HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alansar@ccs.northeastern.edu (Mohammad Al-Ansari)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: SupraFax v32bis and BUSY tone
Date: 7 Nov 92 01:45:21 GMT
Organization: College of CS, Northeastern U

In article <bobl.92yu@bobsbox.rent.com> bobl@bobsbox.rent.com (Bob Lindabury - SysAdmin) writes:
>
>Hmm..I just received 2 SupraFAX modems which I ordered over thier BBS.
>The order took 3 days to process and then was shipped out UPS ground and
>arrived in 5 working days.  This seems to be very good service if you
>ask me. (for all those who are poo-pooing Supra's service).
>
>But to the question at hand.  I checked the version of the ROM with the
>I command and it says ROM 1.2J.  I guess this is newer than the H ROM.
>
>I will be giving the Supra BBS a call to see what the scoop is.
>

The 1.2J ROM is the one that has Caller-ID.

>Since I have hooked up the modem, I have had absolutely! no problems
>what-so-ever with the modem.  I am running UUCP with the port locked at
>38.4k baud.  I have 12 sites that poll me at rates from 2400 up and I
>poll out to them as well.  These sites include local and LD calls and I
>have yet to see a problem.  Busy detect works fine.  I've faxed to a
>couple of machines and that works fine.
>
>I also used the modem with a term program and had no problems with that.
>I noticed that the modem came pre-configured for typical operation (RE:
>&C1 &D2).
>
>All in all I'd say this is a pretty fine little modem.  I don't know
>what all the fuss is about.

I have only been using it with a comm program and as a fax and I have been
extremely happy with it.  I'm glad to hear that it is working well with uucp
since I intend to try that in the near future.

>
>As for BUSY detect, there are different busy signals..fast busy, slow
>busy and probably a few more.  Maybe some of them are unsupported by the
>modem but I have yet to have a problem with that.  Is it possible that
>the busy signal was so low that the Supra couldn't detect it?
>
>--
> Bob Lindabury
>
>InterNet: bobl@bobsbox.rent.com                | Raven Enterprises
>    UUCP: ...rutgers!bobsbox!bobl              | 25 Raven Avenue
>  BitNet: bobl%bobsbox.rent.com@pucc           | Piscataway, NJ 08854
>  Home #: +1 908/560-7353                      | +1 908/271-8878


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mohammad Al-Ansari                      | alansar@damon.ccs.northeastern.edu
College of Computer Science             | alansar@gnu.ai.mit.edu
Northeastern University                 | BITNET: alansar@NUHUB
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Infotel v.32 9600bps
From: JABUSSEY@delta.ualr.edu (JAQUE BUSSEY)
Date: 9 Nov 92 18:44:07 -0500
Distribution: world
Organization: OMEGA
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.22Lines: 9

I have an Infotel 9600bps (V.32) modem that is upgradeable to v.42bis
for $69. When I bought the modem I didnt clearly understand v.42bis. I 
thought It included v.32bis. Now that I know this, is there a way to 
upgrade the Infotel to v.32bis? 

Thanks,

Jacque Andre' Bussey
jabussey@ualr.edu
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Supra vs Zoom v32bis FaxModems
Organization: very little
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1992 22:41:07 GMT

In article <1dc66oINN81q@chnews.intel.com> smintz@sedona.intel.com (Stephen Mintz exp 11/92~) writes:
>
>Zoom hasn't made a good modem in thier exisistance!!! there concept of hays
>compatibility is like calling a chimp a human!!! sorry just an unhappy old
>customer..
>Stephen

My ZOOM VFX V.32bis works great.  Don't know how to judge "hays compatibiltiy"
(is that like Hayes? :) , but it seems to talk well to other fast modems
(as well as slower ones too).


-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.com           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: leo@zelator.in-berlin.de (Stefan Hartmann)
Subject: Re: Supra Problems with LD calls...
Organization: Puplic-Access-Xenix-System
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 92 03:19:59 GMT

In <1992Nov3.065657.17005@uws.EDU.AU> sgolby@st.nepean.uws.edu.au (Scott Golby) writes:


>     Hi people, pretty straight and simple question.

