DT> Is there a problem with the USR Couriers? or is there just a
DT> problem with one or two users of these modems?

PC> Think you'll find it's the latter, my Courier works just fine.

PE> Autobauds on ATZ does it?

PC> No, but i don't consider it a problem.

It is anyway.

PE> Just because you don't use it on the same variety of modems that
PE> I do, does not make the problems disappear into thin air.

PC> True, but if the ATZ quirk was such a big problem we would be hearing

Who said it was a big problem?  I had a workaround for it in 5-10
minutes.

PC> far more about it than we have to date, and your right i don't use my

How many people complained about the Spirit II double-send problem?
BUGGER ALL.  Didn't stop it from existing in every single Spirit II.
In that case, you had to both be:

1. Sending from the Spirit II (ie running a BBS usually)
2. Have a Rockwell caller
3. Have a fast comms program behind the Spirit II that didn't dawdle
about before sending block 0.

PC> USR on a great variety of modems but others here are using USR's to
PC> run BBS's, mail hubs etc that aren't having the problems you seem to
PC> be having. 

They ALL have the autobaud fault in them.  They ALL have the 
retrain request on at least one V32bis modem.

PC> I'm not paying out on you or saying you don't know what
PC> your doing, clearly you do and we all agree that ATZ resetting the
PC> port speed to a pre-saved value is behavior not seen in other modems,
PC> whether it's a bug, quirk or side effect of the AT&B2 command i don't
PC> know it's just there, do we write off the USR Courier as a crap modem
PC> because of it.

I didn't say it was a crap modem because of it, I said it is either
a bug or a design fault.  I've said on numerous occasions that it is
only a minor problem.  It's interesting how many people will try to
turn my numerous claims of it being a minor problem into a
"consistently says that it is a major problem".

PC> Have you ever considered the fact that the Courier you trialed may have
PC> been faulty? 

Yes, briefly.  Thought it was incredibly unlikely that there could
be a hardware fault to blame for the low-level negotiation.  Coupled
with the easy-to-reproduce problems being easy-to-reproduce on
EVERYONE's modems, once the problem was found on mine.

PC> some of the ATI11 dumps you posted as you stated yourself
PC> "Defied the laws of Physics", and i'm not refering to the ATZ issue
PC> here.

Dave Hatch also reported seeing it once.  Just because I'm the
first to report it, doesn't mean that I'm the only one who has
the problem, just that I'm the only one who bothered to report
it.  Been there, done that, found the Spirit II double-send yet?

PC> Anyway this whole issue is starting to take on a life of it's own and
PC> it is after all just a storm in a teacup.

The only reason it's a storm in a teacup is because after I listed
it as one of a dozen problems I was having, people were adamant
that it was not a bug, it was the way things were meant to work.
That's what caused the debate.  It's amazing how long it took for
some people to understand that there was no sense in deliberately
changing speed from that which you KNOW the terminal is operating 
at.

PC> BTW Hows the M34F performing so far, i'm using an M11F on my mailer
PC> here and it gives me no problems apart from calling a system on very
PC> bad lines where i only get a 4800 connect, oddly enough the USR will
PC> get 16800 connects to that system.

It's FAR WORSE than the Courier.  Mainly because a Maestro SE 9600
can't connect to it at 9600.  A secondary problem is the failure
of a USR Sportster to connect with EC on 50% of times.  The Courier
gave 30% failed connects with a Supra.  The Netcomm is giving 95%
failed connects to a Maestro, and 50+% failed connects to a 
Sportster V34.  That makes it worse than the Courier.  In fairness
to Netcomm though, support have not yet finished on the problem.  The
last thing they got me to try was %L11, which didn't work, so we'll
see what they have to say about that...

BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---