Original Message Information:
Rick Graham wrote to Darren Hamilton about: V90 question
Original Message Date: 03-13-1998
Hi Rick:
RG> > What ultimately ends up happening is that both "standards" become
RG> > orphans and the people who "jumped the gun" by buying either type of
RG> > modem are out of luck. Remember HST modems? They would only connect
RG> > at 16,800 with other HSTs. Everyone else would connect with them at
RG> > 2,400. I know that Flash ROMs might help some people who bought K56
RG> > and x2 modems but this is a kludge solution.
RG> > The lesson to learn is to always wait until the standard committee
RG> > and manufacturers come to a concensus on modem specifications. Then
RG> > buy the new technology.
RG> I've never read a more -wrong- statement in my entire life
RG> experience on Fido 'n I've been here since '86.  In the first place,
RG> neither one of the pre-V.90 releases were "standards," rather they
RG> were two different approaches implemented to acheive a common end.
Please note in the previous post that I put quotation marks around the
word *standards*. Maybe I should have used the word "designs" instead
of "standards." I am sorry that this confused you. I know the two
implementations, K56Flex and x2, were NOT standards. I did not mean to
imply they were. 
The point is those who purchase modems before the standards committee
ratify the specifications are likely to be stuck with orphan
technology. That is why I used the HST example.
RG> With your rational there would be no new purchaces of any kind of
RG> item because 'there might be a bigger/better/faster/etc., item
RG> produced in a month or a year or ten years.
This is not what I said. I did not say that we should not buy products
because "there might be a bigger/better/faster/etc., item produced in a
month or a year or ten years" as you suggest. 
The point of my argument is:
People who purchase modems (e. g., HST, x2, K56Flex) *before the
standards committee ratify the specifications* (e. g., v.32, v.90)
could be stuck with orphan technology.
I had no problems waiting until they ratified the v.90 standard. Now I
can go and purchase a new modem with *clearly-defined telecommunication
specifications* in common use between the modem manufacturers.  :-)
Regards,
Darren
Internet: darrenah@interchange.ubc.ca
 * KWQ/2 1.2i * An Intel SatisFAXtion 400i sent this message to you.
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------