>     How do I get any connect to regular HST modems with my
>Supra v32bis?  My old v32 + MNP1-4 modem would give me 2400/REL
>without a hastle, and I expected to get 2400 + v42bis with this
>new modem, but I don't get ANY connect at all!

>     I could aslo ask the same question about Supra <-> Supra
>connects.

>     HST problem happens mostly over long distance,  the Supra
>not connecting to Supra happens all over the place.

>     Thanks.

>--
>*  Scott Golby                           BBS +61-(0)47-36-6263  v32  * 
>*  University of Western Sydney, Nepean - Kingswood                  *
>*  Secretary of the UWS-Nepean Computer Society  (email compsoc)     *
>*  sgolby@st.nepean.uws.edu.au           FIDO : 3:713/616            *

Just forget it,

it seems they have delivered bad Rockwell chips with it.

I don't get any connect also to Dual-standard Modems !!

I have emailed Kenny (the support freak from Compuserve) about 10
times and he also mailed me simple answers back, but the new ROMS
don't arrive over here.

It seems they don't deliver it.. Better buy other Modems, never again
a Supra... for me.....

A very fustrated Supra user... :-(((



-- 
 
*************************************************************
*  Stefan Hartmann       This is how to contact me:         *
*  EMAIL: leo@zelator.in-berlin.de                          *
*  Phone : ++ 49 30 344 23 66      FAX : ++ 49 30 344 92 79 *
*************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: wolfgang@netcom.com (Wolfgang Henke)
Subject: Re: Anyone have any comments on Computer Peripherals Viva! modem?
Organization: Netcom
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 18:20:14 GMT

Roger F. Noia (rnoia@netcom.com) wrote:
: Hi...i'm interested in a 14.4k modem and 14.4k fax...
: 
: I have decided to avoid: supra and zoom (too many problems)
: i would like to keep the price range under 350 if anyone has
: any other ideas on modems with fax. thanks

I use the Digicom Scout Plus V.32bis data and Group 3 fax modem like 
quite a few other netcomers. I also sell them. You can find the info in 
~wolfgang/pub/scout. Here is the current list of modems it connects to:


List of some high speed modems the DSI Scout Plus connects easily to:
(with factory register settings AT&F)
							chipset

Telebit T1600 V.32 (9600)				Telebit
Telebit T2500 V.32 PEP (9600) (PEP answers last ?)	Telebit
Telebit T3000 V.32bis (14,400)				Telebit
Telebit Worldb. V.32bis PEP (14,400) (PEP answers last)	Telebit
USR DS 16,800 (14,400)  (*G0 and *Q0 help sometimes)	USR
USR DS V.32bis (14,400) (*G0 and *Q0 help sometimes)	USR
USR DS V.32 (9600)      				USR
ATT Paradyne 3829 V.32bis (14,400)			
ATT Paradyne 424 V.32 (9600)				Digicom
Supra V.32bis (14,400)					Rockwell
Digicom Scout+ V.32bis (14,400)				Digicom
Digicom Scout V.32 (9600)				Digicom
Digicom 9624LE+ V.32bis (14,400)			Digicom
Digicom 9624LE  V.32 (9600)				Digicom
Digicom 9624E+ V.32bis (14,400)				Digicom
Hayes Ultra V.32bis (14,400)				Phylon
Hayes Ultra V.32 (9600)                                 
Practical Peripherals V.32bis (14,400)			Rockwell or ATT?
Multitech 9632 V.32 (9600)
Multitech 14400 V.32bis (14,400)
Microcom V.32 (9600)
Intel 14400ex V.32bis (14,400)				Rockwell
Forval IM14400 V.32bis (14,400)				Forval
ZyXEL U-1496E V.32bis (14,400)				ZyXEL
TwinCom 14400 D/F V.32bis (14,400)			Rockwell 	
NEC-N9635E V.32 (9600)
Quickcomm Spirit V.32 (9600)				Digicom
Quickcomm Spirit II V.32bis (14,400)			Digicom
Viva V.32 (9600)					Rockwell
Compucom Star V.32 (9600) 				Compucom

The value in brackets is the speed the Scout+ connected at. If a modem 
you are interested in is not listed, please let me know, including
a number where I might dial in for testing.




