BG> Easy to say that the Courier shouldn't be demanding a retrain immediately 
BG> following the connect, but if that's its normal operation, I'd have fully 
BG> expected to be hearing other complaints about that.  Also, one of the more 
BG> objectionable and time-wasting duties I had to perform at CHH was to test 
BG> EVERY single modem they put up for sale (although I suppose DOAs _can_ be a 
BG> tad embarrassing), and this was done by calling Mike's own BBS - equipped 
BG> with a Courier - and DLing a largish file.  I must have tested literally 
BG> 100s of modems in this manner, the bulk of them being 14k4, yet I didn't 
BG> once see the problem you describe.  And there must be a HELL of a lot of 
BG> people calling Couriers with their Rockwell 14k4s too.

PE> And did you check all those modems, to see if a retrain had been
PE> requested?  If so, how did you check that?

BG> No need to, Paul.  Even if the USR is demanding a retrain, NONE of the 
BG> current 14k4 and 28k8 modems I tested were bothered by this.  And frankly, 
BG> I really don't give a shit if you don't believe what I say to be true.

PE> [fx: falling flat on face]

It's not so much a matter of whether I believe you, as I know
for a fact that you made a statement based on zilch, since you
never once checked ANY 14k4 to see if a retrain had been 
requested.  Because you didn't have the ability to see that anyway.
THAT's the point.  You are above claiming that it can't be normal
operation of USR because "someone else" would have complained
about it.  The reason no-one else has ever complained is because
no-one else has ever looked, INCLUDING YOU with your "100's of
tests" which you were attempting to pass of as evidence.

You really have a pat line in bullshit, Bill.

PE> Yes, an incompatibility which my Spirit DIDN'T have, meaning it
PE> is fixable from the USR end, although that does not necessarily
PE> mean that it is the USRs problem. 

BG> Quite right.  And when it's only happening with ONE of your callers (and 
BG> NONE of the 100s of modems I tested with a Courier), that should tell you 
BG> something.  It sure does me.

Yeah, you've never tested a Supra.  The Supra is a real-world
modem.  I'm the first one to document the problem.  Funny that,
just like the Spirit double-sending.  Oh, you doubted that I
was the first to see that.  Presumably you also doubt that I
am the first to see the SupraUSR problem?  Oh no, hang on,
you've just said that I'm the ONLY one to have seen that 
problem.  What happened to this world-wide survey required 
before making such a claim?

[fx: falling flat on face]

PE> However, when you buy the world's most expensive modem,

BG> The Courier is NOWHERE near the most expensive modem.  The American 
BG> Octocomms, Penrils, AT&Ts, and Telebits are all much dearer than the 
BG> Courier.  It's not even the dearest modem in Australia, either.  Not by a 
BG> long chalk.

Whatever, paying a huge premium at any rate.  As the ISP at work
said, "The USR is not a $200 better modem than the Netcomm.  It
is not even a better modem".

PE> you expect it to be compatible with MORE thinks than a Spirit II, not less.  
PE> Anyhow, it's still far more likely to be a USR bug, because for it to be a 
PE> Supra fault, there has to be a bug in the Supra, that only occurs with a 
PE> USR, that makes it look like a retrain has been demanded when there
PE> was none.  It's certainly possible, but either way, the USR is
PE> not compatible with real-life modems.

BG> Nope, all you've proved (and you really haven't even proved that) is that 
BG> ONE modem exhibits a problem calling USRs.  Apart from Rod's archaic Supra, 
BG> neither Dave nor I have EVER seen that problem before.

Before you'd never seen the problem EVER.  Now it's "Apart from
Rod's modem".  Well done, Bill.  Just shows how much value your
original argument of "no-one else has EVER seen the problem" is,
eh?

BG> If somebody else eventually complains about the SAME problem, then I might 
BG> start listening, but until then, I'm simply no longer interested.

Oh great, Rod's modem suddenly developed SERIOUSLY FLAWS straight
after my Thunder fried, so it's now an "irrelevant modem".  Nice
one, Bill.  About the same level of support I got from MBE.  THEY
had never seen the double-sending bug, even the bastards at Digicom
had never seen the double-sending bug, so it was irrelevant.
BFN.  Paul.
@EOT:

---