Re: [expert] WinModem question
John Aldrich wrote: > Right...that's 2.2.4, According to my read, it was kernel > 2.4.x (at least that's how *I* understood it!) 2.3.18 > might be released, I'm guessing, around Christmas or My bad, the freeze currently in effect is for 2.4. 2.2.4 was released a long time ago, and 2.3.18 was released sometime in the last week. No winmodems in 2.4. -- Dan Brown, KE6MKS, [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Since all the world is but a story, it were well for thee to buy the more enduring story rather than the story that is less enduring" -- The Judgment of St. Colum Cille
Re: [expert] WinModem question READ THIS.
Ramon Gandia wrote: > > Mike Hill wrote: > > > > Ive got a CompUSA ad in front of me. > > > > I see the following. Best Data 56K V.90 PCI Modem $49.99 with $20.00 mail > > in rebate. CompUSA part number is #202878 (internal modem by the way) > > This is a WinModem. It used to be that ALL PCI modems were > winmodems, however there are two out now that are not. THe > first was the MultiTech. However, it still does not work with > Linux The second is the ActionTec (get the right one, they > have PCI winmodem models too!). Other than those two, ALL, > and I repeat ALL other PCI modems are WinModems and do not work > with Linux. > Not so, I had a USR PCI that was _not_ a winmodem. Until I left the phone line plugged in during a storm. RIP USR, blew the tops off three chips. :-( Probably the best modem I've ever had. Be aware that 99.9% of pci's are winmodems, just not all. Bob J.
Re: [expert] WinModem question READ THIS.
Mike Hill wrote: > > Ramon, > > Those part numbers are all CompUSA numbers. Not manufacturers numbers. > > I only posted the information since some were mentioning modems in the > compusa ad. > > I like the USR Sportster Externals myself! I am aware they were CompUSA numbers. I wanted to point out that they are useless in determining what kind of modem it is or its real model number. -- Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin Nook Net http://www.nook.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575 P.O. Box 970fax. 907-443-2487 Nome, Alaska 99762-0970 == Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525
Re: [expert] WinModem question READ THIS.
Ramon, Those part numbers are all CompUSA numbers. Not manufacturers numbers. I only posted the information since some were mentioning modems in the compusa ad. I like the USR Sportster Externals myself! Mike
Re: [expert] WinModem question READ THIS.
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > I looked at a best buy ad, but all I see is a Creative WinModem. > > All Creative modems are WinModems. the isa creative labs modem blaster has jumper settings and can be set. it is net a winmodem I've had them running although they don't seem to be very consistent. If you can find them the best data 56sf is an internal isa jumperable modem. I found mine at Fred myers. I usually get between connections between 43 and 49 it works very well. > > I am going to save you guys a bunch of work. There is one site > that has a list of every modem made or ever made. It tells you > if its internal, external, WinModem or not, PCI or ISA, etc. etc. > It also tells you if its Linux compatible, and where you get the > init strings and WHO has actually got this modem to work (I mean > a private person that reported it working under Linux). They also > give you the manufacturer contact. Please bookmark this page: > > http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html > > The page was last updated 9/11/99, just 5 days ago. Look for the > link "View the Entire Table". The whole site is full of a wealth > of information regarding LInux and Modems. I have found this site > to be very accurate, and regarding Modems, the ones that work > fine for Linux also work best for Windows 95/98. > > -- > Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin Nook Net > http://www.nook.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575 > P.O. Box 970fax. 907-443-2487 > Nome, Alaska 99762-0970 == Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525 -- ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Holiness unto the Lord, He must increase, but I must decrease Brook Humphrey Owner, Mobile PC Medic webmaster, www.thelinuxstop.com webmaster, www.webmedic.net
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, you wrote: > Ive got a CompUSA ad in front of me. > > I see the following. Best Data 56K V.90 PCI Modem $49.99 with $20.00 mail > in rebate. CompUSA part number is #202878 (internal modem by the way) > > They also have a Viking 56K V.90 internal ISA modem. $39.99. Part #188969 > > They have Internal USR Faxmodems (not winmodems) for $99 (after $20 rebate) > part # 183923, and they also have external ones for $129.99 (after $20 > rebate) part #183921 > > I looked at a best buy ad, but all I see is a Creative WinModem. > > Hope this information helps somebody. > Well, hopefully it helps the gentlemen (and ladies) on this list who have WinModems. :-) John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
