Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!ames!dftsrv!mimsy!mojo!russotto
From: russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Another 9600 protocol!
Message-ID: <1991Mar11.060923.2240@eng.umd.edu>
Date: 11 Mar 91 06:09:23 GMT
References: <6965.27D9BD8E@zswamp.fidonet.org>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (C-News)
Organization: College of Engineering, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Lines: 23

In article <6965.27D9BD8E@zswamp.fidonet.org> root@zswamp.fidonet.org (Geoffrey Welsh) writes:
>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.

What do you think of the tests perfomed by Data Communications magazine
(Jan '91)?  (they found the Hayes to be the best in noise-resistance, with
USR by far the top in throughput over a local line)
--
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
     .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
I mine 600 wells, and whaddo I get?  Another day older and deeper in debt!
	--- Saddam Hussein.