Paul, at 18:05 on May 08 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

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.

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

BG> But if you're not using the M34F...  

PE> Someone else is.  If I return the M34F, I'll have to return the 
PE> Viper as well.

OK, you didn't mention that you'd done a swap.

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. 

You're a blatant fucking fraud, Paul.  Nice attempt at selective quoting,
especially as you had to chop the original halfway along a line in order to
delete the last four words which were extremely important in context. 
Let's put them back and requote my original comment in its entirety, shall
we ?

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

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

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

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

BG> Sure Paul, pity I don't just happen to have a $10k protocol analyser lying 
BG> downstairs gathering dust.  

PE> Which is why YOU can do very little scientific at all. 

And which just happens to be exactly what I said anyway.

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

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

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.

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

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.

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

BG> Can you say the same about NetComm?  

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

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

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

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

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

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.

If you weren't so bloody anal about Austel approval, you too could be
running a sysop deal Courier.  US$249 plus US$50 shipping, same price I
just paid for mine (Customs didn't slug me any sales tax this time either).
 At US$0.80 to the Oz dollar, it's as cheap as a yum-cha anyway.

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

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20