Xref: utzoo comp.dcom.modems:5369 comp.sys.mac.hardware:2016
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!virtech!cpcahil
From: cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: Searching for inexpensive V.32 9600 bps modems (was cheap telebits)...
Message-ID: <1990Mar3.164553.29588@virtech.uucp>
Date: 3 Mar 90 16:45:53 GMT
References: <8398@potomac.ads.com> <1990Mar2.220228.2836@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill)
Organization: Virtual Technologies Inc., Sterling VA
Lines: 28

In article <1990Mar2.220228.2836@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> paul@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (Paul Pomes - UofIllinois CSO) writes:
>
>I disagree.  The performance edge of the Telebits is so great I would not
>consider a V.32 only modem.  The defacto standard that I see is PEP and
>not V.32.

How can you say the defacto standard is PEP when there is only 1 manufacturer
that uses it?

V.32 is used by every major modem manufacturer and is formally documented
as a standard.  

I have 8 9600+ baud modems, all of which understand V.32 and two of which
understand PEP.

PEP alone is ok if you want to limit yourself and anybody you will connect
with to a single manufacturer.  To me, that is too much of a limitation
even if it is fast.  Pleas note that I am not downing PEP, I use it for
my newsfeed, but for interactive connections with lots of different types
of modems, I will always go with a V.32 modem that will also talk V.22 and 
V.22bis.

The T2500 fits all of these requirements, but is too expensive.
-- 
--
Conor P. Cahill            (703)430-9247        Virtual Technologies, Inc.,
uunet!virtech!cpcahil                           46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
                                                Sterling, VA 22170