BG> Well it's true, Paul.  Anybody who's been involved with modems for more 
BG> than a couple of years would normally have enough sense to avoid NetComm 
BG> like the plague, given some of the positively atrociously buggy modems 

PE> No they're not, they're all user errors.  Not a bug in sight.

BG> Bullshit.  Even your attempts at humour fall flat these days.  :)

They are as much user-errors as all the user-errors I reported with
the USR.  Like a Supra modem getting dropouts.  Like failing to get
EC connects when calling a Viper (David got the same when calling
a Netcomm).

BG> Besides, the Viper has always been a better and more reliable performer 
BG> than the NetComm, 

PE> Dear oh dear, another Bill Grimsley Fact.  You use "always" as if
PE> there is a long record of various Viper models consistently 
PE> outperforming Netcomms in large numbers of exhaustive tests. 

BG> You're a blatant fucking fraud, Paul.  

No, Bill.

BG> Nice attempt at selective quoting, 
BG> especially as you had to chop the original halfway along a line in order to 
BG> delete the last four words which were extremely important in context.  

No they weren't, Bill.

BG> Let's put them back and requote my original comment in its entirety, shall 
BG> we ?

Go for it, Bill.

BG> =======
BG> Besides, the Viper has always been a better and more reliable performer 
BG> than the NetComm, especially from my POV.
BG> =======

BG> As I said, you're a fucking fraud.  And have been caught red-handed too.

No, Bill.  The sentence above can be broken down into two distinct
statements:

1. The Viper has always been a better and more reliable performer
than the Netcomm.

2. From my point of view, the Viper has been a VASTLY better and more
reliable performer than the Netcomm.

Number 2, is probably correct, so I didn't want to respond to that.
I did want to respond to the first bit, which is NOT from your
personal point of view, but a GENERAL STATEMENT about use of Viper
vs Netcomm by the rest of the population.

THAT is just arse-wind.  THAT is what I chose to rebuke.

PE> When reality is you blew wind out of your arse and said what colour
PE> it was.

BG> If you say so Paul, but I'm not the one who just lost their credibilty.

Bill, you lost your credibility months ago, and now you have shown
your inability to understand your own English.

PE> And thus, simply say "I have no scientific data available to
me".  Instead,
PE> you choose to blow wind out of your arse.

BG> Nope, I choose to pass an opinion based on personal experience.

An opinion which consists entirely on arse-wind, trying to tell me
where code bugs lie, when you wouldn't have a clue in the world.

BG> Now that my Courier is on-line, I've had occasion to DL a few of the latest 
BG> SDLs, and the README provided with each one indicates that each subsequent 
BG> SDL does indeed solve certain prior bugs or problems with the code (quite 
BG> aside from the wankers in the USR echo aside) with their code. 

PE> They even did that with the Spirit II.  Shows how useful that is.

BG> No, it shows how USELESS Digicom were.  Any wonder they went belly-up.

Yep, shows how USELESS USRs SDLs are too.  If they don't fix the
problems I reported, I don't care if they release 50 million SDLs
every 2 seconds, they all add up to USELESS.

PE> What proves what is useful is how they react to reported bugs.
PE> The Spirit II still double-sends, the USR problem list is still
PE> untouched.

BG> Funny, MY Courier works superbly.  As does David's, et al.

No they don't.  David was just complaining about connects to Netcomm
a few days ago.

BG> Can you say the same about NetComm?  

PE> There are a variety of levels of the flashrom. 

BG> Pity that NetComm's flash-ROM code does nothing to solve any bugs in the 
BG> hard-coded RC288dpi chipset itself then.  You're stuck with those for life.

Just like I'm stuck with USRs problems in their flashrom code for 
life, because they choose not to fix them.  No different (except
for the massive $$$ hike) to Digicom, which was also totally 
rom-fixable, but chose not to do so.  Heard it all before, Bill,
how great the Spirit was, because any problems could be fixed with
a ROM change.  Reality was they didn't fix the problems that counted.
They presumably fixed some hypothetical bugs, judging by the number
of roms they produced.  Just like USR.  Amazing how two companies
could be so similar!  The only difference is the huge price increase
of USR.  There's a sucker born every minute though, who thinks that
buy paying $500 more than a $250 yum cha modem actually gets him a
3 times better modem, when in fact, its the same old smelly boot.

Anyhow, which of the problems I documented with the Netcomm are a 
fault of the RC288dpi chipset anyway?  If none of them are, then 
it doesn't matter a damn.  And given that the same problems don't 
exist on the Viper, and given that the Viper and the Netcomm are 
both Rockwell-based, I would assume that ALL of the problems are 
code problems, fixable by flashrom by Netcomm.

But just like USR, they have not fixed the problems I reported, so the
flashrom capability is totally useless.  At least Netcomm have said
that they are looking into the problems, instead of saying "Oh
England, my lionheart".

BG> Certainly, with the Taiwanese clones, you're very much on your own, 

PE> No matter what I get, I'm on my own. 

BG> Oh crap.  Now try explaining away at least half a dozen Courier SDLs since 
BG> they moved to flash-ROM then.  Have fun trying, won't you?

Have fun trying to explain why they haven't fixed ANY of my reported
bugs, which are the ONLY things that I am interested in.  I am NOT
interested in bugs that I wasn't even experiencing.  Try to get that
into a single neuron.

PE> Indeed, if I end up returning the Netcomm, it will likely be to get a 
PE> Taiwanese one.  At least I'm not paying for any pretence of support.

BG> If you weren't so bloody anal about Austel approval, you too could be 
BG> running a sysop deal Courier.  US$249 plus US$50 shipping, same price I 

And if I broke into Dave Hatch's house and stole his Courier, I'd have
an even cheaper one.  So what Bill, we're comparing apples with apples
here, not what happens if you manage to avoid sales tax and break the 
law.  And at $675, compared to a $250 (or somthing) yum-cha, the USR
is just an expensive paperweight.

BG> Frankly though, I'd sooner you bought a Dynalink.  You deserve it.

At a $425 saving, that's about 2 gig of disk space.  I'll take the
disk space thanks.  I can actually use it the disk space.  Being able
to wank in AUST_MODEM that I bought the world's most expensive modem
doesn't appeal to me as much as it does to you.  In actual fact, it
would make me feel like a right wolly having been ripped off blind,
and having to resort to trying to religiously convince everyone else
that I hadn't been ripped off blind, and getting extremely frustrated
when people didn't agree that the world's most blatant ripoff had the
world's longest list of problems too.  Nup, I just can't see myself
getting into the swing of that one, Bill.  I have even ditched SCSI
for the same reason.  Faced with my THIRD purchase of an Adaptec
SCSI controller, for $380 I'd rather have 1.5 gig of IDE hard disk
thanks all the same.  So I did.  BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---