Good rant, well done and informative. Jeanette - Original Message - From: Ramon Gandia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 8:09 PM Subject: Re: [expert] WinModem question > 1. WinModems do not work under Linux. > > 2. They would work if someone wrote a driver for them. > > 3. There is a french modem manufacturer that SAYS they will > release a winmodem soon with a Linux driver. It is still > vaporware. > > 4. WinModems require critical timing (real-time) in order > to handle the digital signal processing. This would create > extreme difficulties for Linux, specially on computers > short of memory or lacking in CPU speed. > > 5. WinModem manufacturers have not shown interest in writing > Linux drivers. > > 6. A Linux programmer might be able to do it, but so far no > one has volunteered to do this. For various reasons: > > a) The hardware is junk. They barely work or do not >work under Windows95/98. > b) The information needed from the Manufacturer is >proprietary. The manufacturer may or may not >release it for inclusion into GPL software because >the source code would be GPL. This is mostly an >imaginary issue, but its perceived as such by most >hardware manufacturers. > > 7. There are only three manufacturers of the WinModem chipsets: > Lucent Technologies, Rockwell International and 3COM (formerly > US Robotics). Cirrus pulled out of the winmodem chip market > a month or so ago. I have heard that Lucent is willing to talk > to Linux programmers, but so far nothing has come of this. > > Now, for Ramon's opinion. As an ISP, I can tell you that the > WinModems, particularly those employing Rockwell Chipsets > comprise 95% of my user's modem problems. Real modems simply > work fine if no installation errors have been made. Most of > my users use Windows 95/98 and they experience things as > disconnects, slow performance, "stalled" conditions, retrainings, > or simply refusing to connect. Often, new "drivers" are needed > and most users are simply unable to this on their own. Those > modems are junk. I am sure there would be all sorts of grief > under Linux. > > For instance, if the memory of the computer is such that Windows > (or Linux) swaps to disk, what happens to the modem driver when > it gets put on the hard drive? Well, the modem simply locks > up until it comes back. Imagine this being done repetitively. > In this case, the modem may well show a connect speed of 50,666 > but the thruput may be as low as 1,200 or worse "stalled". > > Memory can be used fast. For instance, the chief offenders are > things like Office 97, or IE 4.0 which leave large parts of their > programs resident in memory even when they are not running. Ditto > for sound card drivers (real sound cards are raremost are > now "winsound" cards!). Printers are now often "win printers". > > I do not think you will see winmodems under Linux for a long time. > > The Rockwell HCF winmodem, the latest one now, has been a real_bear > for us ISP's. Look in the internet, for instance doing an > Altavista search on +rockwell +hcf will give you thousands of hits, > most of them web pages from ISP's about how to overcome connect > problems with this hardware. The solution is typically to make > them connect slower, at V34 speeds instead of V90. In other > words, at 33,600 and slower. Read some of this info, its an eye > opener. > > The latest incarnation of these HCF have put the modem chipset > on the sound card. There is a good reason for this: winmodems > and soundcards can share some of the interface to the CPU; they > are configured both to do Digital Signal Processing. Except the > processing is not done by the sound/modem card, but by the CPU - > your Pentium. Adding the chip to a sound card is costing the > OEM under $5.00. A decent modem would cost the computer manufacturer > anywhere from $30 to $70, and would raise the list price of the > computer by $100 or more. This is extremely disadvantageous on > the marketplace. Most buyers would select the cheaper computer > if all else looked the same. This is a reasonable attitude, but > the poor user is really stuck. > > He has actually bought a computer that has NO modem. It has a > device in there that has a chance, under Windows 95/98, of making > some sort of half-assed connection to the internet with differing > degrees of success. > > Usually, upgrading a computer to enough RAM to use one of these > will cost more than getting a decent modem in the fi
Re: [expert] WinModem question READ THIS.
