Hoyt wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ramon Gandia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 2:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem
>
> >
> > I just looked, just in case I had missed something. All Diamond
> > PCI modems *are* WinModems. You should get a model number, which
> > will be on the card, like Model 2920. They use 4-digits like
> > that.
> > "Supra Express" is meaningless as they use this term on ALL the
> > modems that they make (ie, SupraExpress = ModemMadeByDiamond ).
> >
> > A few WinModems, depending on the chipset and vintage, will have
> > limited functionality as a regular modem. Generally enough to
> > allow
> > for non-compressed communications at 1,200.
> >
> >
> > There are some things that distinguish the Lucent WinModems from
> > the
> > rest, the main one being that ALL Lucent LT modems look the same
> > from
> > the computer's point of view. It does not matter which
> > manufacturer
> > the modem is from, if its an LT chipset, it will use the SAME
> > driver.
> >
>
> >
> > I can say more about Lucent, but will withold it for now. It is a
> > great outfit.
> >
> > There are a couple more WinModems with Linux aspirations. The
> > ones
> > that are non-Lucent have limited functionality. Either only at
> > 1200
> > bps, or can be used as dialers and voice only, not data.
> >
>
> >
> > In particular, you should be on the lookout for Rockwell Chipset
> > modems. Most of those are WinModems, and some are particularly
> > bad such as the HSP and HCF WinModems. Rockwell sold the chip
> > division to Connexant, so you will also see them with that label
> > on the chip. They also make externals and ISA modems, some of
> > which are not WinModems. You should be aware that as an ISP,
> > and a person that has wide contacts among ISP's, I can tell you
> > that Rockwell/Connexant modems are simply the worse. I see a lot
> > of advertising hype about this and that modem, but if the fine
> > print says its a Rockwell or Connexant, I advise you to pass.
> > If they *do not* mention the chipset, you can assume it is
> > Rockwell
> > or Connexant WinModem technology as it accounts for about 90% of
> > the modem market share today.
> >
> > A Rockwell winModem costs the OEM only about $3 to put in, so you
> > know now why they are sold so widely. There is not much to them,
> > mostly empty chips. The Lucent chips have some meat in them, ie,
> > hardware that helps the software do some things. Better junk.
> >
> > As an ISP, I have seen and worked with thousands of modems. For
> > all practical purposes "I have seen them all" (I do get a surprise
> > now and then, usually not pleasant). Often I get folks that have
> > spent a lot of money on a computer and insist that their modem is
> > of the "best quality". Or had very good luck with a Rockwell
> > and insist that they are "the best" type around. Most, if not all
> > of these fold have been exposed to just one or two modems in their
> > life, and their knowledge is flawed.
> >
> > If you go out and buy a Modem, stick it in a Windows 95 computer,
> > fire it up, and insert a disk when the thing says "new hardware
> > detected". And then use it successfuly to dial up your ISP, I
> > do not think that I would call that as 'experienced with this
> > or that modem'. It is merely anecdotal experience of the type
> > that
> > the manufacturer hopes you have. To know a modem you have to
> > experience horror stories with that type, or conversely,
> > experience nothing but good from this other type.
> >
>
> OK, you gave us the "bad" news, now recommend a good internal modem (based on your
>experience) that is affordably priced (<US$100) and works well with Linux.
>
> Hoyt
>
> __________________________________________
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
Modem Blaster Flash 5611. I have used the earlier ISA modem in
this series and it provides excellent performance.
Also, Hayes made some nice ISA v90 modems.
www.soundblaster.com to see the modem blaster
The Modem Blaster Flash 5611, the external Flash 5611 are both
good hardware modems. The older modem blaster I used kept 15
computers on the internet at once for more than a year of nearly
constant login.
The modem blaster 56K v.90, the modem blaster 56K USB modem (yes
an external) are cheap junk The 56K USB modem requires win98 (no
others at all) to run.
But why 56K? It usually runs at the speed of the nearest
bottleneck. I have found I get about 20K performance where I
live so I could be using a 28.8 modem and still have the same
data rates. Actually one good reason is that it is digital in
the BIG direction and may hang on the line better.
NEWCOM produced the 56K IFXSP(C) whixh is a 56K X2 modem with a
firmware upgrade to v.90 readily available and the package is
cheap in comparison to most. Watch the surplus distributors.
A Phoebe model is supposed to be very good. Perhaps someone will
mention it. Having direct experience with only the modem
blaster, the Hayes, and the Newcom, that is all I will endorse
and I will withhold the horror stories. Of course, with any
modem purchase you are likely to receive by the munificence of
AOL a brilliantly colored coaster suitable for absolutely
anything you can imagine to do with it. Older modems carry the
added benefit of a high-quality 3.5" floppy suitable for holding
data after erasure.
Civileme
Always check system requirements. If you see "Pentium processor
at ...." it is a software modem.
--
experimentation involving more than 500 trials with an
ordinary slice of bread and a tablespoon of peanut butter
has determined that the probability a random toss will
land sticky side down (SSD) is approximately .98
