LE>> * No need for a RAM chip
 LE>> * No need to license protocols (MNP5, MNP10) from Microcom
 RB> Agreed, This does save cost, But not heartache & hassle to the user.

Russell, your message carries a flavor which leads me to think that you
believe I was -justifying- RPI modems. Please believe me when I tell you I
don't recommend that ANYONE buy an RPI modem. The only circumstance under
which these units are a good buy are for a situation where you need V.17
fax capability, and will never use the data capabilities.

 RB> This is similar to buying a car without an engine. The car is cheaper, and
 RB> No need to register it because it is not self propelled

Is this true ? Interesting ! So a horse and cart doesn't need to be
registered? Or just the horse needs to be registered ?

 LE>> There is an RPI generic comm.drv replacement which can be obtained
 RB> Isn't the money you saved outweighed by time you have already taken (Your

I have to admit I didn't try very hard. I mostly tried because I had a
couple of clients with these modems, and they wanted to get them working.
After a while messing about with drivers, no joy at either end, I exchanged
them for real 14.4 modems, and sold all but one of the RPIs as dedicated
fax cards.

 RB> In the real world people buy a modem to DO A JOB and don't need to be
 RB> stuffing around for a half hour with drivers, just to send one file that

Half an hour is a bit optimistic, actually.

 RB> BTW, USR have actually brought out another type of modem that can only be
 RB> used with Windows. It is not an RPI modem.

Never heard of it, and don't want to ! Are you sure it's not RPI ? I know
USR have released one RPI unit.

 RB> I might ask Paul Edwards to start documenting the problems with RPI modems

There's not much to document, except "Doesn't work".

-- Lewin A.R.W. Edwards [Team OS/2]  Tel 0419320415 * 0412809805 * 0414927056

--- GoldED 2.41+