Mike Hill wrote: > > Ive got a CompUSA ad in front of me. > > I see the following. Best Data 56K V.90 PCI Modem $49.99 with $20.00 mail > in rebate. CompUSA part number is #202878 (internal modem by the way) This is a WinModem. It used to be that ALL PCI modems were winmodems, however there are two out now that are not. THe first was the MultiTech. However, it still does not work with Linux The second is the ActionTec (get the right one, they have PCI winmodem models too!). Other than those two, ALL, and I repeat ALL other PCI modems are WinModems and do not work with Linux. > > They also have a Viking 56K V.90 internal ISA modem. $39.99. Part #188969 This is not the Viking part number. Most of their modems, the 56KI... series are WinModems even though they are ISA. The 56KE... seem to be regular modems. > > They have Internal USR Faxmodems (not winmodems) for $99 (after $20 rebate) > part # 183923, and they also have external ones for $129.99 (after $20 > rebate) part #183921 These will work fine. Here at Nook Net we find them to be the most consistent. Some models will work faster from time to time, but not consistently; ie, somedays you get 52K, some days you get 26.4, where the USR will do 49.3 7 days a week. > I looked at a best buy ad, but all I see is a Creative WinModem. All Creative modems are WinModems. I am going to save you guys a bunch of work. There is one site that has a list of every modem made or ever made. It tells you if its internal, external, WinModem or not, PCI or ISA, etc. etc. It also tells you if its Linux compatible, and where you get the init strings and WHO has actually got this modem to work (I mean a private person that reported it working under Linux). They also give you the manufacturer contact. Please bookmark this page: http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html The page was last updated 9/11/99, just 5 days ago. Look for the link "View the Entire Table". The whole site is full of a wealth of information regarding LInux and Modems. I have found this site to be very accurate, and regarding Modems, the ones that work fine for Linux also work best for Windows 95/98. -- Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin Nook Net http://www.nook.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575 P.O. Box 970fax. 907-443-2487 Nome, Alaska 99762-0970 == Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525
Re: [expert] WinModem question
Ive got a CompUSA ad in front of me. I see the following. Best Data 56K V.90 PCI Modem $49.99 with $20.00 mail in rebate. CompUSA part number is #202878 (internal modem by the way) They also have a Viking 56K V.90 internal ISA modem. $39.99. Part #188969 They have Internal USR Faxmodems (not winmodems) for $99 (after $20 rebate) part # 183923, and they also have external ones for $129.99 (after $20 rebate) part #183921 I looked at a best buy ad, but all I see is a Creative WinModem. Hope this information helps somebody. Mike - Original Message - From: Axalon Bloodstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 1999 2:04 PM Subject: RE: [expert] WinModem question > > It was in the sunday ads, which someone has thrown away for me. I may have > my ads backwards maybe it was bestbuy. Anyways it was an actiontech isa > 56k, and was between 25 and 35 dollars. > > -- > MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/ > --Axalon >
RE: [expert] WinModem question
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > It was in the sunday ads, which someone has thrown away for me. I may have > my ads backwards maybe it was bestbuy. Anyways it was an actiontech isa > 56k, and was between 25 and 35 dollars. > Ahh...probably bestbuy. :-) But they have a website, so maybe those poor unfortunates will be able to get one! :-) John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
John Aldrich wrote: > > > Axalonwhat site were you on? I just went to > www.compusa.net and searched their modems list. The only > thing they had under about $100 was either external or PCI. > I couldn't find ANY modems on their "closeout" page. :-( > > Is this in one of their catalogs or if you have a URL, > maybe you can post it so the unfortunate folks who have > WinModems. :-) > John Look in http://www.pricewatch.com for prices and sources; so far it has been the best source of hardware. Its not a retailer...its a listing of retailers that has the hardware. -- Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin Nook Net http://www.nook.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] 285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575 P.O. Box 970fax. 907-443-2487 Nome, Alaska 99762-0970 == Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525
RE: [expert] WinModem question
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, John Aldrich wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > > > Ok guys, winmodems aren't support, and a driver will never be accepted > > into the mainstream kernel even if someone were to write it. Alan and > > Linus have already made statements to this effect. On an upnote compusa > > has modems on sale for like 25$. > > > Axalonwhat site were you on? I just went to > www.compusa.net and searched their modems list. The only > thing they had under about $100 was either external or PCI. > I couldn't find ANY modems on their "closeout" page. :-( > > Is this in one of their catalogs or if you have a URL, > maybe you can post it so the unfortunate folks who have > WinModems. :-) > John > It was in the sunday ads, which someone has thrown away for me. I may have my ads backwards maybe it was bestbuy. Anyways it was an actiontech isa 56k, and was between 25 and 35 dollars. -- MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/ --Axalon
RE: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > Ok guys, winmodems aren't support, and a driver will never be accepted > into the mainstream kernel even if someone were to write it. Alan and > Linus have already made statements to this effect. On an upnote compusa > has modems on sale for like 25$. > Axalonwhat site were you on? I just went to www.compusa.net and searched their modems list. The only thing they had under about $100 was either external or PCI. I couldn't find ANY modems on their "closeout" page. :-( Is this in one of their catalogs or if you have a URL, maybe you can post it so the unfortunate folks who have WinModems. :-) John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > Well, it was more than I really had asked for, but I am really impressed and > grateful for all of your responses. It is really unfortunate that WinModems > don't work with linux ( for some people, even a 40$ forkout to a comp shop is > too much), but I agree with all of you. As for my friend, well, I'm going to > take a quick look through the archives like one of you suggested, and if I > can't find the required article, I'll just have to urge him to get the real > thing. > Maybe you can find a used 33.6 (external, of course ) somewhere and get your friend up and running on that! John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
David Comeau wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > > A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a winmodem using the > > > setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person who wrote it > > > please write back to me directly with that message? I am trying to help an > > > unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, > > > > > Winmodems under Linux are paperweights. Period. Don't > > bother. These are SOFTWARE modems, or modems in name-only. > > Go get a real modem with HARDWARE UARTs, etc. > > John > > I understand, and wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately, not everyone can simply > throw something for no other reason than it not working with all OS's. I had > often ribbed my friend about that very thing. He always looked sheepish after > my having done that. What it comes down to, is, he is aware that he should get > a real modem, but since I had seen a message about two weeks ago, about this > very subject, including a way out(other than trashing the modem:) ), I felt http://www.mail-archive.com/expert@linux-mandrake.com/ tom -- "Never trust a Shoggoth!" Thomas 'tom' Berger, [EMAIL PROTECTED] LSTB - "advancing the community", [EMAIL PROTECTED] UMS: +49-(0)89-1488-208756 fon: +49-(0)30-45809013
Re: [expert] WinModem question
Ramon Gandia wrote: > > 1. WinModems do not work under Linux. > [snip] > I say, lets keep those damn things away from Linux. We do not > need those headaches HERE. > > > -- > Ramon Gandia ---Sysadmin --- http://www.nook.net > 285 West 1st Avenue ISP for Western Alaska > P.O. Box 970 tel. 907-443-7575 > Nome, Alaska 99762fax. 907-443-2487 > === Wow! ;-) Now that was informative. Thanks! tom -- "Never trust a Shoggoth!" Thomas 'tom' Berger, [EMAIL PROTECTED] LSTB - "advancing the community", [EMAIL PROTECTED] UMS: +49-(0)89-1488-208756 fon: +49-(0)30-45809013
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > From: John Aldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Well, I just did a quick browse-through of the mail archive for the > > "newbie" group and it appears that there is rumors of SOME > > rudimentary support in kernel 2.4 (considering we're on 2.2.x right > > now, that's going to be awhile!) Other than that, the only references > > Linus has said that 2.2.4 "should" be released by late Fall '99. > There's currently a feature freeze in effect from 2.3.18, which, as far as I > can tell, includes no support for Winmodems. It's got some USB support, but > no Winmodem support. > Right...that's 2.2.4, According to my read, it was kernel 2.4.x (at least that's how *I* understood it!) 2.3.18 might be released, I'm guessing, around Christmas or late-winter? After that, who knows how many revisions to 2.3.x??? We *could* be talking a year or so before 2.4.x is released... John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Ramon Gandia wrote: Sorry for the big rant. I can assure you all that as an ISP, the > proliferation of these "things" has really ruined what would > otherwise be an enjoyable business. Look in those web pages > that you get with a search engine and you will see many other ISP's > in the same boat, including some of the regionals and nationals. > > I say, lets keep those damn things away from Linux. We do not > need those headaches HERE. > I Agree!!! WinModems are horrible. We keep a bank of analog lines just for those people whose winmodems are so junky they can't connect to 56k lines and stay connected. bug
Re: [expert] WinModem question
David Comeau wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > Well, it was more than I really had asked for, but I am really impressed and > grateful for all of your responses. It is really unfortunate that WinModems > don't work with linux ( for some people, even a 40$ forkout to a comp shop is > too much), but I agree with all of you. As for my friend, well, I'm going to > take a quick look through the archives like one of you suggested, and if I > can't find the required article, I'll just have to urge him to get the real > thing. Don't give up yet, since he's willing to settle for a slower connection anyway, you may be able to find an ISA 33.6 real cheap. Later when he can afford the $40 or so, he can step up to 56K. If he stays with the Winmodem, he's not going to get 56K anyway. Bob J.
