>
> Isn't Lucent supposted to already have very well working modem code
> already? We can't afford for this to go on forever to get the PM3 modems
> to the point of a stupid analog modem in compatbility..
I agree! It seems to defeat the whole purpose of going all digital.
When they came out... The whole idea was to have digital lines coming in
to your facility, so you could eliminate the problem from being on your
end. But, it seems the exact opposite has happened. With the PM2s and US
Robotic Couriers, you gave people the software worked them thru getting
the software setup and quit worrying about connection problems. Now it
seems to be an endless stream of try this init string or that init string,
always having to fiddle with modems..
And on the same lines, why does Sherwood have a page up with different
strings, for different modems. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate it
very much. But the point is, why doesn't Livingston have a page up, with
recommendations for all these varying modems? It just seems strange, that
everyone has to constantly get the latest drivers for this modem or that
modem, when it was never an issue before.
And now we(well we don't,we are number #469) have K56Flex ver. 1.1, what
exactly is the meaning of interoperable code?
>
> Any ideas about fixing this problem and others that have been reported on
> the list with modems such as Mwave's!?
>
Agreed again, it can't continue to be the customer's fault on modem
compatability problems.
Later
Kelley