🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <JQQ41KAK$tQ0EwYf@spacetime.demon.co.uk>,
Chris Lawrence  <news@spacetime.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Re:<876776958.0024443.0@office.demon.net>
> On Mon, 13 Oct 1997,  wrote:
> 
> >Malcolm was being simplistic. Perhaps the situation is:
> >
> >    Standard:   range 990 to 1010   (20 units)
> >    Ascend Max: range 985 to 1015   (30 units)
> >    Ascend TNT: range 972 to 1012   (40 units)
> >    Some particular modem: 1014
> 
> *** IF *** the modem does not comply with the standard.  In which case
> of course you can expect problems.  The problem with this much bandied
> about example is that the equipment is shown to be out of spec in the
> first place, ergo, no other explanation is needed.  But you don't know
> that the 3400 does not comply with the spec.  If it does then this
> example is moot anyway.  If it doesn't then 3400 users have a case
> against Motorola.

And it's possible - it's happened before - to set a standard such that
two fully compliant devices will not inter-operate, in which case it's
the standard commitee's fault and you haven't a case against anyone.