Re: [expert] Modem problem

[Brian T. Schellenberger]

You mean /dev/modem?

If so, then, no, you have to link it yourself . . . unless you have
PCMCIA modem; the PCMCIA services *are* clever enough to set up the link
for you.

Sarang Lakare wrote:
> 
> thanks for the advice.. but I do know all about ttyS? (thats the reason i
> sent mesg to "expert ;)
> 
> neway, the reason i said that was because I wanted to know how the
> /dev/cdrom link is created.. shoudln't there be a program which
> asks/searches for modem on all COM ports and creates the link? (or let me
> know if there is one). it'll make life a hell lot simpler for a newbie.
> 
> apart from that, I still don't know why kppp said modem found and all ATI
> strings were blank!
> 
> sarang

-- 
"Brian, the man from babble-on"  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian T. Schellenberger  http://www.babbleon.org
Support http://www.eff.org.  Support decss defendents.
Support http://www.programming-freedom.org.  Boycott amazon.com.

Re: [expert] Modem problem

[John Aldrich]

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, you wrote:
> why isnt' there a GUI utility to load/unload drivers.. I was trying to get
> a modem to work under linux and didn't know how to test it other than kppp.
> Under kppp it said modem ready.. then it started querying the modem.. but
> the result of all ATIs was blank string.. the modem console was also
> blank.. no OK nothing!
> 
> any help?
>
Any chance it's a software (AKA "Win") modem?
John

Re: [expert] Modem problem

[Sarang Lakare]

thanks for the advice.. but I do know all about ttyS? (thats the reason i
sent mesg to "expert ;)

neway, the reason i said that was because I wanted to know how the
/dev/cdrom link is created.. shoudln't there be a program which
asks/searches for modem on all COM ports and creates the link? (or let me
know if there is one). it'll make life a hell lot simpler for a newbie.

apart from that, I still don't know why kppp said modem found and all ATI
strings were blank!

sarang

Re: [expert] Modem problem

[bobby dowling]

Yeah, I got it.  I just followed the directions at linuxnewbie.org ...no 
problem after that, unless you count the fact that my telephone cable is too 
short!  : )

Thanks


>From: "Tony McGee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: [expert] Modem problem
>Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:23:54 +1000
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [216.71.84.35] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id 
>MHotMailBB33C2DC002ED82197EBD84754230F000; Mon Jul 10 18:26:53 2000
>Received: (from sympa@localhost)by mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com 
>(8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA31895for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 
>20:26:48 -0500
>Received: from vasquez.zip.com.au (vasquez.zip.com.au [203.12.97.41]) by
>mandrakesoft.mandrakesoft.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA30365 for
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:23:04 -0500
>Received: from Dazhel (ppp60.dyn248.pacific.net.au [203.143.248.60]) by
>vasquez.zip.com.au (8.9.2/8.9.1) with SMTP id LAA08425 for
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:23:02 +1000 (EST)
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jul 10 18:30:17 2000
>Message-Id: <00ee01bfead6$b08b8de0$4205000a@Dazhel>
>References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>X-Priority: 3
>X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
>X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
>X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Sequence: 228
>Precedence: list
>
>
>Make sure there is a /dev/modem symbolic link to /dev/ttyS0 if your modem 
>is
>on COM1 or /dev/ttyS1 if your modem is on COM2. I believe kppp uses
>/dev/modem by default and straight after installation of 7.1 there is no
>link.
>
>If there is no /dev/modem link then create it by running 'ln -s 
>SERIALDEVICE
>/dev/modem' at a root prompt where SERIALDEVICE is either of the ttyS
>devices explained above.
>
>HTH
>Tony
>
>- Original Message -
>From: Sarang Lakare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 9:09 AM
>Subject: [expert] Modem problem
>
>
> > why isnt' there a GUI utility to load/unload drivers.. I was trying to 
>get
> > a modem to work under linux and didn't know how to test it other than
>kppp.
> > Under kppp it said modem ready.. then it started querying the modem.. 
>but
> > the result of all ATIs was blank string.. the modem console was also
> > blank.. no OK nothing!
> >
> > any help?
> > -sarang
> >
>


Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

Re: [expert] Modem problem

[Tony McGee]

Make sure there is a /dev/modem symbolic link to /dev/ttyS0 if your modem is
on COM1 or /dev/ttyS1 if your modem is on COM2. I believe kppp uses
/dev/modem by default and straight after installation of 7.1 there is no
link.

If there is no /dev/modem link then create it by running 'ln -s SERIALDEVICE
/dev/modem' at a root prompt where SERIALDEVICE is either of the ttyS
devices explained above.

HTH
Tony

- Original Message -
From: Sarang Lakare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 9:09 AM
Subject: [expert] Modem problem


> why isnt' there a GUI utility to load/unload drivers.. I was trying to get
> a modem to work under linux and didn't know how to test it other than
kppp.
> Under kppp it said modem ready.. then it started querying the modem.. but
> the result of all ATIs was blank string.. the modem console was also
> blank.. no OK nothing!
>
> any help?
> -sarang
>

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> 
> The .com was missing from the url.
> 
Yep. My bad. :-)
>
> An interesting site - the guy sure can rant when he wants. Also a lot of
> stuff on controllerless modems; nothing Linux-y found by me.
>
Never said it was a Linux site... just that it's a good
site for 56k modem fixing. :-)
>
> A few bits of good advice if you dig deep.
>
Yep... I only go to the /trouble2.htm page, though
that's the only page I really need. It tells me what to put
in the "extra settings" to disable X2 or whatever...
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

"Albert E. Whale" wrote:
> 
> John Aldrich
> > (www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
> > for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
> > >
> 
> John,
> 
> THanks for the lead, but I cannot seem to quite get the above site.
> What is the Web Address?

He mistyped it.  http://www.808hi.com/56k/trouble2.htm
It is a good site.

-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Hoyt]

- Original Message -
From: John Aldrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 10:06 PM
Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem


> On Thu, 09 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > John Aldrich
> > > (www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
> > > for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
> > Thanks for the lead, but I cannot seem to quite get the above site.
> > What is the Web Address?
> >
> BTW, IP address for the above server is 168.144.5.163.

The .com was missing from the url.

An interesting site - the guy sure can rant when he wants. Also a lot of
stuff on controllerless modems; nothing Linux-y found by me.

A few bits of good advice if you dig deep.

Hoyt


__
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> John Aldrich 
> > (www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
> > for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
> > >
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> THanks for the lead, but I cannot seem to quite get the above site. 
> What is the Web Address?
>
BTW, IP address for the above server is 168.144.5.163.
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> John Aldrich 
> > (www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
> > for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
> > >
> 
> 
> John,
> 
> THanks for the lead, but I cannot seem to quite get the above site. 
> What is the Web Address?
>
http://www.808hi.com/56k/trouble2.htm. Sorry. I left off the .com.
:-) BTW, that is 8-zero-8hi.com. As in the area code and state
abbreviation for Hawaii. :-) I believe it's an ISP in Hawaii... :-)
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Albert E. Whale]

John Aldrich 
> (www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
> for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
> >


John,

THanks for the lead, but I cannot seem to quite get the above site. 
What is the Web Address?
-- 
Albert E. Whale   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.hky.com/aewhale.html
--
Sr. Database, Internet and Unix Systems Consultant

Pennsylvania Parenthood Initiative - PAPI
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/4688/papi.htm
The Father's Rights Network - http://www.hky.com/frn/frnhome.html
Parents without Partners - Past President
Co-Founder of The Purple Heart Foundation

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> My terminal servers are Livingston Portmaster PM3.  They
> use Lucent chipsets.  Their protocols are K56Flex/V.90.  The
> server will tell the client first to try V.90.  That is the
> default and is shown in the logs.
>
Ahh...Ok. Gotcha. I forgot you use the PM3s. We use an
Ascend product here (Max TNT) so we ALWAYS have trouble
with USR products and have to tell clients to turn OFF the
X2 protocol, as it seems they will have NOTHING but
problems connecting unless they disable X2
(www.808hi/56k/trouble2.htm is the site I use now-a-days
for most 56k modem trouble-shooting.)
>
> I have never really seen any K56Flex connections.  The code 
> for this is rather old now, and the K56Flex and the Robbed
> Bit signalling/D4/AMI/CT1 used by the Telephone Company in
> their DMS-10 Nortel switch is not conducive to their working.
> There are worse switches, I understand from some ISP's that
> what their phone company uses has never allowed any of the
> 56K protocols.  This all has to do with how the phone company
> changes the signal from Analog to Digital in their Codecs.
>
OUR problem is that our LEC has us on a switch with copper
instead of fiber like the original work order specified,
and the switch we're on is KNOWN to have problems... *SIGH*
We just encourage most of our users to get ISDN, because it
either works or it doesn't. There's no in-between like with
analog modems. Plus they get faster connects & better
throughput with an ISDN router. :-)
>
> The best of the WinModems, for what it is worth, is the Lucent.
> They are now better than the US Robotics WinModem.  The Lucent
> needs a driver of Version 5.66 or better.  With the new driver
> it is a good performer.
>
I'll keep that in mind. I still don't like WinModems,
though. :-)
> 
> Such is the life of an ISP.
> 
:-) Yep. Then again, there's the days you walk in and your
main machine is locked up. :-(
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

John Aldrich wrote:
> >
> I have to wonder if this isn't a symptom of the default to
> K56Flex by the Rockwell chipset and the default to X2 by
> the TI chipset. I seem to recall from past emails that you
> (Ramon) use USR products there at your ISP. I know this can
> be fixed by turning OFF K56 flex on these modems, just like
> people have to do here for USR / 3Com modems. I know that
> our customers with 3Com/USR modems who don't turn off the
> X2 protocol have a DEVIL of a time connecting and staying
> connected. I suspect that the same is true of modems which
> default to K56. While these are TECHNICALLY both compatible
> modems, due to the fact that they both default to trying
> their mutually-exclusive PROPRIETARY protocols FIRST,
> there's a conflict and therefore you tend to get lousy
> connections, IF you connect at all.

No, they both connecting with V.90.

My terminal servers are Livingston Portmaster PM3.  They
use Lucent chipsets.  Their protocols are K56Flex/V.90.  The
server will tell the client first to try V.90.  That is the
default and is shown in the logs.

I tried Cisco 5200 and Ascend 4048, these both have Rockwell
chipsets.  Neither would negotiate a connection using either
V90 or K56Flex.  Max speed with them was 31,200.

On the client side, the X2/V.90 modems using the TI chipset,
such as the US Robotics or Phoebe connect fine to the PM3
at V90 protocol with speeds ranging as high as 53,000, although
it is rare to see over 52,000.  The PM3 will not do X2.

I have never really seen any K56Flex connections.  The code 
for this is rather old now, and the K56Flex and the Robbed
Bit signalling/D4/AMI/CT1 used by the Telephone Company in
their DMS-10 Nortel switch is not conducive to their working.
There are worse switches, I understand from some ISP's that
what their phone company uses has never allowed any of the
56K protocols.  This all has to do with how the phone company
changes the signal from Analog to Digital in their Codecs.

My observation has been that the USR/TI chipset client modems
have better throughput, and much less susceptibility to noise
and adverse line conditions; fewer disconnects.  The Rockwells
are aggressive in their connection speed and frequently hook
up at too high on their speed.  In that case, the connection
usually fails -- either a disconnect, or worse yet, just
pokey throughput regardless of reported connect speed.

The best of the WinModems, for what it is worth, is the Lucent.
They are now better than the US Robotics WinModem.  The Lucent
needs a driver of Version 5.66 or better.  With the new driver
it is a good performer.

Keep in mind that the DSP in a WinModem consumes a tremendous
amount of CPU power.  It requires a Pentium 166 in order to
even work.  With a Pentium 166, if you need to move the mouse
pointer 1/8th of an inch, or scroll a window, or do some
other computational operation, the Modem generally has to
be told not to transfer data.  For this reason older pentiums
do not do well at all with a WinModem.  On top of that, most
older Pentiums have old WinModem drivers, so the problem is
compounded.  

As much as we bitch about Win Modems, the truth is that since
the Lucent 5.66 the situation has gotten better.  The latest
Rockwell drivers are getting passable now.  In most cases I
can connect a new 450 mHz Pentium to Nook Net via a 56k
Rockwell and have it work.  The problems is with out of town
phone lines.  The Rockwells simply fail over longer wires.
My laptop with a Phoebe External just connects fine.  Most of
those Rockewells NEED extra settings to tame the connect
speed, or restrict it to V.34 protocol (or have it dial my
analog modem bank which I still operate for those with
RECALCITRANT modems).  

Such is the life of an ISP.


-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> Non-Win Rockwells work, but they are not good performers.  They
> have aggressive speeds, usually a notch or two higher than they
> should for given line conditions.  They get LOTS of retrains
> which I can see on my logs here.  They frequently disconnect
> with "lost carrier" in my logs.  Retrains are bad, because it
> means the modem is spending most of its time resending data that
> had errors.  The Connect speed may be 52,000 vs 46,666 for a
> USR/TI, but the lower speed modem will pass MORE data bytes in
> a given time. 
> 
I have to wonder if this isn't a symptom of the default to
K56Flex by the Rockwell chipset and the default to X2 by
the TI chipset. I seem to recall from past emails that you
(Ramon) use USR products there at your ISP. I know this can
be fixed by turning OFF K56 flex on these modems, just like
people have to do here for USR / 3Com modems. I know that
our customers with 3Com/USR modems who don't turn off the
X2 protocol have a DEVIL of a time connecting and staying
connected. I suspect that the same is true of modems which
default to K56. While these are TECHNICALLY both compatible
modems, due to the fact that they both default to trying
their mutually-exclusive PROPRIETARY protocols FIRST,
there's a conflict and therefore you tend to get lousy
connections, IF you connect at all.
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[vern]

ibi wrote:
> 
> I've done the modem dance with name brands for several years. Thus far I
> have found one modem that works flawlessly with Windows and Linux.
> USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was recognized the first
> time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save money and save
> aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you pays for.
> 
> Pj
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]

I've had a similar experience on this end with 3Com USR modems I still
have
a 14K USR external modem laying around here somewhere!  I'm presently
using
a USR 56K external Faxmodem model #5686 on a dual boot Linux/Win98
Hewlett
Packard Pavilion.  The elcheapo $2 software modem lasted me about a week
after I unwrapped my "prize".  HP is definitely not the company it was
ten
years ago, I bought this box for the name and features.  It took me a
week 
or two to get the all in one Intel 810 chipset video mess going!  I
haven't
even started on trying to get the audio working!  Guess I'll get an all
purpose
run of the mill audio card to stick in the box.
HP is a joke nowadays!
Vern

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> 
> OK, you gave us the "bad" news, now recommend a good
> internal modem (based on your experience) that is
> affordably priced ( 
*MY* suggestion would be to see if you can find a
SupraExpress 56i (ISA) or a 3Com / USR Courier V-Everything
(ISA.) A lot would depend on what your current ISP is
using for dial-up equipment -- ie is it K56-Flex/V.90 or
X2/V.90? If the latter, go with the 3Com, if the former, go
with the Supra. BUT, make *sure* you're getting the ISA
version with the particular model number that's recommended
on the www.o2.net website (sorry, don't have it pulled up
or memorized...check the messages from yesterday )
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> I've done the modem dance with name brands for several years. Thus far I
> have found one modem that works flawlessly with Windows and Linux.
> USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was recognized the first
> time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save money and save
> aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you pays for. 
> 
Yep. A SERIAL-based External is guaranteed to work about
98% of the time (the other 2% won't work because of
defective hardware or port conflicts. )
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> 
> I just looked, just in case I had missed something.  All Diamond
> PCI modems *are* WinModems.  You should get a model number, which
> will be on the card, like Model 2920.  They use 4-digits like
> that.
> "Supra Express" is meaningless as they use this term on ALL the
> modems that they make (ie, SupraExpress = ModemMadeByDiamond ).
>
I have to stick up here for my ISA Supra Express 56i. It's
a non-winmodem (using YOUR definition of "WinModem.") It's
done quite well for me when I've needed a modem. However,
as I said, it's a 100% hardware modem. No extra software
needed. :-) That being said, my dad has a Supra Max 56i,
and it's an HSP modem. Works fine for what he needs but
I know better than to stick it in a Linux box. :-)
Nowadays, he goes through my ISDN connection anyway! 
>
> MS-DOS is not equal to non-WinModem.  It is perfectly possible to 
> write a DOS driver for a WinModem, and some manufacturers have
> done  this.  In Fact, it is possible to write a WinModem driver that
> runs under Linux, and it is then called a LinModem.  AT&T/Lucent has
> opened the design of their chip to Linux folks, and the Lucent
> LT Modems now have Linux drivers for them.  
> 
Quite true. However, IF it requires NO software to run (as
in boot from a bare DOS 6.x boot floppy, open a term
program and dial out) under DOS, it's a good modem, IMNSHO.
:-)
> 
> In particular, you should be on the lookout for Rockwell Chipset
> modems.
>
Yeah. It's sad. Rockwell USED to have a good name among
HARDWARE modemsThen they went and started creating
those HSP and HCF modems. :-(
> 
> As an ISP, I have seen and worked with thousands of modems.  For
> all practical purposes "I have seen them all" (I do get a surprise
> now and then, usually not pleasant).  Often I get folks that have
> spent a lot of money on a computer and insist that their modem is
> of the "best quality".  Or had very good luck with a Rockwell
> and insist that they are "the best" type around.  Most, if not all
> of these fold have been exposed to just one or two modems in their
> life, and their knowledge is flawed.
>
Yep. I'm in the same situation. I'm on the "front lines"
here at the ISP where I work.  I've gotten a LOT of calls
from people who have trouble connecting. Often when I ask
what they've got, the answer is either a "3Com/USR
WinModem",  (more likely) a Conexant HSP modem. or even
"Gateway 2000" (AKA 3Com WinModem -- same chipset,
different name!)
More often than not, I tell clients who have trouble
connecting to go to their favorite computer store and ask
for a "100% hardware modem." I then recommend one store I
know that carries those things. Typically, once they
replace their modem, their connection problems disappear!
Just my $0.02 worth here... :-)
John

