HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: emartine@digi.lonestar.org (Edgar Martinez Martinez)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: What is it with Supra?
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:48:23 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX


 It's been a month since the SupraFax v32bis modem started shipping and I
haven't received mine. Why? I ordered from BFJ, and they have only received
25 modems! I'm 82 on the waiting list, does this mean it's gonna take two
more months to get the modem? What is it with Supra, why have they shipped so
few!?
 Are other mail order houses receiving many more than BFJ is?


Edgar Martinez                UTArlington Co-op program (Great!)
emartine@digi.lonestar.org    DSC Communications Corp.  Plano, TX
b645zju@utarlg.uta.edu        University of Texas at Arlington
"MEXICANO INDUSTRIALIZATE, VIVIRAS MENOS PERO VIVIRAS MEJOR."
                                          "Cristobal Nonato", by Carlos Fuentes
-- Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in! --
From: davidsen@yeti.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Final verdict on the Supra?
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:01:37 GMT
Reply-To: davidsen@crd.ge.com (bill davidsen)
Organization: GE Corporate R&D Center, Schenectady NY

In article <1992Apr17.164930.21630@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca>, jwhite@mta.ca (Jay White) writes:

|  Maybe I can throw the trigger-fingered flamers off my trail by asking
|  the following:  Given that my preferred BBS's are anywhere from 800 to
|  1000 miles away (we're stuck wa-a-a-y out on the continental periphery
|  here, folks), what is the likelihood of my being able to consistently
|  get & maintain a high-speed connection to a BBS in, say, Ontario?  I 
|  realize that your mileage may vary, according to equipment, line noise,
|  etc., but I'm just wondering if I'm too optimistic to expect that 14.4K
|  might be a reliable connection rate over long distances.  Is there any
|  way to test this other than by experience?  (do telcos know about this?)

  In my limited experience with V.32, it has been less resistant to
line noise (even with V.42) than PEP, over the same connections. We
noted this with T2500's, tried some other brand of V.32 just to confirm.
-- 
	- bill davidsen (davidsen@crd.ge.com)
	GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
By analysis of usenet source, the hardest part of C to use is the comment
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:05:06 +0100
From: kai@nicedel.north.de (Kai Schlichting)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Compressed files and v.32bis
Organization: Archimedes !RUCP Users

SLENDT@athena.unomaha.edu (STEVE LENDT - C&DC NETWORK ) writes:

> 
>    A lot of the files that get transmitted over modems have been
> compressed (zip, arc, etc).  What kind of effect does this have
> on transfer times over a pair of v.32bis modems?  I've been told
> that if you transfer an lharc compressed file using Zmodem or
> simple binary Kermit that the transfer times will be close.
> Is this true?  I would think there would be more to it than that.
> 
Hmm....v32bis has really nothing to do with error compression.
v32bis will always go at the minimum of their primary baud rate
(which is 14.4k/12k/7.2k , but there's no 9600 which is v32!).
So even random data is transmitted at 1440 bytes/s at least.

This is where MNP4/5 and LAPM/v42/v42bis comes into play.
MNP4 or v42 both transmit sync. over the phone line,eliminating
the start and stop bits,blowing the data transmission up to
1600 bytes/s (they HAVE overhead ,so 14.4*10bit/8bit doesn't
give you the actual rate).
Now,there are data compression methods like MNP5 (relies on MNP4)
and v42bis (relies on v42- therefore never comes without v42),
which compress the data before sending them over the line.
Random data cannot be compressed. English ASCII text has a redundancy
of about 60%,which results in MNP compressing down to 50% of orig size
and v42bis even manages down to 25% -therefore quadrupeling the
transmission rate (14.4 base *4 = 57.6 kbit/s).
Of course the DTE (computer to modem) rate must be as high as possible,
because that's the stream where the data IS NOT YET COMPRESSED,e.g. the
DTE rate limits the maximum data trans rate.
As I see Steve Lendt beeing the Campus Network Mgr at Nebraska Uni,
I see that he considers using the v32bis in a network environment,
so I say: telnet/ftp transfers mostly use uncompressed data,therefore
it's a good idea to have v42/v42bis instead of just MNP or just v42.
bye,Kai.
      

--------------------------------------------------------------- 
Tel.:  +49 421 556803 (voice)
E-mail: kai@nicedel.north.de (private UUCP site)
       j08i@dhbrrz41.bitnet (not valid;gets forwarded to rs550)
       j08i@rs550.zfn.uni-bremen.de (University)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster)
Subject: ZyXEL new S-registers
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 23:31:35 GMT
Organization: PANIX - Public Access Unix Systems of NY

I keep seeing questions on this. Here are the newer additions to the
ZyXEL bitmapped register set:

S39:	=4 answer in originate mode
	=8 Class 2 Bitfax compatibility: +FCON at 2400, next phase at 19200
	=16 Fax Class 2 mode DTE shifting: +FCON at current DTE, shift to
            19200 when entering into next phase

S40:	=1  Disable throughput averaging
	=2  (=Q2) answer only in quiet mode

S41:	=1  Special MNP compatibility


-- 
_______________________________Mike Schuster________________________________
NY Public Access UNIX: schuster@panix.com        | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM
The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER
From: mjkobb@media-lab.media.mit.edu (Michael J Kobb)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra v.32bis problems
Date: 16 Apr 92 02:29:50 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: M.I.T. Media Laboratory

Hi,

  I'm having a couple of problems with the new Supra.  They're
fairly minor, and it works well otherwise, but I'd be much happier
if I could get these hammered out.

  1) If, while connected with v.42bis/LAPM (haven't tried it with
other setups), I type '+++' and then at%q to get the line quality
(06, sadly), then when I do 'ato', I cannot resume my connection.
The modem reports its CONNECT messages, then I type, and 'SD' lights
up, but I never get any response from the host.

  2)  Occasionally, the modem will connect, but I won't be able to
type (see above).  Escaping and typing 'ath' does NOT work.  The
modem sits and stares at me, and I have to powercycle it.

  3)  I'm getting an annoying delay over reliable connections
whenever the remote machine sends a large (~1 page) chunk of data.
I get the first seven lines, a 1.5second pause, and then the rest.
This is using v.42bis/LAPM, not MNP-5, so I didn't think this should
happen.

Any ideas?
Thanks!
--Mike
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: More serial line tidbits
Date: 9 Apr 92 06:43:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom

editor@wet.UUCP (Eric Swanson) writes:
: 
: When your subscriber line gets to your serving Central
: Office, it gets hooked into one form or another of analog-
: to-digital converter (probably either a channel bank or an
: analog station card in a digital matrix switch).  At this

NO!

Not on digital lines which these serial lines obviously are. Specifically
the calculation was to show how easy it might be to feed T1 serial data
right into the exchange on DIGITAL lines. 

The Codecs you mention in effect are the bottleneck in the online world.
Up to them its fast up to maybe T1 speeds, and from them along the phone
company network its any bandwidth you'd like, in digital. The slots are
in 56/64 Kb/s pieces though, so it maybe advantageous to stick with this
pattern beyond the Central Offices in the subscriber loops.

Its another issue if this is popular at present and/or expensive. I leave
this for others who are more familar with these issues.


-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
Wolfgang Henke          wolfgang@henke.sf-bay.org           wolfgang@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: bob@MorningStar.Com (Bob Sutterfield)
Subject: Re: New modem transfer protocol
Organization: Morning Star Technologies
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 03:09:21 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.202935.341@cc.ic.ac.uk> cmaae47@cc.ic.ac.uk (Thomas Sippel-Dau) writes:
   Could transfer be done in both directions? ... for example, news
   transfers could send totally unrelated information in both
   directions.

Lots of people run PPP or SLIP, and get some large fraction of the
modem's bandwidth for use in each direction simultaneously.
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:6578 comp.dcom.fax:817
From: larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.fax
Subject: Re: ZyXEL FAX (can send at last!)
Keywords: ZyXEL, fax, Unix
Date: 11 Apr 92 13:51:52 GMT
Organization: Feeds-R-Us

uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal) writes:

>	others :-), Netfax-2.1 now sends faxes OK with
>	ZyXEL U-1496. (Well, I took liberty to rename
>	it to Netfax-2.2 :-).

netfax runs under which version of UNIX?

-- 
 =*= Larry Snyder, Public Access Unix Site - 219-289-0777 - 10 lines =*=
      internet: larry@gator.rn.com        uucp: uunet!trauma!larry
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Are 16550'a pin compatible with 16450's?
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 92 12:08:19 EDT
Organization: Izot's Swamp

gt1610c@prism.gatech.EDU (MCGAUGH,MICHAEL KENNETH) writes:

> I think I read in PC Mag that these two chips are pin compatible.  Is this
> true?  If so, does that mean that I can take my 16450 out and plug in a
> 16550 then use software that recognizes it?  Also, will software that does
> not utilize the 16550's abilities still work? 

   There are two types of 16550: the -N variety, which is a 40 pin DIP 
compatible with the 16450 and 8250, and the the -V variety, which is a 64 pin 
square carrier.

   On powerup, the 16550 is 100% compatible with the 16450; that is, software 
will recognize it as a 16450.  Software which has specific code to support the 
16550 will try to enable the FIFO buffers that distinguish the 16550.

   There are utilities that will enable the buffers on a 16550, and well-
written serial drivers will work properly with 16550 buffers enabled, even if 
they don't have specific 16550 activation code.

Geoffrey Welsh, 412-305 Margaret Avenue, Kitchener Ontario, N2H 6S4 Canada
geoff@zswamp.uucp, { watmath!xenitec | m2xenix }!zswamp!geoff (519)742-1228
"Show us your sig." "Seeg?  I don't need no steenking seeg!"
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: mlcole@nevada.edu (Michael L. Cole)
Subject: Re: Help with Line Noise
Keywords: Noisey Phone Lines
Organization: SCS-DataComm
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 16:36:55 GMT


  i work as a data tech for UNSCS data communications and one of my 
responsibilities is fielding modem user complaints.  seventy-five per cent of
the complaints are noise related.   a majority of users complain of the "{" 
character on their screen.  the only other anomoly i am aware of is the 
ASCII characters changing from normal to the extended ASCII character set
in the middle of the users' session.

  i have experienced both of these problems when calling from home.  in each
instance, i can hear a crackling sound over the modem speaker.  even a normal
phone call has a crackling sound in the background.  some days it is weak,
other days it is loud.  i have also noticed that on days when the noise is so
bad i can't make a connection, that the sprinkler system has been running.
the phone boxes are located in the grassy areas between apartments and are 
amply saturated.

  the phone company here is CENTEL.  the technicians i have dealt with in the
past maintain that they, CENTEL, are only required to provide voice-quality
service -- data-quailty is at the risk of the user.  BellSouth, who maintains
the campus phone system, are also concerned with voice-quality -- they don't
guarentee any speed greater than 1200 baud.  our noise problems range from
300-baud (still a few out there) to 9600-baud.

   i have been able to identify that the "{" is the result of a bad trunk line
entering the campus -- i dial the 4-digit on-campus number and the line is
clean; i dial the same number using an outside line and the noise appears like
gangbusters.  management is aware and is working with CENTEL to resolve the
problem.  six months later, i'm still fielding the same noisey line problems.
furthermore, we are using new Multitech 932 modems and a new cable trunk 
connected to a Northern Telecomm analog switch.

   i would also appreciate any assistance from anyone familiar with this 
problem.
From: atilghma@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Adam Tilghman)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Cheap V.32/V.32bis Modems
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:23:28 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <397@plus.UUCP> stuart@procase.uucp (Stuart Balfour) writes:
>While 14.4K is on paper 50% faster than a 9600 bps modem, in practice this is
>not achieved. Here are some speeds for V.32 and V.32bis file transfers for some
>typical file types in bps (V.42 LAP-M and V.42bis enabled):
         [table deleted - showed roughly similar performance on
            compressible files (text, TIFF, dbase files)]

>           ZIP           8K        10K

	But this is the situation that most computer users will be
facing! (transferring pre-compressed data, hence little v.42bis
compression).  [I don't know what units these figures are in -- for
the record I get ~1060cps on a v.32/v.42bis connection, whilst I get
~1600cps on a v.32bis connection]

>An "average" speed advantage for V.32bis given the spread above is meaningless.
>V.32bis is at least 50% more expensive than V.32, and only 0-25%
> faster, except in a few specific cases.

   I would venture to say that, for properly configured modems, you
will *always* get a 25% speed increase.  The transfer times you
listed in the table seemed to show that the v.42bis implementation
on one of the two modems could not handle data rates above 24Kbps --
otherise, you would be seeing a 25% speed increase there, as well.


>                                                           Stuart Balfour
>                                                           Software Engineering
-- 
==== Adam G. Tilghman - atilghma@sdcc13.ucsd.edu - (619)558-2141 ====
==  "Martha, fetch my rifle - thar's another UCSD ECE undergrad!"  ==
From: CCHEW@UCF1VM.BITNET (Chris Chew)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Final verdict on the Supra?
Date: 11 Apr 92 04:23:27 GMT
Organization: University of Central Florida--Computer Services

I personally would really like to know the answer to this too as it was
my personal favorite ( very close to ordering as a matter of fact ) until
I read the recent postings that support Zyxel and Zoom, but it is still
my top choice if no one has anything else to recommend.....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Christopher Chew                             I&R Support
                                              Computer Services
.........................................................................

 University of Central Florida                cchew@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu
 Orlando, FL                                  chew@ist.ucf.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.mac.comm
From: sknkwrks@unlv.edu (Scott Alfter)
Subject: Re: Supra V.32bis (Disappointment)
Keywords: supra, v.32bis, v32bis, mac, macintosh
Organization: Skunk Works Software Co.
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 17:26:32 GMT

In article <1992Apr3.230641.16672@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> jsm2r@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (John S. Mitchell) writes:
>Using the modem on a Mac IIsi, I set my software for hardware handshaking
>and a communication rate of 57600 (computer to modem). Much to my chagrin,
>the text that came through from all the bbs's I tried was marred by
>numerous dropouts....
>
>Supra Tech solved my problem but only by dashing my hopes and dreams.
>Their story was that the Mac serial port can connect to modems at no better
>than 19200 baud.

The Mac's serial ports are brain-dead.  They lack some of the
handshaking lines needed for reliable high-speed operation.  I have a
Supra v.32bis plugged into my 286 and have only a small number of
overruns in ZMODEM downloads--nothing that the much-talked-about
buffered UART couldn't fix.

According to the modem dox, though, one of the built-in init strings
is supposed to set the modem to compensate for the Mac's brain-dead
ports.  Have you tried that yet?

  _/_   Scott Alfter                             Internet: sknkwrks@cs.unlv.edu
 / v \  Call the Skunk Works BBS today!         Fidonet: 1:209/765 or 1:209/211
(IIe (  (702) 896-2676 v.32bis Apple II/IBM                     GEnie: S.ALFTER
 \_^_/  Ask me about SoftDAC--digital audio for your IIe/IIc! Apple II Forever!
From: gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Final verdict on the Supra?
Date: 10 Apr 92 17:41:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: clark.1992Apr10.174112.24506
Organization: Clark College, Vancouver, Wa.  USA

In article <92100.191033SMITHBS@PURCCVM.BITNET> SMITHBS@PURCCVM.BITNET (Barry Smith) writes:
>
>I keep reading the articles that the Supra doesn't work so hot on the
>Macs.  On a scale of 1 to 10, for a PC, how would you Supra owners rate
>the 14.4 modem?

You must be reading different articles then I am, because I never heard that,
and I have been following the discussions since the beginning.  Where did
you read this?

Gary

-- 
-----
Gary Snow
uunet!clark!gsnow  or  gsnow@clark.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.fax
From: uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal)
Subject: Re: ZyXEL FAX (can send at last!)
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 19:00:04 GMT
Reply-To: uri@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM  T. J. Watson Research Center
Keywords: ZyXEL, fax, Unix

Hello,
	I'm glad to report to everybody, that with generous
	help of several people (plus some growling from
	others :-), Netfax-2.1 now sends faxes OK with
	ZyXEL U-1496. (Well, I took liberty to rename
	it to Netfax-2.2 :-).

	Multi-page send - no problem.

	I'm working on receive part now... And then - the
	biggest obstacle is going to be - you guessed it,
	"getty". It should be replaced with something  to
	distinguish between income "login"-able call  and
	fax... Any suggestions, folks?

	Regards,
	Uri.		uri@watson.ibm.com
------------
<Disclaimer>
From: EWILLIAM@UVAX01.BIOSTAT.MCW.EDU ("Eric Williams, M2 MCW")
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Pin Config for Hrdwre Hndskng Cable?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:16:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Internet


>Does anyone have a pin to pin wiring schematic to make a
>mini-DIN-8/DB25 hardware handshaking cable for the Mac?

Here it is (as far as I could tell from several sources):

	Mini-DIN-8				DB-25
	__________			_____

		    1					 4,20

	    2					  5

	    3					  2

	    4					 1,7

	    5					  3

		    6					  Not connected

	    7					  8

	    8					 	1,7

(The Mini-DIN-8 pins 4 & 8 are connected on the Mini-plug side)

If I'm wrong I'm sure you'll hear about it!

	Eric D. Williams

(no .signature, I'm on a VAX)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.mac.comm
From: mdavis@crash.cts.com (Morgan Davis)
Subject: Re: Supra V.32bis (Disappointment)
Organization: Crash TimeSharing, El Cajon, CA
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1992 20:56:52 GMT
Keywords: supra, v.32bis, v32bis, mac, macintosh

In <1992Apr8.153512.1176@clark.edu> gsnow@clark.edu (Gary Snow) writes:

>>But it would've been just as easy for Apple to stick all the pins in
>>there.  If a Super Serial Card for the Apple II (design dates to the
>>early 80s) can provide all the port signals, and if every serial board
>>out for IBM clones can provide all the signals, why did Apple have to
>>cheat on the Mac?

>Sure the Super Serial Card provides all the signals, but it also only
>has a maximum port speed of 19,200bps.

The Apple Super Serial card also has a funky DCD requirement for
receiving characters from DCE devices, which means you have to cable
around to get true carrier detect ability -- and that usually means
losing DSR.

The Apple II SSC was a bad example for comparison with the Mac (and
IIGS) serial ports which use the Zilog 8530 SCC, which blows the 6551
ACIA chip out of the water.
From: isca@icaen.uiowa.edu (Iowa Student Computer Assoc)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Speed tests on the Supra v.32bis modem
Date: 10 Apr 92 03:27:07 GMT
Organization: isca


  I recently did some thruput tests on various modems here at the U of Iowa
using SLIP (Serial Line Internet Protocol) to give me some timing
measurements.  The results were posted to this group.  Unfortunately, the
Supra modem came in after most of the modems had been sent back.  I
did do a little testing with the Supra, and since it's the hot topic
here these days, I thought I'd post the results. 

  The bottom line of the testing was that the Supra did well on compression
but did very poorly on latency testing.  So the modem would be fine for 
downloading and general interative stuff, but not as good for things like
SLIP or X-remote.  

Modems:
  ZyXEL U-1496E
  Codex 3260 series
  USRobotics V.32bis
  NEC N9635E
  Supra FAX Modem v.32bis
  
           Ping Times (ms)
[Measures latency - lower number are better]
	   
       |	Local
Remote | NEC	USR	Codex	ZyXEL
-------+-----------------------------
NEC    | 262		230	235
Codex  | 233	171	230	202
USR    |	146	179	168
Supra  | 			266


 ASCII FTP transfer rate (Kbytes/sec)
[Measures v.42bis compression - higher
numbers are better]

       |	Local
Remote | NEC	USR	Codex	ZyXEL
-------+-----------------------------
NEC    | 3.31		3.32	3.16
Codex  | 2.62	2.70	2.68	2.71
USR    |	3.29	3.32	3.34
Supra  | 			3.30

Binary FTP transfer rate (Kbytes/sec)

       |	Local
Remote | NEC	USR	Codex	ZyXEL
-------+-----------------------------
NEC    | 1.50		1.51	1.50
Codex  | 1.50	1.50	1.50	1.49
USR    |	1.49	1.50	1.53
Supra  | 			1.48

  If anyone would like info about the setup, mail me.

  - dave
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  David Lacey                           | Try the ISCA BBS and Archives    |
|  President, Iowa Student Computer Assn | Telnet/FTP: grind.isca.uiowa.edu |
|  The University of Iowa                | telnet/rlogin in as iscabbs      |
|  David-Lacey@uiowa.edu                 | 3 GIG of disk space and growing  |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: fnox@vax5.cit.cornell.edu (Mark Margolis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Supra V.32bis FaxModem Testing
Date: 13 Apr 92 11:27:49 EDT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell University

Has anyone had any luck using the built in diagnostic tests on the 
Supra FaxModem V.32bis? How does one use the built in tests? All I seem 
to get are errors. 

- Mark

-- 

******************************************************
*                                                    *
*   Mark Margolis     FNOX@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU      *
*                     FNOX@CRNLVAX5.BITNET           *
*                                                    *
*   Cornell University - Ithaca, New York 14853      *
*                                                    *
******************************************************
From: catone@drachma.wharton.upenn.edu (Tony Catone)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Supra v32bis speeds?
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:55:24 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania
In-reply-to: adhir@cygnus.umd.edu's message of 12 Apr 92 23:12:05 GMT

In article <12516@umd5.umd.edu> adhir@cygnus.umd.edu (Alok Dhir) writes:

   Oh, one final question, does Procomm Plus v2.0 use the 16550 UARTs?


Yes.


Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.protocols.ppp