HM>> Maybe you should get USR to support common fax standards? :-)

 FF>> Or the rest of the industry to support the ITU standards? :-)

 IS> For 'rest of the industry' read 'Rockwell Inc.'

Well, that went without saying :-)

 IS> If they'd implement Class 2.0, so by default would 90% of the
 IS> industry of chip repackagers, hesitating to call them 'modem
 IS> manufacturers'.

What always amazes me is the often large price differences between
different modem brands, when their internals are virtually the same, ie:
Rockwell.

 IS> To be fair, board layout and frontend electronics design still counts
 IS> for something in clonal variations, but few have the savvy to
 IS> implement any protocol code all by themselves these days.

Why bother reinventing the wheel? If some massive company wants to hand out
a virtually complete modem package for next to nothing, why not take it and
run?

 FF>> Yeah, I know. Whoever has the biggest market share shall set the
 FF>> standards ...

 IS> Payback for the ITU-T not ratifying their V.fc as V.34?  :)

Probably. Interesting to note that Rockwell's V.34 only supports 16 state
trellis coding, yet their V.FC uses 32 state trellis coding.

Regards,
Frank

... Deaf? Call 1-800-HEARING for free information.
--- GoldED 2.50+