Paul, at 02:23 on Mar 30 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

PE> Yes, it is slightly inferior in that respect.  So how much do you
PE> think I would have saved off my phone bill if I had paid the extra
PE> $200 for a V34+ modem?

BG> That's not the point, Paul.  

PE> Oh yes it is.  $200 is a HELL of a lot of money.  You do realise that
PE> even if I put the $200 into my home loan, the INTEREST alone will be
PE> 40c per week to me, so I would have to save 40c per week on my phone
PE> bill from DAY 1, nevermind paying back the principle.

And if you delve a bit deeper into that premise, you might be horrified to
learn exactly how much your computer has cost you as well.  And your TV,
and your VCR etc, etc, etc.  It's just a fact of life, but I've already
made the mistake of going without for 5 years (4 years and 11 months, to be
precise), and working my arse off so that I could pay off my 30-year
mortgage in just 5 years.  But at what cost?  Sure, I saved over $160,000
at current interest rates, but I wonder now if it was really worth all that
forced deprivation.

PE> In actual fact, the cost factor made me want to buy a Yum Cha.  It
PE> made my heart bleed to pay $100 more for a Netcomm, when I was very
PE> dubious about whether I would actually see an advantage at all.

Hard to say.  Some yum-chas, like the V.34 Dynalinks for example, are
actually rather good value for money, as long as you don't mind using X3
(and I sure don't).  Others, like the Ellcon, are absolute garbage, so
there are indeed times when it pays to buy from a well-known local
manufacturer (I won't say reputable, because NetComm have perpetrated some
positively obscene rorts on their customers over the years).

PE> However, I didn't get a special sysop price on a Yum Cha, so I sort
PE> of hoped that the advantages of a $700 retail Netcomm cf $300 Yum
PE> Cha, although certainly not worth $400, would perhaps be worth the
PE> $100 extra that I as a sysop were paying.

Oh sure, no argument there, and I'll even agree that the M34F is one of
NetComm's better models, but there's still room for improvement, and that's
only possible by buying a NEW modem, not upgrading the existing one.

PE> It was a tough choice though.  I was basically planning on running
PE> my modem until the next lightning strike (I do not switch my modem
PE> off during storms normally).  I wait until my fish tank jumps 1 foot
PE> in the air before I decide that I might disconnect the modem.

Does your contents insurance policy cover lightning damage?  Mine does now,
but I had to change companies (to NZI) to get it.  Suncorp refused to cover
that sort of damage at all, the bastards.  Also, whilst modem manufacturers
don't cover such damage under warranty (and quite rightly so too), I now
know of two separate cases where lightning-destroyed (to the point of
actual charring) USRs have been physically replaced WITHOUT CHARGE.  And
that impressed me no end.

BG> The problem with any non-DSP modem is that 
BG> they are basically non-upgradeable.  Sure, small bugs in the ROM controller 
BG> code can be fixed (and at least NetComm have a flash-ROM for that), but 
BG> chipset problems or feature upgrades are simply not viable propositions.

PE> Bill, I've never been able to get any modem manufacturer to fix
PE> my bugs.  I couldn't get Borland to fix their compiler, etc etc.
PE> Not much use having the feature if the real problem is that they're
PE> not going to fix it.

Why do you think USR have released half a dozen SDLs over the past 18
months or so then?  Some were feature upgrades, but most were bug-fixes,
and even more importantly, ALL of them were free.  You may not care for the
Courier's quirky behaviour with auto-bauding (or Rod's Supra :)), but I
find it hard to believe that you think that USR don't fix their bugs. 
Clearly, they do.

PE> Besides, can't I get a ROM upgrade for $20 or something from Netcomm?
PE> $20 is one-year's interest on the $200 saving.

Dunno, the last ROM upgrade I bought from NetComm up here (for the M5) cost
me $80, and that was basically just an exchange EPROM chip.  Still, it was
better than the $400-odd that they were charging for motherboard
replacements to those who complained about V.42bis over MNP4 not working
properly (Series 3 M7F).

PE> Yeah?  Worked out how many years it would take for me to make back
PE> the $200 in saved phone call costs? 

BG> Forget the speed difference.  

PE> Then you're forgetting the only thing that would be of any difference
PE> to me anyway.  And only a VERY MARGINAL difference at that.  Certainly
PE> isn't saving ME any money.  It MIGHT save my ISD callers some money,
PE> but every time I've looked, ISD callers get very low connect speeds
PE> anyway.

No, you're completely ignoring interconnectivity (and yeah, I know how you
feel about people who use non-ITU protocols, but your M34F also does V.FC,
in case you hadn't noticed :)), plus the future upgradeability of the
Courier, which IMO, is its most valuable feature.  It basically means that
there's no longer any need to replace your modem every time a new feature
is introduced, and over a year or two, that more than makes up for the
extra $200 up front anyway.

BG> worthwhile).  The REAL advantage with the top-end modems, like the USR 
BG> Courier and the AT&T Paradyne, is the future upgradeability of these 
BG> products, and I for one am more than happy to pay a premium for that 
BG> ability.

PE> It isn't worth $200 to ME, so there's no point you telling me I've
PE> bought a lemming etc etc, I'd rather have my $200 thanks all the
PE> same.  Actually, I would pay the $200 for better connectivity, but
PE> then, I could swap for a Spirit Viper and get my most major problem
PE> fixed even now.

No, I'm not knocking the M34F.  I've already stated that I think it's one
of NetComm's better efforts to date, but whilst I'm not suggesting you've
bought a lemon (ever tried juicing a lemming?  Urk!), I do believe that
you've locked yourself into a modem which will never be anything more than
it is now.  And if you don't mind that, fine.  Incidentally, it's a great
pity you insist on running Austel approved, because the sysop price for the
Courier is US$249, which is not too shabby at the current A$0.78/US$1.00
exchange rates.

BG> Additionally, whilst I know that you personally don't give a shit about 
BG> this, there are still many sysops who consider the modem's ability to 
BG> handle incoming calls from non-ITU protocols like V.32ter or HST to be an 
BG> advantage as well, and I happen to agree with them.  If I was a sysop, I 

PE> If you want to convince me that I got landed with a lemming in order
PE> to save $200, you have to come up with something that interests *ME*.

I can't answer that, because apart from murdering pigeons, I have
absolutely no idea what you find interesting.  Did you ever have a read of
the Courier's on-line manual, which lists all of its extra features in
great detail?

BG> think I'd consider my users before worrying too much about an extra ~$200 

PE> Most of my users are local, and if they buy proprietry modems they
PE> deserve all they get. 

That's a bit unfair, don't you think?  And you have V.FC after all...

PE> What concerns me is people like Dieter, who are using a standard modem, and 
PE> not connecting.

Is he still having problems then?  I thought he'd replaced the Maestro with
a NetComm, or something like that.  I guess not, eh?  :)   BTW, did he have
any problems connecting with Paul's Courier while you had it?  I forget
now.

BG> in the initial cost (and given the free feature upgrades in the pipeline, 
BG> it may well be even cheaper to have paid extra up front for the Courier, 
BG> instead of having to trade-in or sell  your M34F when stuff such as 
BG> Distinctive Ring and CID become a reality).

PE> You're not doing a very good job, Bill.  You have to tell me why CID
PE> and distinctive ring are worth $200 to me. 

I'm not suggesting that they are though.  I'm merely using those features
as an example of the desirability of a generic DSP powered modem in which
the flash ROM code controls the entire modem.  Somebody mentioned the other
day that if USR so desired, they could even flash their ROM to work as a
sound card.  :)

PE> I sort of don't really give a shit, at least at the moment.  After the next 
PE> lightning bolt, I may look for these features.  I would probably be 
PE> interested in being able to set up my BBS to both receive incoming faxes as 
PE> well as incoming modem calls.  THAT interests me, but not enough to use
PE> software without source code.

No problem, the USRs work quite well when discriminating between fax and
data, although the required init$ is a bit of a nightmare.  I also read
somewhere that their Class 1 mode will also discriminate, but I have no
proof of that.

And while you're complaining about non-ITU protocols, the USR is one of
very few fax/modems which DOES use the ITU-ratified Class 2.0 command set,
while your Rockwells et al use their own Class 2.  What a cockup!  The
trouble is, fax apps cater for the majority, even though they're wrong.

BG> If you want to call my enthusiasm for a damn good product
"zealotry", then 
BG> so be it, I really don't give a toss.  What does tend to piss me off 

PE> No, your zealotry is in making unsubstantiated claims, and dragging
PE> out strawmen like "the manual doesn't say you can use ATZ as an init
PE> string".  You really don't know how pathetic that looks from here, Bill.

Don't take everything I say too seriously Paul, will you?  :)

In fact, the manual actually recommends init strings such as AT&F1,
etc.  And so does their tech support, for that matter.  Anyway, it's no big
deal. 

BG> though, is your unjustifiably negative attitude towards the Courier.  Can 

PE> WHAT negative attitude?  You're making it up, Bill.  You are taking
PE> my technical evaluation and just because there is unfavourable stuff
PE> in it (that's what testing is for, Bill), and claiming it as being
PE> negative.

I don't have your Courier "fault" list immediately at hand, but
there are a couple of complaints on it which are COMPLETELY unjustified
(the one about the S56 register, for a start).  It's a shame also that you
weren't using one of the better SDLs, as changing that is basically
identical to changing the entire modem.

BG> you honestly tell me that if they were the same price, you'd still prefer a 
BG> NetComm ?

PE> NO!  And if you LISTENED to what I was saying, instead of going off
PE> on a zealotry trip, you would have already known this, as I have
PE> stated it before:

I's hard to know WHAT you mean half the time though Paul.  You do tend to
be a little erratic from time to time, you must admit.  :)

PE> Although I listed a greater number of technical faults with the USR,
PE> the problems were not as severe as those that I had with the Netcomm.

And some weren't even legitimate problems at all.

PE> I am mostly interested in incoming calls, so the fact that I may not
PE> connect to a Netcomm properly on an outgoing call is not as big a
PE> problem as failure for incoming calls to connect to me.  Dieter's is
PE> the most serious problem in that respect.  Total failure is simply
PE> not acceptible.

And neither is spelling "acceptable" that way, now that you mention it.  :)

Anyway, if you ever manage to find a modem which connects perfectly with
every other modem in the field, do let me know - I'd buy it at ANY price.

BG> And if your answer to that is yes, I'd be damned interested to hear why.

PE> Well it isn't, so you might want to go and keep your zealotry in
PE> check next time.  BFN.  Paul.

It's called "enthusiasm", if you don't mind...

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20