, then you are only limiting
>yourself to being able to call certain modems.

True.  However, I would say at least 80-90 percent of 9600 baud modems now
support v.32, and it already has established itself as THE world standard. 
Plus, the price that you quote for a v.32 modem ($500) was way off from what
it really is.

>  And if I AM wrong in this, would you be so kind as to point me to the
>right source materials so I can read up and understand it a little more. I
>am not doubting your word (as you did mine), I would like to better
>understand the 9600+ world.

Understandable.  It's just that this kind of misinformation could possible
confuse someone who's looking for such a modem, or is just curious.

>
>  And anyway.. wasn't this thread about ICOM throwing out old parts?
>

It sure was.  That why I said "FOLLOWUPS TO COMP.DCOM.MODEMS OR ALT.DEV.NULL"
at the end of my original post.  Didn't you see it?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Drew S. Cheng, BA '91 MD '95           | "Compelling, yet tedious...I    |
| Northwestern University                |  feel spent, like a man who is  |
|  Medical School, Chicago, IL USA       |  forced to wear his genitals    |
| Internet : interpol@nwu.edu            |  like a pendant."               |
|                                        |    - Dieter, "Sprockets"        |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------