-- 
   _________________________________________________________________________
   Wolfgang Henke        wolfgang@henke.sf-bay.org       wolfgang@netcom.com

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: 14.4Kbps Modems and Procomm+
Keywords: l1,99
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:03:16 GMT

In article <8w8VTB2w165w@halcyon.com> puma@halcyon.com (puma) writes:
>gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
>
>> In article <W8SDZ.12826597553.BABYL@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL> CHARLIE@UMVMA.UMS
>> >husc10.harvard.edu!jiu1@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>> >>I just "discovered" that my copy of procomm plus does not support
>> >>14.4K bps communication speed.  After 2,400 come 4,800, 9,600,
>     ...
>> 
>> You'll notice that there are a lot of divisor values missing if you
>> only list the "normal" speeds.  A divisor value of 8 will give you
>> 14,400 bps.
>> 
>> So you see the software certainly could support 14,400 bps.  They just
>> haven't done it.
>
>but the real point here is that you don't WANT to talk at 14,400 bps
>to the modem,  you want to use a faster speed 19,200 or 38,400 and
>flow control to allow the modem to do whatever compression is possible
>on the data stream.  
>

But I was NOT addressing that point.  I didn't contradict it at all
with my article.

I underlined the portion that I was responding to (which you've deleted).
I responded to the assumption that the serial port hardware in an IBM
compatible could not support 14,400 bps.

I showed why that assumption about the hardware was wrong.  I did not
argue that software SHOULD support 14,400 bps, just that it COULD
support it if the programmers wanted to.

For the record, there ARE some situations where you don't want to talk
to the modem faster than the modem-to-modem transmission rate:  When your
computer can't use flow control.


-- 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Greg Andrews   |       UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg        |
 |                 |   Internet: gerg@netcom.COM                    |
 `------------------------------------------------------------------'
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:16478 misc.forsale:30584 misc.forsale.computers:39443
From: jas@ISI.EDU (Jeff Sullivan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,misc.forsale,misc.forsale.computers
Subject: Re: Illegal Sales from Mark Margolis
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:08:26 GMT
	<1992Nov3.201402.11724@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <timm.720888608@xongmao>
	<Bx78Cq.MJG@news.udel.edu>
Organization: USC-ISI
In-reply-to: jeremym@ravel.udel.edu's message of 4 Nov 92 15:58:01 GMT

In article <Bx78Cq.MJG@news.udel.edu> jeremym@ravel.udel.edu (Jeremy A Moskowitz) writes:

>Valery:
>      Illegal? Ha. There's nothing illegal about receiving various
>merchandice from different sources (perhaps for free) and 
>since it costs him nothing or very little, he'll beat any price.
>
>The following is simply a possibility of what MIGHT be happening.
>I think if Mark wishes to sell modems, let him sell modems, what do
>you care? You like, you buy! You don't hit the stinkin' 'N' key!!!!
>
>Let him do what he wants he's a big boy.

You don't quite understand one of the basic tenets of the Net.  No
commercial ventures are alloed, except isolated positngs in
well-delineated groups set off for new product aznnouncements and the
like.

If you allow these operators to use the Usenet as their free
advertising medium, you avoid one important issue: normal retailers
have advertising overhead to deal with, and this is part of their
price.  Not only do Net posters not have this, but they actually
charge YOU (or yoursite) for *receiving* their ads!  Imagine that.

Now, if Joe Shmoe can advertise here, why can't Fred Shmed Inc.?  Why
not Sears?  Or Tandy, CompUSA, and IBM?

It's a precedent that you don't want to set, because it gets very ugly
in the details.

Plus, there's the question of the legality of running a "business"
over the net without paying business taxes, being licensed, etc. (not
that I'm implying any specific person is unlicensed, but the
possibilities exist).

