Re: K56Flex/X2 dilemna
Karl Denninger (karl@Mcs.Net)
Thu, 28 Aug 1997 16:16:20 -0500
On Thu, Aug 28, 1997 at 03:13:33PM -0500, Andrew J. Doane wrote:
> [Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...]
> > > I would like to hear feedback on how other ISPs are dealing with this
> > > current dilemna. And it doesn't with the patent and legal dispute over
> > the
> > > current ITU 56K standard.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Turnando Fuad
> > > NSNet
> >
> > Well here in Buckeye Land we have told our clients for almost a year now
> > that we will not support X2. I took the history stance, that way back in
> > the day, USR came out with proprietary 9600 baud technology. It eventually
> > was washed out with the rest of the industry. As the modem manufactures
> > picked sides it became obvious that X2 was not going to be the only
> > solution, let alone the most requested. We waited on Flex and have
> > probably lost a total of 5 clients to our choice. We aggressively told all
> > of our clients that we would not support X2 and to not bother buying the
> > modems. Many seemed pleased that we had at least made a decision and that
> > allowed them to be more knowledgeable with their purchases.
> > Since the 56K modems have come out. We have had numerous clients thank us
> > again for the amount of information we put out about our standards. Like I
> > said before, many thanked us for making a decision while other ISP's hadn't
> > made up their mind one way or the other. We actively advertised the fact
> > that the new 56K modems were in and running and have attracted a whole new
> > base of clients that have moved from ISP's supporting X2 at the last
> > minute.
> > All in all the big debate really never was an issue on this end. We cater
> > to mainly business clients and that type of customer usually doesn't care
> > about the nuts and bolts. Just solutions.
>
> What you did for your users was a diservice. We have been supporting x2
> since the beginning with success. We saw an a 20% increase in
> subscription rates because we supported x2. We also support K56flex,
> but I would guesstimate that the ratio of x2 to k56 users is 10:1.
> Granted, we had x2 online before k56flex (because USR was able to produce,
> instead of just talk), which would explain why we have more x2 users
> than k56. However, we have *FAR* more problems with k56 than we do with
> x2, both from a technology perspective and technical support.
>
> I know this is a heated war, and you're right, a standard will develop
> and everyone will conform to it; but I'm sure it will be a flash upgrade
> for all my USRobotics gear and a hardware swap with my rockwell based
> modems.
>
> Just my $.02
Well, that's what you get for going with Rockwell. :-)
The ITU standard will be supportable in the Lucent chipsets at no charge,
and I'll bet with no hardware change. If there IS a hardware change Lucent
is going to end up eating the chips.
The problems you're seeing are due to ASCEND pushing vendors to ship code
which wasn't actually complient with the interoperability standards
(specifically V.8bis), while leading people to believe that it was.
The X2 decision will, IMHO, prove to be the true disservice to your
customer base. Any decision made for short-term gain at the expense of
supporting a vendor monopoly usually ends up being bad for the end-user
down the road.
Frankly, I'm glad we waited for the interoperable version of K56Flex.
Its stable, it works, and most of the modems out there have flash updaters
to the interoperable standard. The Lucent implementation is very nice and
stable. The Zoom client modems are both less expensive (by nearly $50)
than the Sportsters AND they have, arguably, the best V.34 implementation
available at any price contained within them.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin
http://www.mcs.net/~karl | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
| NEW! K56Flex modem support is now available
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| 56kbps DIGITAL ISDN DOV on analog lines!
Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal