HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: banshee@cats.ucsc.edu (Wailer at the Gates of Dawn)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Zyxel types (was Re: ZyXEL as answering machine ? (PC-Software))
Date: 5 Jan 1993 21:37:06 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


jeroenp@rulfc1.LeidenUniv.nl (Jeroen W. Pluimers) writes:
>BTW: What are the pro's and contra's of the 4 different modem types?
>If my memory serves me right, ther are E, E+, S and S+ types.
>I'd like a good recommendation on which to buy (and where to buy
>it in The Netherlands or Germany).

E model is std 14.4 fax modem
S adds a nifty LCD front panel display and some more status indicators

X+ models add a faster processor for better compression of voicemail.

-- 
The Wailer at the Gates of Dawn              | banshee@cats.UCSC.EDU       |
Just who ARE you calling a FROOFROO Head?    |                             |
DoD#0667  "Just a friend of the beast."      | banshee@ucscb.UCSC.EDU      |
2,3,5,7,13,17,19,31,61,89,107,127,521,607....| banshee@ucscb.BITNET        |
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:19200 biz.comp.telebit:1131
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,biz.comp.telebit
Subject: Re: Detecting TurboPEP
Date: 9 Jan 93 20:04:55 GMT
Organization: Izot's Swamp

ziegast@godzilla.UU.NET (Eric W. Ziegast) writes:

> 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).

   Nifty idea... but don't the latest firmware revisions for PEP2 modems 
include V.42bis support?

  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: rodney@cabot.balltown.cma.com (Rodney Peck)
Subject: T2500 status registers
Organization: Balltown Offsite
Distribution: comp
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:18:29 GMT


I've got a telebit netblazer with two T2500 modems.  From time to
time, the network response time really goes down hill.  Normally, we
get a ping time of about 300ms to the gateway machine.  When things
get bad, the the time climbs to over 50000ms.  The IP layer doesn't
complain, and there are no IP level errors.  I'm guessing that there's
some sort of problem at the hardware level and that the T2500's are
dealing with this on their own.

My question is: is there some way to ask the T2500 if it has to do a
lot of error correction or retransmission?  I'd like to be able to
poll it and get numbers when it is working well, and again when it's 
misbehaving.

Please email me directly.  Thanks

Rodney

rodney@balltown.cma.com
GE Image Understanding Group
From: oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: V.42bis/LAP-M questions
Date: 12 Jan 93 04:40:10 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1993Jan5.213939.11393@uts.uni-c.dk> 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. 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.

Well, imagine a lost bit either (1) between your computer and your
modem or (2) at the other end, between their modem and their computer.
No amount of v.42 or MNP4 in hardware will fix that.  I got two
retried zmodem packets the other day downloading from Compuserve.
Pretty scary but that's just about the only explanation.

>So, is error correction in modems good ? Or is it something
>that helps a little on quality ?

I guess the other possiblity is a bit or two wrong on the phone
line, in a way that happens to fool the CRC check that V.42 does.
Guess it would have to be more than one bit.  And the odds of it 
happening for any one packet are lower than one in a million or
so.

Carl Oppedahl

-- 
Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY  10112-0228
voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: WB Fax Upgrade
Date: 5 Jan 1993 03:57:10 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
NNTP-Posting-Host: mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us

In article <1ib5ubINNt8a@gap.caltech.edu> tobi@pcmp.caltech.edu (Tobi Delbruck) writes:
>isn't it supposed to be the other way around?  why should we pay $50
>more for precisely the same item?

Well, for starters there's this thing called a "monopoly".  If you
are the sole source for a particular product, then people who want
that product have to pay you however much you're charging, or do
without.  In this case, Telebit is the only legal source for the FAX
upgrade, so you can pay them $149 for the FAX upgrade, do without a
FAX upgrade, or sell your WorldBlazer and buy a ZyXEL or a Supra or
something like that.

In addition, the mailing that *I* got from Telebit was fairly clear
that the $99 price was a special limited-time offer sort of thing, and
that the price would eventually go up.  Well, surprise surprise,
"eventually" is now.

-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   |  have to remember that the nucleus of the atom
                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture
From: naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org (Christian Weisgerber)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Organization: My Individual Private Site
Subject: Re: Hayes lawyers intimidate competition (was: Hayes Press Releas
	<105934@bu.edu> <C0A7wy.Gyn@gator.use.com> <6619.2b48254d@hayes.com>
Reply-To: naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.10 Rev. Dec 18 1992
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 23:19:50 CET
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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?

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber, Germany           naddy@mips.ruessel.sub.org
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Distribution: world
Date: Tue,  5 Jan 93 14:14:01 -0800
From: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Is 19.2K for ZyXel available yet?
Comment-To: Guillot,_Burt_J.@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/701

 > Is 19.2K data mode available for the ZyXel modems yet?  If not,
 > how much
 > longer will we have to wait for the chips that will upgrade the
 > modems?
19.2 is not available just yet.  We will release the the roms soon.

Tyrone Horton
(Zero One)
Tech Support
ZyXEL USA

--- FMail 0.92
 * Origin: ZyXEL USA (1:202/701.101)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: vasco@bvl.pt (antonio vasconcelos)
Subject: Re: V32 FAST
Organization: Bolsa de Valores de Lisboa
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:36:48 GMT

tnixon@hayes.com writes:
: 
: V.32 was approved in 1984.  V.32bis was approved in 1991.  There's 
: no such thing as "V.32 FAST".  If you mean "V.fast", this is the 
: interim, working title of a standard for a duplex modem operating at 
: up to 28,800 bit/s.  It will probably be 1994 before it is adopted.

Yes, my mistake, I want to say v.fast.

We have tested a pair of CODEX v.fast a few weeks ago between 2 sites
about 400 Km away over a standard dial line and got the full 28,800.
And here in Portugal we have REALLY NOYSI lines, not bad for Codex, hum ?.

regards,
vasco
From: dmkasten@redorc.chi.il.us (Bowie Poag)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: sportster 14.4/16.8 adventures
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:48:17 CST
Organization: Red Oracle Bbs/Network

In article <1992Dec31.210531.14912@sun1x.actc.res.utc.com>,
scottb@sun1x.actc.res.utc.com (TheLrdLovsAHngn) writes:
>Hi all,
>
>since last posting/asking about the sportster and hst 16.8 modem settings,
>my friend and I have made a few discoveries.  
>Discovery #1:
>
>if you type atgw03c6,22gw05cb,2f &h1 &r2 &b1 - you and up with
>USR Courier v.32bis settings (type ati4 to see this)
>
>if you type atgw03c6,22gw05cd,2f &h1 &r2 &b1 - you end up with
>USR 16.8 HST settings       ^Note: this is a D, this is the only difference
>from the first line.
>
>Then upon dialing into a 16.8 bbs, I was able to get a cps thru-put of
>1875 chars.  Probably couldve gotten a little higher, but transfer finished.
>
>The downfall of all this is, my friend who has the sportster 14.4 (with 4.1 
>rom) and I cannout successfully connect at 16.8 (with above settings).  It
>would seem that you need to have a real 16.8 HST on one end of the connection.
>Of course I could be wrong, so if anyone can duplicate/prove/disprove my
>findings, please post here for all to see.
>-- 
>Disclaimer:  I didn't do it!  Nobody saw me do it!  You can't prove anything! 
>             My opinions are my own.   They do not reflect anyone/thing else!
>\/       preferred        \/
>scottb%nw8550@utrcgw.utc.com            |           sdb@rcinet.utc.com

I knew about the 14.4-->16.8K hack code for the the sportster, and was one pof
the many reasons I bought one.. However, I knew that USR had made another ROM
that this code wouldnt work on (4.2), and new Sportsters were being shipped
with it.. So I tried my luck at ordering my Sportster from some backwoods
shithole of a software dealer in New Joisey to see if I could take an old
(read:4.1!) Sportster off their hands for $320.


I got a 4.2... However, does anyone know if there exists a code to allow 4.2
rom users to kick up to 16.8?

+-----------------------------------------------------------+
|                I think, therefore I Amiga.                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| Douglas Michael Kasten (DMK) | Amiga 2000HD/5 with a tiny |
|  dmkasten@redorc.chi.il.us   | little 21" Toshiba monitor.|
+------------------------------+----------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: jmccorm@a.cs.okstate.edu (MCCORMICK JOSHUA C)
Subject: Re: Crosstalk for Windows- upload Zmodem thrash
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 00:51:44 GMT

From article <C0EEBz.IsE@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>, by sjm2458@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (The Steve-meister):
> The "thrash" begins with a rediculously (sp?) high throughput display
> (e.g. 2300 cps on a 2400 baud connection), which continues to *increase*
> along with the number of bytes transmitted, while the graphical bar which
> depicts percentage completion "thrashes" between values (e.g. 5%, then
> 35%, then 45%, then 7%, then ...).  Once the transmitted byte count reaches

Ah. The infamous runaway CPS rate. Here's the "standard" answer for that
problem:

What is happening is that your computer is talking to your modem at a faster
rate than your modem is talking to the other modem. Going by the CPS rates
you reported, you more than likely have a high speed modem. 

Your modem normally uses RTS/CTS handshaking to control the problem of a
computer giving it too much information, too fast. What's going on is that
you're flooding your modem and it's saying to your software "Shut up! SHUT
UP!" but your software is not listening.

How to solve the problem? Look for an option to enable CTS/RTS handshaking.
[Make sure you are NOT using XON/XOFF handshaking.] If you do that, and the
problem persists, then make sure your modem is set up to send the proper
handshaking signals.

Let me know how this works out for you, okay?

-- 
      ### ####  #### Name: Josh McCormick
      ### ########## -----------------------------------------
  ### ### ### ## ### Addr: jmccorm@a.cs.okstate.edu
   #####  ###    ### Addr: Josh McCormick @ 1:3814/0 [fidonet]
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Distribution: world
Date: Mon,  4 Jan 93 10:50:05 -0800
From: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Upgrading a ZyXEL 1496E to an E+
Comment-To: Edward_Leung@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: Zero_One@p101.f701.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/701

 > Hello, ZyXEL owners.

 > I am interested in upgrading my ZyXEL 1496E to an E+ and I would
 > like to ask
 > the net for some assistance.  I understand the differences are
 > minor enough
 > that someone with hardware experience should be able to perform
 > the necessary
 > modifications (my E board has the '+' blacked out).

There is no way possible that you can turn the E into an E+.

Tyrone Horton
(Zero One)
Tech Support
ZyXEL USA

--- FMail 0.92
 * Origin: ZyXEL USA (1:202/701.101)
From: j_manning@csc32.enet.dec.com (John Manning)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: PM14400FXSA <=> USR/DS at 4.8kps ?
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:30:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <86392@ut-emx.uucp>, victor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (V Menayang) writes...
>A couple of days before I read that someone was having
>difficulties connecting a Practical Peripherals PM14400FXSA
>with USR Dual Standard modems.
> 
>I just got my 1.21 EPROM and true enough my modem only connected
>at a carrier speed of 4800 bps after I installed the new EPROM.
> 

I saw this same behavior on a board local to me.  I found out that I can get
a 14.4 connect about 1 time out of 5.  I am going to leave the new EPROM in
because it seems to handle retrains much better.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|    John Manning                       |  Opinions expressed are my own.     |
|    j_manning@csc32.enet.dec.com       |  I do not represent Digital Equip.  |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: jmccorm@a.cs.okstate.edu (MCCORMICK JOSHUA C)
Subject: Re: Boy, do *I* have a question!
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 20:13:09 GMT

From article <oZwTwB2w164w@jaflrn.UUCP>, by Don Becker <grendel@jaflrn.UUCP>:
> I own an AT&T PC6300 (ARGH!!!), an 8086-based system that isn't totally 
> compatible with the IBM XT, but is close enough to run most XT-related 
> programs. I doubt I can run 14.4, but I've heard (from somewhat unreliable 
> sources, but sources nonetheless) that some 9600's can run on XT's.
>  
> If anyone can point me towards a 9600 baud modem that will work with my 
> so-called computer (ie: brand, price, and where I can get one), please send 
> me e-mail, as I don't read this group at all.

Generally speaking, if one 9600 baud modem is going to work with your 8086,
all are going to work. But there is something you can do to at least minimize
the potential problems. If you get an internal modem, make sure it has a
16550 chip on it. If you get an external modem, have your communications
card fitted with a 16550. But, not all communication cards can be upgraded.
Make sure that it has a 16450 chip that is *socketed*. It so, you're in
business. If not, you'll need to go out and buy another communications card
that you can upgrade. 

Next, be sure that your telecommunications software will take advantage of
the 16550 chip. I know telemate does, others do as well. The 16550 chip
basically buffers the information inside the chip so that if your computer
was too busy in between interrupts to pick up every byte of data as it
comes it, it'll hold up to 16 characters worth until your computer catches
up.

Unfortunately, you'll find that talking to your modem at 9600 may not be
what you want to do. Unless you disable v.42bis (data compression) you'll
find that you'll want to talk to your modem at a minimum of 19.2k, if not
38.4. I lock mine at 38.4k, and sometimes it can't keep up with a modem I
regularly talk to, locked at 57.6. 

Some things to think about... Josh

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: djr48312@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Dennis Robinson)
Subject: HELP: Digicom Scout+ and kermit
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 07:52:49 GMT

Im using minix kermit 5A.  For some reason it talks to my Hayes
optima 96 fine but does not really want to communicate with my
scout+.  When I "connect" to the modem I seem to have to hit the
enter key twice to get the at command to process.  On the hayes I only
have to hit enter once.  ALso when I try to do a "at*o" I only get
this much info:

MODEL:SCOUT PNE
&B0 &C1 &D2 

I seem to have to hit enter after each line tries to come through.
Also when I am manually typing in the "at" commands the cursor moves
one slower than I type, where the hayes is always ahead of where I
type.
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: paul@pphbau.atr.bso.nl (PPH Bauwens)
Subject: Re: USA modems in Europe
Organization: Private Node
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 19:53:16 GMT

Rob Lyle  Wizard of Ozje (rlyle@nl.oracle.com) wrote:
: Anyone got any experiences with using USR modems (or any other 14.4K beasts)
: built and bred for the States over in Europe?  (Specifically Holland/Britain).

Dear Rob,

I am using a US Robotics Sportster 14.400 FAX (US version) and it runs
perfectly in Rotterdam. Transferrates > 1650 on compressed news etc.

The DOS fax software also works flawlessly, even on international faxes.

One minor point: it currently does not recognise the dial tone (it _does_
recognise busy), just using ATX3 in stead of ATX4 solves this problem nicely.

I ordered directly from the US, make sure you get a 220 Volt power supply!

Een voorspoedig 1993!
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bauwens				Email:	paul@pphbau.atr.bso.nl
Rietkerkweg 364					paul@pphbau.hobby.nl
3066VL Rotterdam  Nederland		Phone:	+31-10-4211858
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Subject: Re: Digicom Scout+ problems
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:47:04 GMT

Bradley D. Keister (keister@poincare.phys.cmu.edu) wrote:
: 2.  There are also times (which keep recurring, though I can't
: forcibly reproduce them) where the modem becomes completely silent,
: that is, it gives no response whatsoever to any AT commands, including
: AT*O, and various AT&F commands (even repeated); by "silent" I mean
: not just no echo, but no OK, either.  The only way I can remedy this
: is to reboot, and, in a few instances, use the reset button.  Is this
: something I should expect, and/or is there a way around it?

The Scout has a command line timeout of about 8 to 10 seconds with the 
intention to minimize the chance of accidental escapes into command
mode. When you type a command like AT and then wait several seconds,
maybe to look something up in the manual or quick reference card and
then continue the command with maybe *O<RETURN> there will be no
response, because the timeout was triggered. In this case one has to
start again with AT, AT*O in this case. 

Since you write 'even repeated' this may not be your problem, however.
You may check your ROM version with ATI1. I posted a while ago that
there is a problem with the 2915/2930 ROM, which can lead to occasional
lockups. This situation was resolved about two or three months ago
already. Personnally I use this particular combination in an external
Scout+ and have been waiting for weeks now for my first lockup.




-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke     Data lanes not car pool lanes      wolfgang@netcom.com
From: eng10081@nusunix1.nus.sg (PAN SOON KEONG)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: INTEL VS AT&T
Date: 6 Jan 93 10:47:14 GMT
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

I intend to buy a fax modem, a 14,400 one.   And I have sort of zero in
to two modems:  Intel SatisFaxtion 400/e or the AT&T Dataport modem.  I
heard a lot about the Intel one and it does not live up to its claims in
the adverts.   Is it true?


        
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?



Please I need some suggestions and advices.   Thanks in advance for your
suggestions.
From: Charles Menser <charles@peachnet.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Wanted: Info on Focus modems
Date: 12 Jan 1993 01:27:35 GMT
Organization: PeachNet
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: charles-home.oit.peachnet.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d17
X-XXMessage-ID: <A7778E4519010438@charles-home.oit.peachnet.edu>
X-XXDate: Mon, 11 Jan 93 02:51:17 GMT

Can someone share any info/experiences on the Focus enhancements modems,
in particular the v.32bis fax/modem.

It claims to use the Rockwell chipset. I have only heard vauge comments on
the chipset, is it good, ok?

All info appreciated.

Thanks,
Charles
-----
Charles Menser
charles@peachnet.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: R3DRS@VM1.CC.UAKRON.EDU
Subject: HELP: USR SPORTSTER 14.4 FAX... NEED OPINIONS
Organization: The University of Akron
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:17:06 GMT

Hello everyone!...
 
I have recently decided to upgrade from my current 2400 baud modem to a V32bis
modem.  Due to its recent price drop, and its apparent reliability as a data
modem, I am seriously considering the USR sportster 14.4 fax modem.  Before i
buy, i have a few questions that hopefully someone here will be kind enough to
answer:
                                                      /--->(Goldstar 16C450)
I currently have a serial board with (i believe) 16450 Uarts.  If i were to buy
   the external model, would i have to replace this board with one that had
   the buffered 16550 uarts?
 
Other than the above, what are the differences in the internal and external
   models?
 
I have gathered from some of the posts that the sportster is somewhat limited
   in its fax capability (due to only offering class 1 fax support); is this
   in fact the case?  How does the sportsters fax capability compare with, say
   the intel satisfaxstation 400? (another modem ive been considering)
   Is a rom upgrade to class 2 in the works (or even possible)?
   (I have no idea of the significance of class 1 or 2, but it seems like a
    question i should ask)
 
     I am looking for more of a data modem than a fax modem, and am attracted
to the sportster from its reputation as gathered from reading this newsgroup.
I would be very interested in hearing from people that have had problems that
suggest the sportster isnt as reliable as i am guessing.  I have also
considered the intel satisfaxstation 400 & 400e,  The hayes optima, and a few
of the lower price ranged modems such as boca and zoom (supra for a while, but
i think the good to bad message ratio has been like 1:25),  but i have since
found the sportster being offered for a good $100 less than most of these.
 
Any opinions on the above modems, or any others in the same price range would
be GREATLY appreciated.
 
                           David Snyder  r3drs@vm1.cc.uakron.edu
                                         r3drs@vax1.cc.uakron.edu
 
PS - Has anyone dealt with Microcomputer Concepts ????
                           15200 Transistor Lane
                           Huntington Beach, CA
 
 
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems