BG> Hey Paul, I really hate to say "I told you so", but...

PE> You're doing it again, Bill.  Nowhere has the man said that
PE> the M34F violates the V.34 spec, he's even said he doesn't have
PE> a copy of it, and to try elsewhere for an answer to the question.

BG> The discussion was about whether or not
BG> NetComms are 100% ITU V.34-compliant,

RS> And you raving on about 'fitness for purpose' and the ACCC, yes.

BG> and as the USR supports MORE of V.34 than the M34F, I have my answer.

RS> Fraid not, utterly irrelevant.

BG> Have it your own way if you must, but I'll absolutely guarantee that my
BG> Sportster is still a hell of a lot more V.34+ compliant than the NetComm.

Yeah, but YOU were the one who 'absolutely guaranteed' that your
handshaking problems would gone if Paul had other than a Spirit too |-)

And pity it has sweet fuck all to do with what we were actually discussing,
being able to use the ACCC and TPA to make Netcon give Paul his money back.
@EOT:

---