The bottom line is, if you want to run a business, run one, but don't
make my site pay for your advertising.  And run it on as level a
ground as is reasonable; we don't want to see the Net clogged with ads
flying every which way.

jas
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Sullivan             | Research Scientist et al.
jas@isi.edu (Internet)          | Information Sciences Institute
72511,402    (Compuserve)       | University of Southern California
Xref: sparky comp.dcom.modems:16523 comp.dcom.fax:2066 comp.sys.mac.comm:10730
From: hp48sx@wupost.wustl.edu (HP48SX Archive Maintainer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.dcom.fax,comp.sys.mac.comm
Subject: Fax modem questions
Date: 7 Nov 1992 18:35:38 -0600
Organization: Washington University in Saint Louis, MO USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: wuarchive.wustl.edu

 I am going to do some hacking on my Supra FAXModem V.32bis, but
unfortunately the fax AT commands is not listed in the manual anywhere.
So if somebody could please tell me where to find them, and where to
find the format of incoming/outgoing faxes.

My problem is, I have a Mac with FAXstf, the Supra V.32bis, and a phone
+ answering machine. I would like this combination to let the answering
machine (connected to the phone outtlet on the modem) answer all calls,
and if either a carrier or a fax CNG is detected then disconnect the
phone/answering machine, and let my program handle things.

Is it possible to do this ? That is listen on the line without answering
? Can I do it with Rings to AutoAnswer set to 200 ? or how is it done ?

thanks in advance,
Povl H. Pedersen.

I live in europe, so no US BBS please. ftp sites, or direct mail is OK.
-- 
Povl H. Pedersen             hp48sx@wuarchive.wustl.edu
HP48sx archive maintainer

All Opinions (C) Copyright the Intergalactic Thought Association
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Subject: Re: 14.4Kbps Modems and Procomm+
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 06:56:28 GMT

In article <W8SDZ.12826597553.BABYL@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL> CHARLIE@UMVMA.UMSYSTEM.EDU (Charlie Turner) writes:
>husc10.harvard.edu!jiu1@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>>I just "discovered" that my copy of procomm plus does not support
>>14.4K bps communication speed.  After 2,400 come 4,800, 9,600,
>>192,000 etc.  Does this mean one can't use 14.4K modems?  How about
>>the Windows version?
>
>As far as I know, the standard COM port speeds are a sequence of
>'doubles', eg. 1200, 2400, 4800, 9600, 19200, 38400, ..., etc.
>I don't think this is anything Procomm or any other software package
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>can change.
 ^^^^^^^^^^

That's not the case in an IBM compatible with a standard UART chip
(8250/16450/16550).

The serial port hardware can support other speeds as well.  The UART
chip takes in a 1.8432 MHz clock signal and internally divides it
by 16 to provide the baud rate clock.  That clock can be divided by
any whole number to produce the actual speed.  Your comm software
can change that number (the divisor) to select different speeds.
The top speed would be the baud rate clock divided by 1:

  1,843,200 / 16 = 115,200   (baud rate clock)

     clock  / divisor  =  speed
    ----------------------------
    115,200 /     1    = 115,200
    115,200 /     2    =  57,600
    115,200 /     3    =  38,400
    115,200 /     6    =  19,200
    115,200 /    12    =   9,600
    115,200 /    48    =   2,400
    115,200 /    96    =   1,200
    115,200 /   384    =     300

You'll notice that there are a lot of divisor values missing if you
only list the "normal" speeds.  A divisor value of 8 will give you
14,400 bps.

So you see the software certainly could support 14,400 bps.  They just
haven't done it.


-- 
 .------------------------------------------------------------------.
 |  Greg Andrews   |       UUCP: {amdahl,claris}!netcom!gerg        |
 |                 |   Internet: gerg@netcom.COM                    |
 `------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Modems with E&M signalling support
Date: 12 Nov 92 21:39:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: ssc.1992Nov12.213917.26447
Organization: very little

In article <1992Nov9.023639.22411@news.arc.nasa.gov> medin@dscs.arc.nasa.gov (Milo S. Medin) writes:
>Hi.  I was wondering if anyone out there knew of any modems
>that support E&M signalling.  This capability, along with
>support from the CO switch or PBX, allows the modem to
>determine what the called number is.  It requires 4 wires
>to the switch, instead of the usual 2.

E&M signalling has nothing to do with the calling number.  E&M leads
are trunk leads within a C.O. (the telco switch) that change state
(from ground to -48 vdc) in response to hookswitch status at the
far end.  So it is like having a regular phone line, except that the
DC signalling (on hook/off hook) is broken out on separate wires.

E&M leads do not extend from the C.O.  Because they are not balanced,
they are susceptible to noise, and only run a few feet from the trunk
to whatever terminating equipment they are hooked to.  If you have
E&M leads at a customer premise, then they are probably using
carrier to get the circuits to the premise, and you can connect
with a PBX that has E&M compatible trunks.

But the E&M leads only run from the carrier circuit to the PBX....not
over telco cable.


>
>Note this is not caller id, where the calling number is 
>transmitted, but rather getting the called number.  This is
>very useful if the PBX was programmed to route several destination
>numbers to the modem, and you wanted the computer's software to
>act differently depending on which phone number the originating
>actually called.

What you are talking about is Direct Inward Dialing, which is
independent from the type of trunk signalling used.  This is 
used where each PBX extension has its own 7 digit phone number,
but the service comes into the PBX on a limited number of
trunks, so the PBX has to be able to tell where to route the
call.  It winks back to the telco when a call comes in, and
the telco sends the destination phone number with DTMF signaling.

>
>I'd prefer a modem that supported v.32bis and FAX, but right I'm
>just interested in any modems that support this at all.
>
What you do is take a regular modem and hook it to the line
(extension) that is on the user side of the PBX.  If you hook
the modem to one of the outside trunks, then the modem would
have to emulate a DID trunk, and what would it do when it
got a voice call?  Remember that all of the traffic for the PBX
comes in on these trunks.  That is the reason for the wink-back
and ID from the CO.

I am sure there are no modems that do this.



-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.com           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: ay@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Alec Yin)
Subject: Supra...again: plain connection problem
Reply-To: ay@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Alec Yin)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:18:57 GMT

Hello,

	I have been 'reading' the manual and tweaking almost all the s register
	on my supra v.32bis in order to get an no compression, no v.32bis,
	no retrain plain connection to an Racal(sp?) v.32 but no success.
	I have set &f, \n, s36=1, s36=3 (for the sake of it), s37=9 (lock
	it at 9600) but no success.  All I got is a screenful of junks.
	Supra help was next to nothing. (They actually asked me to ask the
	sys adm on the other end to enable data compression, which is 
	beyond my control!)  So before I return my beloved Supra, and get
	a real one like USR, I would seek advice from all the net guru here.
	Did I miss any setting for my attempt to get a plain-no-nothing 
	connection?   BTW, the rom version is 1.2J.  I sunked the money
	hoping the new rom would solve the problem but I guess not. Thanks
	in advance for any help/suggestion.  E-mail response preferred and
	I will summarize if there is any interest.

							regards,

							Alec
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
From: fluet@ee.ualberta.ca (Kevin Blaine Fluet)
Subject: Does anyone other than Midwest Micro sell Infotel?
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:30:13 GMT

Just for the sake of price comparisons, does anyone other than Midwest
sell the Infotel modems, specifically their v32.bis model, or is it a
Midwest Micro brand?

-------------------
Kevin Fluet
fluet@ee.ualberta.ca
----------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: 14.4Kbps Modems and Procomm+
From: cputnam@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:14:58 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <1992Nov6.065628.29610@netcom.com>, gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews) writes:
> In article <W8SDZ.12826597553.BABYL@WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL> CHARLIE@UMVMA.UMSYSTEM.EDU (Charlie Turner) writes:
>>husc10.harvard.edu!jiu1@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU writes:
>>>I just "discovered" that my copy of procomm plus does not support
>>>14.4K bps communication speed.  After 2,400 come 4,800, 9,600,
>>>192,000 etc.  Does this mean one can't use 14.4K modems?  How about
>>>the Windows version?
>>
>>As far as I know, the standard COM port speeds are a sequence of
>>'doubles', eg. 1200, 2400, 4800, 9600, 19200, 38400, ..., etc.
>>I don't think this is anything Procomm or any other software package
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>can change.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^

There are a series of Procomm + 2.01 for DOS patches available on 
FTP-OS2.NMSU.EDU in the pub/os2/2.0/dos/patches directory which, among
other things provides support for up to 57600 bps communications.  It
even includes the configuration files for the new Rockwell based V.32bis
modems.  Also included is a "patch" to disable the mouse.  The patches were
downloaded off of the Datastorm BBS.

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems