🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <JamQUFA6eoQ0EwpK@whitecross.demon.co.uk>,
Martin Watson <martin@whitecross.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>But if they are out of spec, why are they out of spec?? Usually, the big
>manufacturers have a big meet and decide the future before it happens so
>they can align their products to this.

This appears to show a touching faith in the modem manufacturers' ability
to implement the agreed protocols when they want to. I know that USR have
had problems with different issues of the code differing in their
capabilities- i.e, one revision was a lot worse than another.

I've seen this with my Courier; the 1994 rev flash software wouldn't
connect at all with the TNTs in V34 mode (oddly it worked fine when the TNT
had k56 enabled even though the Courier can't do k56 or X2). When I flashed
it to the 1995 version of the code, it connected perfectly at 33,600. The
USR docs say that the '95 code is better in every way, more tolerant of
line faults etc. It's also well established that certain version of the
Sportster are seriously broken when workign with Ascends, others not. Yet
all these modems are supposed to be built to the same spec.

Judging from the stuff posted here over the years, more 3400s than other
types of modem have *always* had problems with Ascends, not just with the
TNTs. 

-- 
Peter