PC>> I don't know why they persist with different code versions, even with
PC>> the US code installed S11 won't go < 70 and ATS0=1 still sets the S0
PC>> reg to 2, i've never seen a -9dB Tx level usually -12.5->-13dB so what
PC>> does the Austel code do or not do the the US code does?

You're forgetting that V.34 automatically adapts the Tx level to match the
received level - it does not just blindly transmit at the maximum permitted
level, as do less sophisticated protocols.  If you look at the V.34 specs
you'll see there is a good deal in it regarding calculating and negotiating
levels to best suit current conditions - louder is not necessarily
'better'.

SA>  Well, Since the modems still 'comply' with AUSTEL with the ENHANCED US
SA> CODEloaded as far as I can tell, I dont know why they have so many
SA> different versions of SDL's.. !?!?!?!

Perhaps because many different countries have different telecommunications
regulations, that have evolved over many years, and have installed network
infrastructure, with given send/receive levels, etc, to match, and that
manufacturers truly designing for the international market have always
provided country-specific versions of their modems?

 DH> IMNSHO, the difference is to ensure that the local version
 DH> is sufficiently crippled to not provide serious competition
 DH> for the less than competent among the local manufacturers.

Dave, you've been saying this, regularly, for years.  I simply don't
believe it.  If you're arguing, as some do, that we should scrap our own
standards to suit US dominance, including nationally switching to
'standard' 110V power, re-engineering our entire network to American
levels, and driving on the other ('standard') side of the road, well that's
one thing, but the days when any manufacturer may have had any particular
sway over then Telecom, now Austel, are long gone - unless you have some
evidence to provide to the contrary?

 DH> This case grows stronger by the day, as more and more
 DH> outlandish crippling misfeatures appear in putatively
 DH> "improved for Australian conditions" modems - and do NOT
 DH> appear in the original models before the damage is done.

You've been saying that for years, too.  Some evidence, please, apart from
assuming that -9dB is 'better' than -10dB as a network-loading limit, or
that the TV keeps telling us that God is an American, and who are we to
argue?

(Ok, I've got some buttons, too :)

Ian

--- MaltEd 1.0.b5