Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!hayes!tnixon From: tnixon@hayes.uucp Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems Subject: Re: Hayes Smartmodem 9600 troubles Message-ID: <3829.27d4d360@hayes.uucp> Date: 6 Mar 91 11:32:48 GMT References: <1991Mar4.025731.21550@ping.chi.il.us> <3827.27d24b3a@hayes.uucp> <1991Mar5.093318.2146@llustig.palo-alto.ca.us> Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA Lines: 63 In article <1991Mar5.093318.2146@llustig.palo-alto.ca.us>, david@llustig.palo-alto.ca.us (David Schachter) writes: > In article <3827.27d24b3a@hayes.uucp> tnixon@hayes.uucp writes: > > for UUCP, PEP beats the Hayes by a country mile because > PEP spoofs UUCP, converting into a non-stop-and-wait protocol. PEP doesn't spoof UUCP. Spoofing is not a function of PEP, but it is a higher-layer function of Telebit modems. Now, I know this may be splitting hairs, but my original discussion was regarding the modulation schemes and associated low-level functions themselves, not higher-level functions specialized for particular DTE interfaces. Spoofing could be added to the VSM9600, too, but we prefer (now) to channel people who use stop-and-wait protocols to a full-duplex modem instead. > <> > Toby's articles generally have a low hype-to-information ratio but this one > seemed to be worded Just So. I respect Toby a lot; surely someone cracked his > account and faked his article. If that's as hot as your flames get, them I'll just bask in the gentle warmth. I appreciate your noticing that I try to keep the hype to a minimum (and usually apologize in advance when I don't!). And the article was written by me, thank you. I'm always careful to word things "Just So", as you put it, to avoid the wrath of Hayes' PR department. > If you want good UUCP performance over a regular dial-up phone line, you have > two choices: buy an non-Telebit modem and complain about lousy UUCP throughput, > or buy a Telebit and save money and headaches. I strongly disagree. A full-duplex modem such as V.32 or V.32bis is going to give you great UUCP performance; I'd even propose that a V.32bis modem might give better performance than PEP. The only benefit of PEP is smaller increments of data rate fallback on bad lines. Other than this, Telebit has not been able to demonstrate objectively in a contribution to a standards committee that multicarrier modulation has any significant benefit over single carrier on the same quality phone line. > Now if Hayes would like to get on the wagon instead of trying to > tip it over... Which wagon are you speaking of, specifically? I think the industry as a whole had a problem until recently with every company supporting a different modulation scheme until V.32 modems could be produced and sold at a price acceptable to owners of small systems. Hayes is now on the V.32 bandwagon, as are Telebit, USR, Microcom, and basically ever other modem company of any significance. What can possibly be gained by Hayes, or any company other than Telebit, trying to build a multicarrier modem, unless it becomes a standard? It just might, but until it does, it would make about as much sense as Hayes building HST modems, or Telebit building V-series ping-pong modems. -- Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net