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

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

He was talking about failure to autobaud on &B1, not the use of
&B2.

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.

It does not say why it should not autobaud.  And anyhow, if you
want to claim the &B2 documentation covers &B1 operation, then
try and explain why the modem DOES autobaud if I make an
outgoing call, or you AT&F as my init string.  ie it DOESN'T
operate at the speed in NVRAM.  Try to get out of that one.

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 run 
BG> their modem and terminal with mismatched serial port bit rates.

They're NOT running them at mismatched baud rates.  THAT's what
autobaud does, it makes the modem pick up the speed automatically.
What do you think the point of autobaud is anyway?  Anyone who
uses autobaud is stupid?  

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

Right.  So before the problem didn't exist because I was the first
one to EVER report it, and now the problem is not serious enough
to warrant fixing because you've only seen 2 people complain about
it in a fidonet echo.  Nice one, Bill.

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.

Yeah?  What was their rationale for changing speed on the terminal?
Which terminal or comms software were they trying to cater for?
None that I know of.  Except the mythical VT770 of course!  Goes
under the alias of "unicorn".

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

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

RUBBISH.  You could STILL have &B2 do that if that's the way
you want, and STILL autobaud normally for people who use &B1.
Quite pathetic really.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---