IS>>>> Fair comment.  You might expand on the problems with RPI a bit?

 HM>> Well, I've never used one, but the modems are made simpler (with no 

 LE> built

 HM>> in error correction or compression). Then you use software to perform



 LE> The cost savings in this are twofold :



 LE> * No need for a RAM chip

 LE> * No need to license protocols (MNP5, MNP10) from Microcom



Agreed, This does save cost, But not heartache & hassle to the user.



This is similar to buying a car without an engine. The car is cheaper, and 

even acceptable because it has a towing hook on the front for some third

party to get involved doing the real work for you)



You will get there but not without a lot of mucking around.



No need to register it because it is not self propelled





 LE> There is an RPI generic comm.drv replacement which can be obtained from 

 LE> my BBS

 LE> (for Win-OS/2 and Windows), but I've never got it to work reliably, ever,



Isn't the money you saved outweighed by time you have already taken (Your time

IS worth, money isn't it) trying to get the drivers to work acceptably.





In the real world people buy a modem to DO A JOB and don't need to be stuffing 

around for a half hour with drivers, just to send one file that should have

gone yesterday. You went from Windows to OS/2, You should know what I mean.



And you should not have to be restricted in the choice of software used to run

your modem. 

The modem may be cheaper but the hassle of finding software to run the thing

must cost something.



BTW, USR have actually brought out another type of modem that can only be

used with Windows. It is not an RPI modem.

....Another Dumb Idea & more money for Microsoft.



RPI (Really Poor Idea)



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

get his mind off USR's.



Russell



--- Terminate 3.00/Pro