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

Civileme wrote:
> 
> Of course, with any
> modem purchase you are likely to receive by the munificence of
> AOL a brilliantly colored coaster suitable for absolutely
> anything you can imagine to do with it.  Older modems carry the
> added benefit of a high-quality 3.5" floppy suitable for holding
> data after erasure.

Back in the early 90's, those of us on the CP/M groups tested
a whole slew of those AOL floppies.  What we found out was
disturbing.  It SEEMS as if they are written to with a high
write current.  These disks have tracks that either do not
format properly (the earlier data 'prints thru') or the track
is wider than normal and creates errors when rewritten.

The end result was that AOL floppies are fine for what they do:
port AOL programs.  They should not be formatted, erased or
used otherwise.  Compuserve floppies were better, but not by
much. Lots of people lost lots of data with those! 

If you think about it for a bit, a floppy that is being mass
marketed and probably going to be discarded, is not likely to
be of very good quality.  I bet the magnetic film was kinda
spotty or poor and they made it up by stepping up the webbers
on the write heads.


-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Civileme]

Hoyt wrote:
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: Ramon Gandia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 2:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem
> 
> >
> > I just looked, just in case I had missed something.  All Diamond
> > PCI modems *are* WinModems.  You should get a model number, which
> > will be on the card, like Model 2920.  They use 4-digits like
> > that.
> > "Supra Express" is meaningless as they use this term on ALL the
> > modems that they make (ie, SupraExpress = ModemMadeByDiamond ).
> >
> > A few WinModems, depending on the chipset and vintage, will have
> > limited functionality as a regular modem.  Generally enough to
> > allow
> > for non-compressed communications at 1,200.
> >
> >
> > There are some things that distinguish the Lucent WinModems from
> > the
> > rest, the main one being that ALL Lucent LT modems look the same
> > from
> > the computer's point of view.  It does not matter which
> > manufacturer
> > the modem is from, if its an LT chipset, it will use the SAME
> > driver.
> >
> 
> >
> > I can say more about Lucent, but will withold it for now.  It is a
> > great outfit.
> >
> > There are a couple more WinModems with Linux aspirations.  The
> > ones
> > that are non-Lucent have limited functionality.  Either only at
> > 1200
> > bps, or can be used as dialers and voice only, not data.
> >
> 
> >
> > In particular, you should be on the lookout for Rockwell Chipset
> > modems.  Most of those are WinModems, and some are particularly
> > bad such as the HSP and HCF WinModems.  Rockwell sold the chip
> > division to Connexant, so you will also see them with that label
> > on the chip.  They also make externals and ISA modems, some of
> > which are not WinModems.  You should be aware that as an ISP,
> > and a person that has wide contacts among ISP's, I can tell you
> > that Rockwell/Connexant modems are simply the worse.  I see a lot
> > of advertising hype about this and that modem, but if the fine
> > print says its a Rockwell or Connexant, I advise you to pass.
> > If they *do not* mention the chipset, you can assume it is
> > Rockwell
> > or Connexant WinModem technology as it accounts for about 90% of
> > the modem market share today.
> >
> > A Rockwell winModem costs the OEM only about $3 to put in, so you
> > know now why they are sold so widely.  There is not much to them,
> > mostly empty chips.  The Lucent chips have some meat in them, ie,
