RS> The manual doesnt document the fact that USR does the ATZ
RS> differently to everyone else, and what documentation there is on
RS> the &W command is on the &B2 mode which he isnt even using Bill.

BG> Doesn't matter if he uses it or not, their reasoning should be
BG> obvious to anyone except the completely brain-dead.  Have a quote....

Soorree, completely useless. THAT documents the &B2 mode.
We happen to be actually discussing the fact that USR does the
ATZ command differently to how every other modem manufacturer does
it on the port speed used after the ATZ command has been OKed at
the port speed determined from the AT letters. FOR NO GOOD REASON.

Nothing whatever to do with the &B2 mode, which certainly does need to get
the port speed from somewhere for an ARQ connect after a non ARQ connect,
without an intervening AT command. It can ONLY get that from the NVRAM.

RS> You can certainly justify doing things like that if there
RS> is a good operational reason to do that, but in this case
RS> there isnt even any good reason to do it like that.

BG> I disagree.  There are still people using non-EC 2400 bps modems.

Pity that has nothing whatever to do with the unique
to USR approach on the port speed after an ATZ command.

Yes, the &B2 mode is used, its got nothing whatever to do with the
ATZ command tho. Which just happens to be what we were discussing.

RS> AND if you choose to do it like that for a good reason,
RS> you MUST document the quirk very thoroughly to minimise the
RS> risk of it repeatedly biting people on the bum. USR doesnt.

BG> I've already agreed that their documentation
BG> could be a little clearer, but as the vast majority
BG> of my calls are outbound, that isn't my problem.

We werent discussing whether its a problem for you, we were discussing
whether there is any good reason for USR to do the ATZ command differently
to the way everyone else does it, and whether its adequately documented.

BG> And that is the one thing with which I'll agree, the lack of documentation.

RS> You STILL havent justified why it makes the slightest sense for
RS> USR to be doing the port speed after a ATZ differently to everyone
RS> else, PARTICULARLY when doing that can bite you unexpectedly.

BG> The &B2 documentation covers that more than adequately IMO.

Welp, your opinion is a dud, it says NOTHING about the ATZ
command AT ALL. Let alone EVEN MENTION that USR does the
ATZ command differently to everyone else. FOR NO GOOD REASON.

RS> It does appear that USR may well have had that quirky approach
RS> to ATZ using the NVRAM port speed for quite some time, hard
RS> to check, but it still makes no sense to do it that way.

BG> Well it's certainly done that way on my old Courier HST, vintage 1988.

RS> Yeah, wouldnt surprise me if its been there for quite some time.

BG> I'd suggest that it's always been that way with USRs.

Dunno, there was a time when they even used rockwell chipsets.

RS> Still makes no sense to be doing it differently to everyone else
RS> tho. PARTICULARLY when the difference is only seen in some special
RS> circumstance, using ATZ as a modem init string, needing to see RINGs,
RS> and using a port speed which isnt the one used in the last &W command.

BG> And you still haven't explained why anybody would be stupid enough to
BG> run their modem and terminal with mismatched serial port bit rates.

Thats not the point Bill, robust designs are about working
well EVEN WHEN not everyone uses their modem the same way.

In fact there are plenty of situations where a modem can be &Wed at
a particular speed and many months later get used at a different port
speed on a different machine or whatever. Its nuts to demand that it
be &Wed again at that port speed so the RING can be seen when the way
everyone else does the ATZ command doesnt require that.

RS> FAR too quirky, robust designs are about eliminating those gotchas.
RS> Everyone else has realised that on that particular command.

BG> Then why have I only ever seen 2 complaints re mismatched
BG> bit rates - one from Paul, the other from some fellow in
BG> Zone 1 ?  If it was such a serious problem, I'd expect to
BG> have heard a considerably higher number of complaints.

The reason is you need a particular combination for the USR modem to
bite you. You need incoming calls, you need to have JUST and ATZ modem
init string, and you need to have &Wed at a different port speed to the
one you currently use. Its hardly surprising that thats not seen all that
often, but that says nothing useful at all about whether it makes the
slightest sense to have a gotcha like that in a modem FOR NO GOOD REASON.

RS> The autobauding on the AT letters is a brilliant concept.
RS> USR just stuffs that up on the ATZ command for no good reason.

BG> Once again, IYO.  USR obviously disagree with you though.

Yes, but they dont have a good reason for doing that do they ?

RS> Makes MUCH more sense to eliminate the NEED to do that Bill.

BG> Not if they wish to maintain the &B2 option.

Its got NOTHING to do with the &B2 mode. You can continue to
have that mode, and do the ATZ just like everyone else does.
@EOT:

---