On Tue, 2 Oct 2001 22:48:31 -0500, Joseph Braddock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Are you telling me that by hooking up an external modem through a serial > port, it's not taking any CPU cycles? Somehow, something in my computer has > to read that port and process the data to get it to my browser, email, or > hard drive. It might not use as much CPU cycles, but it uses some. Most > people using winmodems are coming from windows. To tell a prospective new > linux user to shell out $70 for an external (or internal) modem to run their > "free" software won't win many converts. It's kind of like Microsoft > offering free beta versions of software if you pay $19.95 for shipping and > handling. > > I don't see how a design choice to minimize cost by utilizing excess CPU > cycles is somehow parasitic or evil. For the record, I did some tests of > using my winmodem and an external modem. For all practical purposes, the > throughput was identical (neither reached 53K due to phone line quality). > Neither seemed to slow down my system 450mhz AMD K62 196MB RAM. > > If someone is running Mandrake, then they are running a minimum of a pentium > processor. Every adapter/peripheral in the computer uses CPU cycles to work. > For the average newbie, using a winmodem to surf the web and check email is > not going to be a resource hog for the CPU. If the CPU is so slow that a > winmodem is a burden for it, then the $70 for a new modem would be better > spent on a new motherboard/cpu.
Serial ports have stayed mostly unchanged for over 20 years now. The load on a CPU back then was minimal, and it is negligible today. Winmodems rely on the system's CPU to do most of the work, placing a much larger drain on the processor. A typical winmodem can chew up between 10 and 30 per cent of a system's CPU power when in use. > I sometimes wonder if the Linux community came up with linmodems instead of > Windows, if there would be such an uproar over them. Yes, some of them can > be a pain to get them working, but there are many, many winmodems that > function quite well under Linux. This is true, but most of them either don't work at all or are not worth the trouble. Being a software modem, most of the development has been on the software (i.e. the driver), not the hardware. Companies are therefore reluctant to provide open source Linux drivers, since most of their intellectual property is tied-up in the software rather than in the hardware. Most winmodem support in Linux has been the result of painstaking reverse-engineering by open source developers, with no assistance from the manufacturers. They are essentially hacks (i.e. workable solutions), and often don't work as well as do their official Windows counterparts. A few manufacturers have released drivers for Linux, or have co-operated with open source developers to create one. If one owns one of these modems, and can stand the performance hit of a winmodem/linmodem, there is little reason to spend money on a real modem. I personally would still prefer a real modem, but that's simply a matter of personal choice. > Joe > > > > On Monday 01 October 2001 11:58 pm, you wrote: > > You've actually missed the point about "winmodems". It's not that they > > need a driver to work (If they'll work at all). The problem with them is > > that they shift the work that normally done by the modem, over to the > > main system processor, thus sucking valuable CPU cycles. > > > > They're parasitic by design, trash the blood suckers, and buy a real > > modem that does it's own work. > > > > Ric > > > > "Arthur H. Johnson II" wrote: > > > Here here! Good post! I have a Lucent and it works Awesome on my Duron > > > 800 at home. It even worked decently find with 166 and 200 Pentiums. > > > Some of us have lives and need to pinch pennies. > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Joseph Braddock wrote: > > > > There sure is a lot of talk about modems and winmodems on this list. > > > > At times it sounds like a religious argument! But, I think we do a > > > > diservice to people by telling them to run out and buy a true modem > > > > whenever they pose a question about a winmodem. > > > > > > > > While it is true that a real modem (external or internal) is usually > > > > easier to setup/install. The fact is that many of these people already > > > > have the winmodem in their formerly Windows machines. > > > > > > > > Winmodems can be a good choice, particularly for the cost concious. I > > > > know that not all winmodems work with Linux, but many based on Lucent > > > > or PCTel chipsets do. The only problem is that you have to install a > > > > driver (usually open-source) for them. > > > > > > > > If having to install the driver is what causes a problem in > > > > recommending them, well, then, we better quit using NVida and most > > > > other graphic cards, numerous other IO adapters and the like. > > > > > > > > Ironically, for people coming from Windows, having to install a driver > > > > for a winmodem isn't a show stopper, since most winmodems need drivers > > > > installed under windows. (Now compiling the driver, etc. might be > > > > intimidating). > > > > > > > > I guess, what I'm trying to say is that if someone request help in > > > > choosing what kind of modem to purchase, buy all means, recommend a > > > > hardware modem. But if someone states they have such and such a modem > > > > and need help installing it, telling them to go out an buy another > > > > modem doesn't answer their question and really isn't of much help. > > > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > -- > > > Arthur H. Johnson II > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > The Linux Box > > > http://www.linuxbox.nu > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > > > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com > > -- Sridhar Dhanapalan "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." -- Ken Olson, President, Chairman and Founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
