Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!know!news.cs.indiana.edu!maytag!xenitec!zswamp!root
From: root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Another 9600 protocol!
Message-ID: <6965.27D9BD8E@zswamp.fidonet.org>
Date: 9 Mar 91 18:38:55 GMT
Organization: Izot's Swamp BBS - Kitchener, Ontario
Lines: 80

In a letter to All, Ron Dippold (rdippold@maui.qualcomm.com ) wrote:

 >Not quite.  Regardless of the supposed compatability, not 
 >all supposed V.32
 >modems will connect with each other even with V.32 (PC 
 >Magazine, Dec 11, 1990,
 >They reviewed several (7?) V.32 modems), correctly.

   I am certain that anyone who has used the modems tested by PC magazine and 
compared notes with the rag will realize that the only important thing proven 
by PC Magazine is that general user rags like PCMag are *not competent* to 
perform a test such as the one in question, at least not within their time 
restraints.

   I should also clarify that I was disappointed with the figures published 
earlier by BYTE magazine in their June '88 article on "Ultra High-Speed 
modems", in which not a single modem yielded better than 960 CPS because they 
fed the data to the modems at 9600, not 19,200 (which most of the modems 
listed could handle)!  To BYTE's credit, the Ven-Tel PathFinder and Telebit 
Trailblazer, virtually identical modems, yielded very similar results... the 
tests seem at least consistent.  Since Telcor's 2400 bps modem with mean data 
compression scored well against the 9600s, I also suspect that no one thought 
to send compressed files, random data, or binaries in stead of text...

 >I think you're underestimating the effect of the fact that 
 >this modem is available now and give you 9600 bps for $169,

   It *would* give you 9600 bps, if there were any other CompuCom modems 
around!

   The latest press release I got from CompuCom listed the BBSes known to 
carry their modems, and there were about 125 on the list... a quick scan of 
the 10,000 member FidoNet nodelist suggested that there are over 3,000 HSTs on 
FidoNet alone, and I'm sure the BBS lists maintained by Hayes and USRobotics 
is *orders of magnitude* longer!

   Sure, it could give 9600 bps within a closed system if you bought one for 
each site.  I'm not saying that it has no value whatsoever, simply that it 
isn't a good investment for those who need to communicate with the outside 
world, or maintain some level of compatibility with the future...

   BTW, anyone care to bet on the SpeedModem's performance under UUCP?

 >I don't have one of
 >these CompuComs, but I am the On-Line columnist for a 
 >computer magazine, and
 >these things are popping up all over the place, on boards 
 >and with lots
 >of users, in amazing numbers.

   I'm willing to let time decide.  I'm also willing to be that it becomes a 
passing fad.

   Well, OK, the HST was also a passing fad... but it lasted several years.  I 
put 12-18 months on the CompuCom.

 >I saw one of these things, using their Dynamic Impedance 
 >Stabalization, connect without line noise [...]

   Considering that they have error correction and would have corrected any 
noise, how can you be sure that DIS had any effect on the line at all?

 >I imagine the same thing will happen that happened with the 
 >C64.  They'll get
 >no respect from the power users, but they'll sell obscene 
 >amounts of them.

   If and when they do, I'll gladly join the ranks.


 

--  
UUCP:     watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent
Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org     | Kitchener, Ontario
FidoNet:  SYSOP, 1:221/171            | N2M 5E6 CANADA
Data:     (519) 742-8939              | (519) 741-9553
The mile is traversed not by a single leap, but by a procession of coherent 
steps; those who insist on making the trip in a single element will be failing 
long after you and I have discovered new worlds.        - me