HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! Our lawyers are tougher than your lawyers. You're Dead.
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:30:52 GMT
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:

>In article <BrsyEw.Dst@wsrcc.com>, wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht) writes:
>> 
>> This has nothing to do with "good modem manufacturers".  Anyone
>> relying on "<pause>+++<pause>" not occurring during a data transfer is
>> not writing good defensive code.  Good programmers don't *hope* that a
>> certain set of characters and delays never happens.  They turn off the
>> inband +++ escape kludge and use a good *out-of-band* escape.

After perusing my manual, I see *two* "possible" out-of-band signals
for dropping into command mode. The first is dropping DTR. But I need
that to drop the *connection* as well as enter command mode.

That leaves sending a "true break". Alas, I need that to get the attention
the very machine I'm entering this message from! (I've had times when it
was not possible to get it to pick the right port rate without hitting
it with a break).

So now what?

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/56	 Leonard.Erickson@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently)
From: berger@atropa (Mike Berger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Mystery Gadget
Date: 22 Jul 92 21:12:42 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

F.Farzin-nia@lut.ac.uk (F Farzin_nia) writes:
>I have a 'I don't know what this piece of kit is' question :-) A friend of
>mine recently bought a piece of kit from an electronic junk shop for me,
>thinking that it was a telephone answering machine (you see, I had asked a lot
>of friends to keep an eye out for a second
>hand answering machine and if they were to find a reasonable one to
>purchase it on my behalf). On close inspection of this rather curious
>and wonderful gadget, I realised there is a lot more to it than meets
>the eye. However, I simply cannot figure out what it is. This thing is
>manufactured by LANIER BUSINESS PRODUCTS, INC (Atlanta, Georgia, USA),
>and it has a MODEL P-101 printed underneath it. It resembles a telephone
>answering machine/dictating machine/modem. It has a speaker but no
*----
It IS a dictating machine of sorts.  These connect to the office
phone system, where they can be shared.  Then the secretary connects
to transcribe.
--
	Mike Berger
	Department of Statistics, University of Illinois
	AT&TNET     217-244-6067
	Internet    berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11166 can.uucp:172
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,can.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' vs. MNP & V.42
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 13:37:15 EDT
Organization: Izot's Swamp

john@chance.gts.org (John R MacMillan) writes:

> This is unlike V.42bis, where if the compressed block is larger
> than the original, the uncompressed block is sent.

   Strictly speaking, that's not true.  V.42bis acts on data as it arrives; 
the latency associated with waiting for a block to arrive before deciding what 
to send would be unacceptable in many circumstances.

   However, V.42bis does monitor its effect on data and, if it finds that it 
is expanding the data for any length of time (LZ always expands data for the 
first few tokens), it will start sending the uncompressed data in stead.  The 
damage is done for the data that's been sent, but at least the modem will 
stop.

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
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: radel@bach.udel.edu (Todd Radel)
Subject: Connect troubles with PPI PM14400FXSA?
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 19:09:20 GMT

Hello all!  I'm the proud(?) owner of a brand-new Practical Peripherals
PM14400FXSA modem.  I have noticed a few problems which I've been
unable to resolve:

	o Occasional trouble with ZMODEM downloads aborting suddenly
	  without even an "ERROR" warning.

	o ZMODEM uploads working inconsistently, or not at all.

	o Connects to HST DS 9600 and 14.4k modems at 2400/MNP, or
	  not at all ("NO CARRIER").

	o Trouble connecting to a Supra V.32bis: I get a "CONNECT 
	  14400" without V.42 or V.42bis, a screenful of garbage,
	  and then a disconnect; or a "CONNECT 14400/ARQ", and the
	  BBS's logon screen, but nothing I type gets echoed back
	  and a few seconds later the modem drops.

	o Occasionally a call will end with "BUSY" or "OK" instead
	  of "NO CARRIER".  I have Telix set to drop DTR to hang up,
	  rather than use the odious "+++" sequence everyone's
	  going rabid about.  :)

Part of this may be due to my serial card, which uses a 82C450
chip.  A friend of mine has the PM14400FX (internal) and has no
problem calling the above Supra.  PPI's tech support even tried
calling that number to see if they could connect, and they also
called the BBS's second line (which has a HST DS 14.4k).  No
problems for anyone except me.