RE: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, Ken Wilson wrote: > I'm not so sure I agree with you. External modems are relatively cheap. > And, if that's all you have to upgrade to run Linux you're laughing. > Beats the hell out of having to double your RAM, processor speed, and > hard drive size everytime that unmentionable OS release a new version of > their OS or one of their bloated applications for said OS. :-) > > But, if you can avoid even that cost it certainly is worth a try as you > said. Once again, check the archives on the Mandrake page. I'm not so > sure that it's something anyone here would make note of as most bite the > bullet and get something to replace their winmodem. > > Ken Wilson > First Law of Optimization: The speed of a nonworking program is > irrelevant > (Steve Heller, 'Efficient C/C++ Programming') Ok guys, winmodems aren't support, and a driver will never be accepted into the mainstream kernel even if someone were to write it. Alan and Linus have already made statements to this effect. On an upnote compusa has modems on sale for like 25$. > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Comeau > > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 2:08 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [expert] WinModem question > > > > > > I understand, and wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately, not > > everyone can simply > > throw something for no other reason than it not working with > > all OS's. I had > > often ribbed my friend about that very thing. He always > > looked sheepish after > > my having done that. What it comes down to, is, he is aware > > that he should get > > a real modem, but since I had seen a message about two weeks > > ago, about this > > very subject, including a way out(other than trashing the > > modem:) ), I felt > > that it was worth a try. And, if you think about it, it "is" > > worth a try, > > because of all the people who presently have the > > WinXX/WinModem combination, > > and we are trying to win over to linux. I don't think it is > > very realistic to > > expect them all to run out and buy a new modem. > > > > As for you and I, and many who are technically inclined, and versed in > > computing, we knew that when we bought our computer, it had > > to work with most, > > if not all, OS's (and for those of you who didn't buy that > > way, please don't > > feel that I am insulting you in any way. I realize that everyone is an > > individual, and I feel that everyone should have their own > > way of purchasing, > > even if at times it is unthoughtful and wasteful). > > > > In any case, thanks for the info. > > > > -- MandrakeSoft http://www.mandrakesoft.com/ --Axalon
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: Well, it was more than I really had asked for, but I am really impressed and grateful for all of your responses. It is really unfortunate that WinModems don't work with linux ( for some people, even a 40$ forkout to a comp shop is too much), but I agree with all of you. As for my friend, well, I'm going to take a quick look through the archives like one of you suggested, and if I can't find the required article, I'll just have to urge him to get the real thing. Thanks again all! Sincerely, David Comeau
Re: [expert] WinModem question
1. WinModems do not work under Linux. 2. They would work if someone wrote a driver for them. 3. There is a french modem manufacturer that SAYS they will release a winmodem soon with a Linux driver. It is still vaporware. 4. WinModems require critical timing (real-time) in order to handle the digital signal processing. This would create extreme difficulties for Linux, specially on computers short of memory or lacking in CPU speed. 5. WinModem manufacturers have not shown interest in writing Linux drivers. 6. A Linux programmer might be able to do it, but so far no one has volunteered to do this. For various reasons: a) The hardware is junk. They barely work or do not work under Windows95/98. b) The information needed from the Manufacturer is proprietary. The manufacturer may or may not release it for inclusion into GPL software because the source code would be GPL. This is mostly an imaginary issue, but its perceived as such by most hardware manufacturers. 7. There are only three manufacturers of the WinModem chipsets: Lucent Technologies, Rockwell International and 3COM (formerly US Robotics). Cirrus pulled out of the winmodem chip market a month or so ago. I have heard that Lucent is willing to talk to Linux programmers, but so far nothing has come of this. Now, for Ramon's opinion. As an ISP, I can tell you that the WinModems, particularly those employing Rockwell Chipsets comprise 95% of my user's modem problems. Real modems simply work fine if no installation errors have been made. Most of my users use Windows 95/98 and they experience things as disconnects, slow performance, "stalled" conditions, retrainings, or simply refusing to connect. Often, new "drivers" are needed and most users are simply unable to this on their own. Those modems are junk. I am sure there would be all sorts of grief under Linux. For instance, if the memory of the computer is such that Windows (or Linux) swaps to disk, what happens to the modem driver when it gets put on the hard drive? Well, the modem simply locks up until it comes back. Imagine this being done repetitively. In this case, the modem may well show a connect speed of 50,666 but the thruput may be as low as 1,200 or worse "stalled". Memory can be used fast. For instance, the chief offenders are things like Office 97, or IE 4.0 which leave large parts of their programs resident in memory even when they are not running. Ditto for sound card drivers (real sound cards are raremost are now "winsound" cards!). Printers are now often "win printers". I do not think you will see winmodems under Linux for a long time. The Rockwell HCF winmodem, the latest one now, has been a real_bear for us ISP's. Look in the internet, for instance doing an Altavista search on +rockwell +hcf will give you thousands of hits, most of them web pages from ISP's about how to overcome connect problems with this hardware. The solution is typically to make them connect slower, at V34 speeds instead of V90. In other words, at 33,600 and slower. Read some of this info, its an eye opener. The latest incarnation of these HCF have put the modem chipset on the sound card. There is a good reason for this: winmodems and soundcards can share some of the interface to the CPU; they are configured both to do Digital Signal Processing. Except the processing is not done by the sound/modem card, but by the CPU - your Pentium. Adding the chip to a sound card is costing the OEM under $5.00. A decent modem would cost the computer manufacturer anywhere from $30 to $70, and would raise the list price of the computer by $100 or more. This is extremely disadvantageous on the marketplace. Most buyers would select the cheaper computer if all else looked the same. This is a reasonable attitude, but the poor user is really stuck. He has actually bought a computer that has NO modem. It has a device in there that has a chance, under Windows 95/98, of making some sort of half-assed connection to the internet with differing degrees of success. Usually, upgrading a computer to enough RAM to use one of these will cost more than getting a decent modem in the first place. I have seen few Win95 computers with less than 64MB ram do well with these things. They are not real modems they are only half a modem circuit and I wish someone would take legal action so they can be called by what they are: an interface chip. They could then decide on some fancy name, but not modem. Maybe "modem-like." Sorry for the big rant. I can assure you all that as an ISP, the proliferation of these "things" has really ruined what would otherwise be an enjoyable business. Look in those web pages that you get with a search engine and you will see many other ISP's in the same boat, including some of the regionals and nationals. I say, lets keep those damn things away from Linux. We do not need those head
RE: [expert] WinModem question
I'm not so sure I agree with you. External modems are relatively cheap. And, if that's all you have to upgrade to run Linux you're laughing. Beats the hell out of having to double your RAM, processor speed, and hard drive size everytime that unmentionable OS release a new version of their OS or one of their bloated applications for said OS. :-) But, if you can avoid even that cost it certainly is worth a try as you said. Once again, check the archives on the Mandrake page. I'm not so sure that it's something anyone here would make note of as most bite the bullet and get something to replace their winmodem. Ken Wilson First Law of Optimization: The speed of a nonworking program is irrelevant (Steve Heller, 'Efficient C/C++ Programming') > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Comeau > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 2:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [expert] WinModem question > > > I understand, and wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately, not > everyone can simply > throw something for no other reason than it not working with > all OS's. I had > often ribbed my friend about that very thing. He always > looked sheepish after > my having done that. What it comes down to, is, he is aware > that he should get > a real modem, but since I had seen a message about two weeks > ago, about this > very subject, including a way out(other than trashing the > modem:) ), I felt > that it was worth a try. And, if you think about it, it "is" > worth a try, > because of all the people who presently have the > WinXX/WinModem combination, > and we are trying to win over to linux. I don't think it is > very realistic to > expect them all to run out and buy a new modem. > > As for you and I, and many who are technically inclined, and versed in > computing, we knew that when we bought our computer, it had > to work with most, > if not all, OS's (and for those of you who didn't buy that > way, please don't > feel that I am insulting you in any way. I realize that everyone is an > individual, and I feel that everyone should have their own > way of purchasing, > even if at times it is unthoughtful and wasteful). > > In any case, thanks for the info. >
RE: [expert] WinModem question
I think Mr. Aldrich's comment to you may be 100% correct. Not being absolutely sure myself, and not concerned about winmodem's as mine isn't, my only advice would be go to Mandrakes website for the archive of this list and see if you can't find the article there. Ken Wilson First Law of Optimization: The speed of a nonworking program is irrelevant (Steve Heller, 'Efficient C/C++ Programming') > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Comeau > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 8:22 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [expert] WinModem question > > > A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a > winmodem using the > setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person > who wrote it > please write back to me directly with that message? I am > trying to help an > unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, > David > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: [expert] WinModem question
From: John Aldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Well, I just did a quick browse-through of the mail archive for the > "newbie" group and it appears that there is rumors of SOME > rudimentary support in kernel 2.4 (considering we're on 2.2.x right > now, that's going to be awhile!) Other than that, the only references Linus has said that 2.2.4 "should" be released by late Fall '99. There's currently a feature freeze in effect from 2.3.18, which, as far as I can tell, includes no support for Winmodems. It's got some USB support, but no Winmodem support.
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > > A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a winmodem using the > > > setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person who wrote it > > > please write back to me directly with that message? I am trying to help an > > > unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, > > > > > Winmodems under Linux are paperweights. Period. Don't > > bother. These are SOFTWARE modems, or modems in name-only. > > Go get a real modem with HARDWARE UARTs, etc. > > John > > I understand, and wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately, not everyone can simply > throw something for no other reason than it not working with all OS's. I had > often ribbed my friend about that very thing. He always looked sheepish after > my having done that. What it comes down to, is, he is aware that he should get > a real modem, but since I had seen a message about two weeks ago, about this > very subject, including a way out(other than trashing the modem:) ), I felt > that it was worth a try. And, if you think about it, it "is" worth a try, > because of all the people who presently have the WinXX/WinModem combination, > and we are trying to win over to linux. I don't think it is very realistic to > expect them all to run out and buy a new modem. > Well, I just did a quick browse-through of the mail archive for the "newbie" group and it appears that there is rumors of SOME rudimentary support in kernel 2.4 (considering we're on 2.2.x right now, that's going to be awhile!) Other than that, the only references I've found state that WinModems are Windows-only, and are therefore worse than useless under any other O/S. > > As for you and I, and many who are technically > inclined, and versed in computing, we knew that when we bought our > computer, it had to work with most, if not all, OS's (and for > those of you who didn't buy that way, please don't feel that I am > insulting you in any way. I realize that everyone is an individual, > and I feel that everyone should have their own way of purchasing, > even if at times it is unthoughtful and wasteful). > In any case, thanks for the info. > You're welcome. As a bit of history, WinModems are NOT the first "software" modems to come out. In the late 80's/early 90's there were an abundance of "SoftModems" which were dos-level software modems, but they were just as bad pieces of junk as the USR WinModems and HCF modems are today. :-) I know, I was a BBS Sysop up until about 1997 when I lost my batch files to a hard drive crash and gave up because I was getting MAYBE one call per day. :-) John
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > > A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a winmodem using the > > setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person who wrote it > > please write back to me directly with that message? I am trying to help an > > unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, > > > Winmodems under Linux are paperweights. Period. Don't > bother. These are SOFTWARE modems, or modems in name-only. > Go get a real modem with HARDWARE UARTs, etc. > John I understand, and wholeheartedly agree, unfortunately, not everyone can simply throw something for no other reason than it not working with all OS's. I had often ribbed my friend about that very thing. He always looked sheepish after my having done that. What it comes down to, is, he is aware that he should get a real modem, but since I had seen a message about two weeks ago, about this very subject, including a way out(other than trashing the modem:) ), I felt that it was worth a try. And, if you think about it, it "is" worth a try, because of all the people who presently have the WinXX/WinModem combination, and we are trying to win over to linux. I don't think it is very realistic to expect them all to run out and buy a new modem. As for you and I, and many who are technically inclined, and versed in computing, we knew that when we bought our computer, it had to work with most, if not all, OS's (and for those of you who didn't buy that way, please don't feel that I am insulting you in any way. I realize that everyone is an individual, and I feel that everyone should have their own way of purchasing, even if at times it is unthoughtful and wasteful). In any case, thanks for the info.
Re: [expert] WinModem question
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999, you wrote: > A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a winmodem using the > setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person who wrote it > please write back to me directly with that message? I am trying to help an > unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, > Winmodems under Linux are paperweights. Period. Don't bother. These are SOFTWARE modems, or modems in name-only. Go get a real modem with HARDWARE UARTs, etc. John
[expert] WinModem question
A couple of weeks ago, some had given a possible setup for a winmodem using the setserial command. I have lost theat message. Can the person who wrote it please write back to me directly with that message? I am trying to help an unfortunate friend. Thanking-you in advance, David [EMAIL PROTECTED]
