David, at 16:29 on Nov 25 1995, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

db>> How many brands other than USR support this?

BG> In the US, both Hayes and AT&T already support 33k6bps, and the V.34
BG> extensions which are being used by USR will be the ones adopted by the
BG> ITU as the official ratified standard early next year.

db> That's nice .. once they're in place as an ITU-T standard, then I'll worry 
db> about 'em.  :-)

True enough too.  Even at ISD rates, the difference in overall time on line
is not all that much, although if you're likely to be shifting vast amounts
of data overseas, it could indeed be a worthwhile investment.  Not so much
for STD though, and certainly not at all for local calls.

BG> To upgrade a Rockwell modem will require a whole new datapump, not just
BG> an EPROM upgrade.  Any guesses as to how much Netcomm are likely to
BG> charge for that?  I already have a fair idea...  :)

db> I've already worked a way around NetComm's plan; 

Oh really?  Where did you get the Plutonium for your bomb then?  :)

DB> y'see, it cost me less for this modem new than it cost to upgrade my modem 
db> last time (M5 -> M7F), so what you do is skip a standard (I skipped 
db> 16.8Kbps, 19.2Kbps and landed on 28.8Kbps) and by then the new modem is 
db> cheaper than it would have cost to upgrade the old one in the first place.

True for local call use, but if you were a corporate client who needed a
good fast modem for ISD, you'd have actually lost money doing that.  As
you're not though, I guess it's completely irrelevant.  :)

db> At the same time, the intervening time period enables far more people to 
db> upgrade their modems, thereby giving you far more options for high-speed 
db> connects by the time you get your modem.  :-)

Is that what you call "the trailing edge" of technology then?

db> Sure, not as cheap or quick as a straight EPROM upgrade, but I've got other 
db> things to do without having to stuff around with upgrading hardware (heck, 
db> I barely have enough spare time to shop for my new computer at the 
db> moment!).

So what's wrong with the old computer - not fast enough?  The same could be
said for 14k4 modems too, I guess...

BG>> Plus Class 2.0 fax.

db>> M34F, too.

BG> Really?  That surprises me.

db> True. 

I really am surprised, as the vast majority of modem manufacturers have
gone with Class 2 (and sadly, so have the floggers of most fax apps).  Of
course, Class 2.0 is the official ITU-T standard, but that's cold comfort
when most fax/modems still don't bloody well support it.  :(

db> 14.4Kbps fax, unlike the ol' M7F's 9.6Kbps fax, too.

Yeah, not too many who don't run 14k4 fax now.  Not much use when calling
stand-alone fax machines though, most of which still only run at 9600 max.

BG>  Seems like you need a SOH transplant too, Dave.  :)

db> Without any indication (such as a smilie, or facts that were so 
db> outrageously unbelieveable as to be untrue) that it was intended as 
db> humourous, 

Np point using smileys on Paul - they appear to mean nothing to him.  :)

db> I could only conclude that you were serious about pissing off if 
db> Paul got a NutCrumm.

Nah, I occasionally send data to a fellow in Melbourne, and his M34F works
really well with my USR, always 26400 or 28800 connects.  I'm not really
down on their modems, just Netcomm and their policies.

db>> Ner.  :-)

BG> Is that an obscure acronym of some sort?  :)

db> I'll leave that as an exercise for the reader.  :-)

Could be anything - No Eating Rice, No Early Roots... damn, I give up!

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20