Lucent is doing a good job of trying to satisfy all of the configurations
that are coming out on the market today. It has to be one hell of a
headache!
We played this same old song back in our BBS days with the RPI modems
(remember them?)
Just as then, the best modem going that we have seen are the hardware type
modems, not Win or other software modems. Businesses and consumers are
spending their money on new 500 MHz systems with cheapo software modems.
Here in KY, users that are some distance from the phone switch have problems
with Win type modems, but not the hardware type, such as a USR Sportster.
We also do not recommend shops or users putting in Win modems in systems
with CPU's under 200 to 166 MHz, as the modem uses the systems resources.
Randy
==========================
Randy Sigler - Tech Support
Ziggycom Online
502.365.1300 - Phone
502.388.1385 - Pager
-------------------------------
* Ziggycom is YOUR Home Town ISP ! *
Ziggycom is dedicated to giving you....
helpful,friendly,personal service for your
online experience! We DO INTERNET!
* Online experience since 1985 *
http://www.ziggycom.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Bacher <news@darkhorse.triad.net>
To: <portmaster-users@livingston.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: (PM) Modem slow-down with 3.8.2c2
> >IMHO: The slightly slower connect speed appears to be a trade off
> >in recognizing that not all modems and residential phone lines are
> >created equal. I'd have to give the Livingston people who worked
> >on the new modem code an "A" for effort. But, Livingston's effort
> >is beginning to look like the same ole song. . . Livingston just
> >can't please all the modems all the time, and neither can any
> >other vendor.
> >
>
> I agree on both points. Lucent was very responsive to every modem problem
> we had during the betas. I had many "point of reference" users that I
> compiled, for which I knew their exact make/model modem, firmware, etc.
> Some had problems with 3.8.2, some did not, but I was able to watch trends
> with each new beta build. During the betas, some builds broke modems that
> were working before as they fixed modems that were not. However, towards
> the end, and in c2, we have the best balance we've ever had between 56K
> connection speed, reliability of initial connection, and disconnect
issues.
> The only outstanding issues we have (which Lucent has already put out a
> technote on) are some lingering HCF initial connect issues. We still do
> have some USR v.90 customers that must dial several times to get a v.90
> connection, too. You can only "bend" the modem code so far to fix one
> thing before you break something else. I know our users are much happier
> now (vs 3.8, 3.8.2), and we've always felt good about our PM3 (and now
PM4)
> purchase decisions (we used PM2's back in the day as well). We've used
> other equipment (USR Total Control), and found it much poorer quality all
> around. We cater to many performance oriented (read: Quake fanatics)
users
> that value ping time and latency above all else, and the PM3s give us an
> edge over our competition in that department as well. I just hope this
> whole Ascend merger thing doesn't affect the PM3 (or more likely, PM4)
> product lines in any way.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Mike Bacher / mikeb@webzone.net
> Systems Administrator, The WebZone
> Now serving both Tulsa and Oklahoma City!
> Phone: (918) 585-8800 FAX: (918) 587-1526
> Web: http://www.webzone.net
> Supporting the v.90 56k standard
> ---------------------------------------------
> -
> To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
> 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
> Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>