Are my problems due to using the 16450 chip?  Or to a bad
setup string?  Could someone with a working PM14400FXSA mail me
their setup string?  I just got my new 16550 board by UPS today,
so I'll install that tonight and see if it helps.

Thanks to any and all who reply!

Cheers,
Todd

-- 
Todd Radel                   | "I obscenity in the milk of all," Agustin said,
CIS/English undergrad        | "if it does not seem like a lunatic asylum in
University of Delaware       | here." -- Hemingway, _For Whom the Bell Tolls_
A.I. duPont Institute, 1600 Rockland Road, Wilmington, DE  19899
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: oleg@crash.cts.com (Oleg Rovner)
Subject: Re: WorldBlazer v UUCP
Organization: CTS Network Services (crash, ctsnet), El Cajon, CA
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 04:37:27 GMT

Thanks for the helpful replies. The consensus was that I should turn spoofing
back on. Unfortunately when it was on I was experiencing uucico problems...
 Oleg
From: gartrell@girtab.usc.edu (Fred Gartrell)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: PPI 14400FXSA MODEM (intensive use vs. basic use ??)
Date: 25 Jul 1992 10:56:52 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: girtab.usc.edu

In article <728.48.uupcb@uttsbbs.uucp> kevin.fong@uttsbbs.uucp (Kevin Fong) writes:
>This is an advisory message for those interested in the Practical
>Peripherals PM14400FXSA external modem.
>
>There is a bug in the current release of the eprom (1.12c and earlier)
>which makes the modem lose its ability to connect with V.42 or MNP error
>correction or compression after it has been used for several hours.
>
>This was clearly evident in my case, since I run a BBS with two full
>time nodes.  The only solution is to turn the modem off and then back
>
>PPI will reluctantly admit this bug, and, after a frustrating
>
>Be forewarned.  The 14.4fxsa modem is a good deal, but it is currently
>buggy and undergoing rom updates (two already in less than two months of
>owning this modem).

Please tell me,  I'm hearing a lot of things about PPI 14400fxSA.  Many
people love it,  they have no problems.  Other people have had nothing
but problems, vowing never to use it again, throw it against the wall,
buy a different modem.

So who's right.  It is my guess that those individuals using this modem
for intensive work, BBS lines, network remote connections, etc are having
the problems.  Those individuals using it for fun, play and basic work
are having the least problems.

I'm no rocket scientist and won't be using it for customized connections.
Can people help me out on this.  Please email me.

P.S.  I read in another newsgroup that ftp.cica.indiana.edu has a beta
fix for the high speed modem problems relating to winfax/winfax pro.
It's called MOD1.ZIP \win3\uploads

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: pdtc@bluemoon.rn.com (Philip Caskey)
Subject: Re: 14,400 bps:  Does any comm software support it?
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 14:02:59 EDT

> I will be getting a 14,400 bps v.32/v.32bis/v.42/v.42bis
> fax/modem soon.  I have noticed that on all of the MSDOS
> and OS/2 communications software that I have seen there is
> no setting for 14,400 bps, although there is for 9600 bps and
> 19,200 bps.   Is there any way to access the 14,400 bps
> speed, or am I stuck at 9600 bps for now?  Is there any software
> out there that supports 14,400 bps?  Thanks. 
 
With MNP and other compression, you should set your DTE speed higher than 
your BPS so that (for uncompressed files, anyway) the modem receives data 
from your processor fast enough to compress at UP TO 4:1  and send at 
14,400 bps.  This means a DTE rate of 57,600.  That speed is supported by 
at least a few comm programs and should insure proper performance of your 
new modem.


 This is from
     pdtc@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have his (or her) own obnoxious signature yet
From: tls@panix.com (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Boom! You're Dead.
Date: 24 Jul 92 09:14:51 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <5787.2a6a973d@hayes.com> tnixon@hayes.com writes:
>In article <1992Jul18.142320.4269@qiclab.scn.rain.com>,
>leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: 
>
>> BTW, you seem to imply that the makers of these brain-dead modems are
>> actually pushing this bug as a *feature*? Is that true?
>
>If I implied that, I didn't mean to.  To the best of my knowledge, 
>the implementors of TIES don't tout it as a feature; they simply 
>don't mention it at all, which is the purpose of the Hayes 
>educational campaign.

I beg to differ.  The purpose of the educational campaign seems to be to scare
people who don't know better into a) buying Hayes, in the face of better and
cheaper products, or b) buying Hayes indirectly, by supporting a patent that
was granted by a Patent Office that should have known better, and upheld by a
court that should have known better.  Tony, if you can explain why the Milnet
TAC escape sequence isn't prior art, I'll shut up.  Otherwise, I wish you'd stop
miscountenancing your employers' scare tactics.
-- 
Thor Lancelot Simon	 tls@panix.COM

"Better be careful there.  John might decide to start taking legal action
against people who refuse to buy stuff from him."  --Kevin McBride
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11238 can.uucp:178
From: bdb@becker.GTS.ORG (Bruce Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,can.uucp
Subject: Re: UUCP 'g' vs. MNP & V.42
Date: 27 Jul 92 04:52:02 GMT
Organization: G. T. S., Toronto, Ontario

In article <1992Jul24.034646.26340@chance.gts.org> john@chance.gts.org (John R MacMillan) writes:
||Anybody running MNP at any level with UUCP 'g' should have their modem
||and UUCP configurations examined!  :-)
|
|I don't know, I use MNP-5 (and hence 4) on two of my mostly-mail (ie.
|uncompressed) connections and I see much improved throughput.  Even on
|much of the compressed stuff there is some improvement, though there
|is sometimes also degradation.
|
||MNP-4 is link-layer protocol that retries erroneous packets.  UUCP 'g'
||is a link-layer protocol that retries erroneous packets.  Guess what
||-- the don't get along very well!
|
|Why not?  The 'g' protocol would just never (or very rarely; only in
|modem-to-computer failures) see failures.  In my case, where the 'g'
|protocol isn't spoofed at the modem, and has to go all the way to the
|computer, that's a win.
|
||...  [V.42bis, MNP-5, and LZ are all variants of the Lempel-Ziv
||compression algorithm, though most implementations of MNP-5 *reduce*
||throughput with pre-compressed data, and each have varying degrees of
||efficiency and ratios of compression.]
|
|It's my understanding that all MNP-5 implementations will sometimes
|reduce throughput of some pre-compressed data because the compression
|is always done; it's not dependent on the implementation, but on the
|data.  This is unlike V.42bis, where if the compressed block is larger
|than the original, the uncompressed block is sent.


	I've turned MNP off on all my modems because


	1. it seems inefficient to have it on top of
	   uucp frames;


	2. I can't turn on V.42bis compression indep-
	   endently from MNP-5 compression;


	3. the telebits bid V.42 first, then if it is
	   enabled, MNP.  By the time the modems have
	   gone thru all the tones etc., uucico might
	   have given up in disgust 8^)


-- 
  ,u,	 Bruce Becker			Toronto, Ontario
a /i/	 Internet: bdb@becker.gts.org	Uucp: ...!web!becker!bdb
 `\o\-e	 -=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-=[ ]=-
 _< /_	 "Usenet is never having to say you're sorry" - Handy Andy
From: swaliff@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Steve Aliff)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Why is Zoom half the price of other 14.4's?
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:49:39 GMT
Organization: The Great Beyond


ZOOM's phone is (617) 423-1076.
-- 
Steve Aliff (swaliff@afterlife.ncsc.mil [144.51.1.1])
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: V.32(bis)-pocket-modem(DC-power-supply)?
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:40:38 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <dirksch.712342866@rama> dirksch@rama.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Dirk Schlossmacher) writes:
>Did anybody see or is currently developing a V.32(bis)-modem for
>mobile use??
>Possibly there is one to integrate in a notebook, and to be passed
>by the german TELEKOM for their stupid FTZ/ZZF-Number?

Megahertz, an American company that specializes in laptop enhancements,
is developing intenrla V.32bis modems for popular laptops. They're
supposed to be ready this fall. Their number is 1-800-LAPTOPS but
I don't know if this can be dialed from Europe.



-- 
_______________________________Mike Schuster________________________________
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM
The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: QBlazer $299
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 10:55:41 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC
Keywords: Telebit

In article <1992Jul28.001026.10748@telebit.com> fmueller@telebit.com (Fritz Mueller) writes:
>If anyone is interested in details on getting QBlazers direct from Telebit
>at $299 I can send you information.  I can also post the information if
>enough people are interested.

I need a fast tiny portbale battery-operated modem for my laptop.
Frankly, there's only one thing stopping me from ordering a $299
Qblazer. It's the nagging questions as to whether the price drop
is to stay competitive, or because a V.32bis model is to be introduced
shortly. I'd go for the latter if it were available.


-- 
_______________________________Mike Schuster________________________________
NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM
The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com   | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: st901745@pip.cc.brandeis.edu (Alastair M. Bor)
Subject: Re: V.32(bis)-pocket-modem(DC-power-supply)?
Reply-To: st901745@pip.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:57:57 GMT

Megahertz already makes an external V.32 send/rec FAX modem that REALLY
small.. (1" x 2" or so).. the number is 1-800-LAPTOPS or 1-801-272-6000.
-Alastair
From: z_kupkams@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Date: 18 Jul 92 10:07 MDT
Subject: Dallas Fax Financial Problems?
Nf-ID: #N:1992Jul18.000713.104@ccsvax.sfas:-1424073519:001:688
Nf-From: ccsvax.sfasu.edu!z_kupkams    Jul 18 10:07:00 1992


Is Dallas Fax having financial difficulties? I noticed that they do not have an
add in the August Computer Shopper.  Hmmmmmmmmmmm??? I wonder If it is because
they had to pay back a lot of refund money? or Did Shopper Ban Them for False
Advertising? I called to ask for a refund, they gave me an RMA number, said
send the modem in, and my money would be refunded. Well I asked how long would
it take, they said it would take 4 - 6 weeks, But I need a modem, and can't
wait 4-6 weeks for a refund! But I wonder If I was wise to hold the modem,
until I can Drive to Dallas! Since The Usual 2-4 page adds are not present,
somthing is rotten in dallas!

Anyone have any info?

Michael Kupka


Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: MODEM
Organization: very little
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:31:55 GMT

In article <5401@dsacg4.dsac.dla.mil> nol2321@dsacg4.dsac.dla.mil (Jim Dunn) writes:
>In article <4029.106.uupcb@cutting.hou.tx.us> eric.vongonten@cutting.hou.tx.us (Eric Vongonten) writes:
>>i have another problem.  people keep picking up the phone in the house
>>when im on the modem. (i have a boca 14.4) It keeps disconnecting me
>>from the boards and kills the download process.  how can i solve this
>>problem (throught the modem).  If i cant solve it i guess i will have to
>>post signs on teh phones.
>>l8r,
>>        -eric vongonten-
>
>My brother had this same problem, so he bought some resistors and other
>junk from "the shack" and built a "Protect-Your-Carrier" kits.  He told
>me he was going to get them copyrighted and trademarked and... but I think
>he got involved in another project.

Don't bother....these are called automatic exclusion devices, and
Proctor & Associates is the longtime patent holder on this.
>
>However, I snarfed the only three that he ever made and use them in my
>home.  They work GREAT!  I never have to worry about anyone picking up the
>phones anymore.  If I'm on, they get a "dead" phone, when I drop carrier,
>then they get a dialtone.  Real easy to install also, just unplug and plug.
>
Proctor has several different models, including ones that install at
each phone to prevent that phone from going on line when the
line is in use by any other device, or a group exclusion module where
it divides the incoming line into two groups....one for the phones,
the other for the modem.

Depending on the application, the exclusion modules range in price
from $15.30 to $59.95.  Proctor's minimum order requirement is
$50.00, and they do take VISA/MasterCard.

You can reach them for more info via:

Proctor & Associates
15050 NE 36th St.
Redmond, WA  98052-5317

email: 3991080@mcimail.com
phone: 206-881-7000
fax: 206-885-3282



-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.wa.com        or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:11219 comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:20336
From: geoff@zswamp.UUCP (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Re: 14,400 bps:  Does any comm software support it?
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 16:29:08 EDT
Organization: Izot's Swamp

csjohn@knuth.mtsu.edu (Bullwinkle) writes:

> I will be getting a 14,400 bps v.32/v.32bis/v.42/v.42bis
> fax/modem soon.  I have noticed that on all of the MSDOS
> and OS/2 communications software that I have seen there is
> no setting for 14,400 bps, although there is for 9600 bps and
> 19,200 bps.   Is there any way to access the 14,400 bps
> speed, or am I stuck at 9600 bps for now?  Is there any software
> out there that supports 14,400 bps?  Thanks. 

   You misunderstand; I've never seen a comm program that speaks 14400 bps, 
nor do I expect that I ever will.  There's no need for it.

   The modems speak to each other at 14400 bps, but they 
speak to their respective computers at high speeds (19200, 38400, or even 
57600) to take advantage of increased throughput due to start and stop bit 
removal, data compression, etc.  CTS handshaking signals the computer to stop 
sending if you're sending to the modem faster than it can transmit.

   Even 9600 bps modems speak to their computers at 19200 or higher; that's 
how you get throughput higher than 960 CPS.

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
From: t9114145@phillip.edu.au
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: What's the supply for Supra Fax v32bis?
Date: 25 Jul 92 17:30:38 GMT
Organization: RMIT (Bundoora Campus)

I am told by Supra that their Supra Fax v32bis modem uses a different
power supply than their other modems. Since I am in Australia and we use
240v mains I'm going to need a different power supply to the one they
send me. No-one I know has one of these modems, so I can't ask anyone 
else this.
 
Would someone owning a Supra Fax v32bis modem mind sticking a multimeter
in the plug that plugs into the modem and telling me what it reads?
All I need is AC or DC, and voltage. I can get to work building one then.

-- 

Adam Eberbach      t9114145@phillip.edu.au          fnord
Computer Science student, Phillip Institute of Technology.
From: swaliff@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Steve Aliff)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: ZOOM V.32bis and UART 16450 question SUMMARY
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:36:28 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Great Beyond


w.r.t. the self-tests, they are only supported at a few different
DTE speeds; my (weak) memory says that they are 1200, 2400, and
9600. Check the first page of the chapter on diagnostics.
-- 
Steve Aliff (swaliff@afterlife.ncsc.mil [144.51.1.1])
From: hamish@cloud.pub.uu.oz.au (Hamish Moffatt)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: 14,400 bps:  Does any comm software support it?
Date: 28 Jul 92 10:12:56 GMT

Hello Bullwinkle!

Thursday July 23 1992 05:18, Bullwinkle wrote:

 B> I will be getting a 14,400 bps v.32/v.32bis/v.42/v.42bis
 B> fax/modem soon.  I have noticed that on all of the MSDOS
 B> and OS/2 communications software that I have seen there is
 B> no setting for 14,400 bps, although there is for 9600 bps and
 B> 19,200 bps.   Is there any way to access the 14,400 bps
 B> speed, or am I stuck at 9600 bps for now?  Is there any software
 B> out there that supports 14,400 bps?  Thanks.

The serial port does not support speeds of 14.4K. Usually, you will lock your
port anyway.. That is, the modem and computer always communicate at a constant
speed, despite what speed you're connected at. EG your modem/PC could be talking
at 57,600bps while you're on the actual line at 300bps. You use your comms
software at whatever speed you've locked your port at, so you don't need 14.4K
speed anyway.. You'll get better throughput too.


Regards,
Hamish


=============================================================================
  Hamish Moffatt       | Cloud is a member of APANA    |    _--_|\   Cloud.
  Moffsoft Software    | The Australian Public Access  |   /      \  pub.uu
  Cloud Nine BBS       | Network Association.          |   \_.--._/  .oz.au
  Melbourne, Australia | Fidonet 3:635/552@fidonet     |         v
===================================== Standard Disclaimer Applies ===========
  NOTE! New path to cloud: ...!uunet!munnari!yarra!eyrie!cloud
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems