Weighing in on the WinModem debate... when I installed Linux recently, I
had to toss the WinModem and get a real one. Much to my surprise, the new
56K "real" modem out performed my US Robotics 56K WinModem in windows...
and I have fewer crashes under windows. Not "science" by any means, but
based on the Linux factor alone, I will never buy a WinModem again. From
the Windows perspective, I could do without the drag of a WinModem... just
get a "real" modem and have greater flexibility in controlling your own
settings and configurations... and still retain the ability to "upgrade" to
Linux at a later date. ;)
From: http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/faqs/rhl_general_faq/FAQ-7.html
Question:
How can I get my WinModem(TM) to work with Linux?
Answer:
Unfortunately, WinModems(TM) are completely incompatible with Linux. There
is no work-around for this issue at this time. The problem is that
WinModems(TM) and similar type modems use the CPU to emulate various
hardware that is removed to save on costs. These hardware parts that are
removed would have to be "emulated" by the Linux kernel and would require
the hardware maker of the modem to write such drivers.
At 07:12 AM 9/22/00 -0400, you wrote:
>This question might be better served on the compuhelp list at
>ashlists.org or the win98 list at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>I have a ISA US Robotics 56K modem and am very happy with it myself.
>
>
>On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 10:31:48 -0700 [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I'm interested in people's opinions on this topic, which comes up
> > often
> > and is a nagging concern to those whose systems came with a
> > winmodem.
> >
> > Under what circumstances does the winmodem cripple performance and
> > should
> > be replaced by another winmodem brand or another "real" modem
> > (which, as
> > I see in ads, costs $50 and up)?
> >
> > [1]I hear that "winmodems" are worse than the regular ones (which
> > cost
> > over $50) because they load down system resources doing functions
> > which
> > happen in the regular modem's hardware.
> > [2]Some winmodem brands are reputed to be much worse than others.
> > which
> > are which?
> > (I have a Conexant SoftK56 PCI Modem(M).)
> > [3]If you get a reasonable brand, and have a pentium class machine,
> > many
> > folks do not agree that one must "yank it out and throw it away.
> > They say
> > that is true for a 486 class machine, but a Pentium would be able
> > to
> > handle the load. Where are the CPU and RAM dividing lines on this?
> > (I use the computer to surf the Internet with free ISP's, have
> > Celeron
> > 433 and 32 MB RAM.)
> > [4]Getting the latest driver for the modem may improve the
> > situation.
> >
> > thepccat
> >
> > http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
>Leslie Pearson
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.crosswinds.net/~lesliepear
>AIM: lesliepear
