Paul, at 13:19 on May 11 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

PE> Ok, all you're doing is confirming the same error I reported
PE> connecting to someone else's Viper. 

BG> Same symptom, not necessarily the same error.  There is a difference.

PE> Ok, if you want to be pedantic.

No, just trying to be accurate.

PE> USR problems too.  Certainly worth the $400 extra if you ask me.

BG> Waddya mean EXTRA ?  The Courier cost me LESS than A$400 IN TOTAL !!  

PE> Do an honest comparison, Bill, not one that includes breaking the law.

Oi, I did NOT break the law.  Customs CHOSE not to charge me the $66 sales
tax which would normally have been payable.  Nothing to do with me at all. 
In fact, they quite often don't bother charging on smaller items anyway.

PE> A non-sysop can get a USR for about $725.  And can get a Yum Cha for
PE> around $270.  That's actually $455 extra.

The cheapest yum-cha Austel V.34 I've seen locally is now only $195. 
Anyway, nobody twists anybody's arms to buy Couriers, they did so of their
own volition, and (apart from you) they're ALL very happy with them,
totally regardless of their initial cost.  And just as I don't personally
bag YOU for buying NetComms or Spirits, neither do I expect you to bag me
for my choice.

BG> Anyway Paul, as you profess to be so good at locating and curing bugs, 

PE> I don't remember professing that, you'll have to either quote 
PE> something or withdraw that.

The implication is there, and I shall do neither.

BG> perhaps you'd care to explain why I've only ever seen 28800/NONE connects 
BG> with TML ?  

PE> As a GUESS, I would say there is some unique characteristic about
PE> my phone line.  The only way you will really know is if you get
PE> someone who has the source code to put debug info into the modems,
PE> and maybe use a datascope too.  I don't have that ability, so
PE> DON'T KNOW.

And NEITHER DO I know!  All I know is that it only ever happens when
calling YOUR board.

BG> I've called heaps of V.34 modems all over Australia (and a few in the US), 
BG> and have NEVER seen a non-EC connect anywhere but on your board.  Same with 
BG> DD as well, now that I think about it.  So what is peculiar to YOUR 
BG> situation that could possibly cause these non-EC connects, I wonder ?

PE> I DON'T KNOW.

Oh well, at least you've given up on blaming specific modems now.

BG> Don't worry, I'm not suggesting that the USR code isn't partly to blame, 
BG> but it does seem odd that it only happens with YOUR M34F and (very 
BG> infrequently) YOUR Viper, and so far, with nobody else's.  Poltergeists, 
BG> perhaps ?

PE> More likely my line.  That's why you can't just take your results
PE> from calling others from CHH and generalize that the USR has no 
PE> problems, like you USED to do. 

No OBVIOUS problems, if you don't mind.  As I said in another message,
nothing as complex as modem controller code is completely bug-free (another
comment you hotly refuted as well, for some weird reason).

PE> Before you can make generalized statements about a modem, you need LOTS of 
PE> data from LOTS of places. Until then, all you can say is "I
haven't noticed 
PE> any problems with the places I have called" rather than
"The USR is the most 
PE> robust modem on the market". 

I agree.  I also still believe the latter statement to be correct.  :)

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20