> > hardware that helps the software do some things.  Better junk.
> >
> > As an ISP, I have seen and worked with thousands of modems.  For
> > all practical purposes "I have seen them all" (I do get a surprise
> > now and then, usually not pleasant).  Often I get folks that have
> > spent a lot of money on a computer and insist that their modem is
> > of the "best quality".  Or had very good luck with a Rockwell
> > and insist that they are "the best" type around.  Most, if not all
> > of these fold have been exposed to just one or two modems in their
> > life, and their knowledge is flawed.
> >
> > If you go out and buy a Modem, stick it in a Windows 95 computer,
> > fire it up, and insert a disk when the thing says "new hardware
> > detected".  And then use it successfuly to dial up your ISP, I
> > do not think that I would call that as 'experienced with this
> > or that modem'.  It is merely anecdotal experience of the type
> > that
> > the manufacturer hopes you have.  To know a modem you have to
> > experience horror stories with that type, or conversely,
> > experience nothing but good from this other type.
> >
> 
> OK, you gave us the "bad" news, now recommend a good internal modem (based on your 
>experience) that is affordably priced ( 
> Hoyt
> 
> __
> NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
> Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
> http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html


Modem Blaster Flash 5611.  I have used the earlier ISA modem in
this series and it provides excellent performance.

Also, Hayes made some nice ISA v90 modems.

www.soundblaster.com to see the modem blaster

The Modem Blaster Flash 5611, the external Flash 5611 are both
good hardware modems.  The older modem blaster I used kept 15
computers on the internet at once for more than a year of nearly
constant login.

The modem blaster 56K v.90, the modem blaster 56K USB modem (yes
an extern

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Hoyt]

- Original Message - 
From: Ramon Gandia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem


> 
> Both the Phoebe's and the USRobotics Sporsters are wonderful
> performers and reliable under adverse line conditions.  Often
> a Rockwell will show a higher connect speed, but the throughput
> will be higher on the UsR/Phoebe.
> 


Thanks, Ramon. I have a Speedcom (Cirrus Logic chipset, jumpers) modem and a Zoom 2819 
(Rockwell chipset, jumpers). The Zoom is the winner hands down. My backup is an older 
AcerOpen with the Rockwell chipset (switches)- a solid 33.6 modem. Linux likes 'em 
all. I have never cared for jumperless modems.

Hoyt

__
NetZero - Defenders of the Free World
Get your FREE Internet Access and Email at
http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

"James E. Tarvid" wrote:
> 
> The AOpen FM56-ITU/2 works in both Linux, Windows, DOS ...
> 
> There are a few more but this is the best I've found.
> 
> Jim Tarvid
> 
> Aopen Acer 56K V.90 Internal With Voice ISA fax modem (Not aWinmodem) With
> VoiceMail #AOPFM56-ITU/2 $ 41 Unknown??  2/27/00 12:25:03 PM CST Comp-U-Plus
> 800-287-8786
> 914-352-8100
> Online Ordering  NY  FM56
> 
> Aopen FM56-ITU/2 ,V.90,56K, , ISA, Linux Compatible Internal modem/FM56ITU $
> 47 5.00/FLAT anywhere in cont. USA - no other fee  12/28/99 7:24:00 PM CST
> Openlinx Communications
> 562-623-9334
> .
> Online Ordering  CA  -

Yes, they are ISA and non-Win, but they are Rockwells.  Look in
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/2307a.html   for the lowdown.
AOPEN makes a Texas Instrument model, which is probably good,
its is the FM56PVS-T   (the -T is the critical part and makes it
a TI chipset modem, hopefully with the V90/X2 protocol.  If so,
it should be good).

Non-Win Rockwells work, but they are not good performers.  They
have aggressive speeds, usually a notch or two higher than they
should for given line conditions.  They get LOTS of retrains
which I can see on my logs here.  They frequently disconnect
with "lost carrier" in my logs.  Retrains are bad, because it
means the modem is spending most of its time resending data that
had errors.  The Connect speed may be 52,000 vs 46,666 for a
USR/TI, but the lower speed modem will pass MORE data bytes in
a given time. 

There are also lots of other bugs that plague Rockwells.  

On the server end, Rockwell digital modems at the ISP end do
not work well with Channelized T1 service using D4/AMI
signalling,and that is about 50% of the phone switches in the
USA.  The US Robotics make great consumer modems but are just
terrible for an ISP, although the later revisions seem to be
working better.  At one time there was a class action suit
about it, if I recall.  The Lucent digital modems, like I use
here at Nook Net seem to be the most robust of the lot.  I
tried equipment from Ascend and Cisco here and simply could
not make it work above 31,200.  Cisco tried valiantly with
their AS5200no dice.  My Lucent Portmasters PM3 do fine.

On the Analog end, I use a number of US Robotics couriers,
and they do real well too.  In one village I was kinda cheap
and used US Robotics sporsters 33.6 data fax modems, and
they work well too.

-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

ibi wrote:
> 
> Ah yes, but there is a little caveat. The TI chipset is the key. Ramon
> can explain it beautifully and has in prior threads. The modems with the
> TI chipset is the only bulletproof unit that is wholly Linux compatible.
> I believe Phoebe makes two versions. USR external is the only model with
> TI. The internals use a Rockwell chipset that may or may not be winmodem
> versions.

No, No.  Phoebe makes a TI chipset model in both External AND
internal versions.  I gave the model numbers earlier today.

Be careful, Phoebe makes LOTS of junk modems too, you have to
pick thru the part numbers to get the right ones, as I did and
shared with this list.  Because they are the priciest Phoebes,
the dealers do not seem to want to stock them.  They prefer to
sell the $ 9.95 Rockewell WinModems.  

-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

Hoyt wrote:

> OK, you gave us the "bad" news, now recommend a good 
> internal modem (based on your experience) that is 
> affordably priced (http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Jean-Michel Dault]

You know, I have used a lof of modems, and the cheapest ones, the Boca or
GVC external modems work well. The only problem is that they produce a lot
of heat when connected 24/24. It's okay for a home user, but if you're an
ISP with hundreds of them, it's a problem. Ask your ISP, I'm sure they
have some units gathering dust somewhere, and they will probably sell you
one for a few bucks =)

Jean-Michel Dault
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Tue, 7 Mar 2000, Tom wrote:

> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 18:17:20 -0600
> From: Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem
> 
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > Ah yes, but there is a little caveat. The TI chipset is the key. Ramon
> > can explain it beautifully and has in prior threads. The modems with the
> > TI chipset is the only bulletproof unit that is wholly Linux compatible.
> > I believe Phoebe makes two versions. 
> 
>   saved from a prior Ramon post:
> 
> Internal: Phoebe CMV1456VQH-X   
> 
> External: Phoebe CMV1456VQE-X
> 
>   I have an old phoebe, TI 33,6.  It's jus'a'bout bulletproof.  I
> live on a hill in the southern Ozarks (AR, USA). Two rusty wires
> goin down the mountain into Russellville. I always get 28,8 or
> better out'a the world's worst collection of ISP's (3). 'Course
> I measure them as opposed to  www.hal-pc.org  (Houston, World's
> best)
> 
>A search of  pricewatch.com  will turn up 25+, just search
> 'hardware modem'
> 
>  -- 
> ..   Tom Brinkman  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> USR external is the only model with
> > TI. The internals use a Rockwell chipset that may or may not be winmodem
> > versions.   
> > 
> > Pj
> > 
> > Sang Y. Yum wrote:
> > > 
> > > I couldn't agree more. Pay a little more and get an
> > > extrenal modem. No COM3/4 or IRQ to worry about,
> > > simply plug into your serial port and you are all set.
> > > 
> > > Sang
> > > 
> > > --- ibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I've done the modem dance with name brands for
> > > > several years. Thus far I
> > > > have found one modem that works flawlessly with
> > > > Windows and Linux.
> > > > USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was
> > > > recognized the first
> > > > time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save
> > > > money and save
> > > > aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you
> > > > pays for.
> > > >
> > > > Pj
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > > 
> > > =
> > > Sang Y. Yum
> > > San Diego, CA
> > >
> 

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Tom]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> Ah yes, but there is a little caveat. The TI chipset is the key. Ramon
> can explain it beautifully and has in prior threads. The modems with the
> TI chipset is the only bulletproof unit that is wholly Linux compatible.
> I believe Phoebe makes two versions. 

  saved from a prior Ramon post:

Internal: Phoebe CMV1456VQH-X   

External: Phoebe CMV1456VQE-X

  I have an old phoebe, TI 33,6.  It's jus'a'bout bulletproof.  I
live on a hill in the southern Ozarks (AR, USA). Two rusty wires
goin down the mountain into Russellville. I always get 28,8 or
better out'a the world's worst collection of ISP's (3). 'Course
I measure them as opposed to  www.hal-pc.org  (Houston, World's
best)

   A search of  pricewatch.com  will turn up 25+, just search
'hardware modem'

 -- 
..   Tom Brinkman  [EMAIL PROTECTED]   .










USR external is the only model with
> TI. The internals use a Rockwell chipset that may or may not be winmodem
> versions.   
> 
> Pj
> 
> Sang Y. Yum wrote:
> > 
> > I couldn't agree more. Pay a little more and get an
> > extrenal modem. No COM3/4 or IRQ to worry about,
> > simply plug into your serial port and you are all set.
> > 
> > Sang
> > 
> > --- ibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I've done the modem dance with name brands for
> > > several years. Thus far I
> > > have found one modem that works flawlessly with
> > > Windows and Linux.
> > > USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was
> > > recognized the first
> > > time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save
> > > money and save
> > > aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you
> > > pays for.
> > >
> > > Pj
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > 
> > =
> > Sang Y. Yum
> > San Diego, CA
> >

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[James E. Tarvid]

The AOpen FM56-ITU/2 works in both Linux, Windows, DOS ...

There are a few more but this is the best I've found.

Jim Tarvid


Aopen Acer 56K V.90 Internal With Voice ISA fax modem (Not aWinmodem) With
VoiceMail #AOPFM56-ITU/2 $ 41 Unknown??  2/27/00 12:25:03 PM CST Comp-U-Plus
800-287-8786
914-352-8100
Online Ordering  NY  FM56

Aopen FM56-ITU/2 ,V.90,56K, , ISA, Linux Compatible Internal modem/FM56ITU $
47 5.00/FLAT anywhere in cont. USA - no other fee  12/28/99 7:24:00 PM CST
Openlinx Communications
562-623-9334
.
Online Ordering  CA  -

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[ibi]

Ah yes, but there is a little caveat. The TI chipset is the key. Ramon
can explain it beautifully and has in prior threads. The modems with the
TI chipset is the only bulletproof unit that is wholly Linux compatible.
I believe Phoebe makes two versions. USR external is the only model with
TI. The internals use a Rockwell chipset that may or may not be winmodem
versions.   

Pj

Sang Y. Yum wrote:
> 
> I couldn't agree more. Pay a little more and get an
> extrenal modem. No COM3/4 or IRQ to worry about,
> simply plug into your serial port and you are all set.
> 
> Sang
> 
> --- ibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I've done the modem dance with name brands for
> > several years. Thus far I
> > have found one modem that works flawlessly with
> > Windows and Linux.
> > USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was
> > recognized the first
> > time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save
> > money and save
> > aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you
> > pays for.
> >
> > Pj
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> 
> =
> Sang Y. Yum
> San Diego, CA
>

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Sang Y. Yum]

I couldn't agree more. Pay a little more and get an
extrenal modem. No COM3/4 or IRQ to worry about,
simply plug into your serial port and you are all set.

Sang

--- ibi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've done the modem dance with name brands for
> several years. Thus far I
> have found one modem that works flawlessly with
> Windows and Linux.
> USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was
> recognized the first
> time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save
> money and save
> aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you
> pays for. 
> 
> Pj
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

=
Sang Y. Yum
San Diego, CA
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Hoyt]

- Original Message - 
From: Ramon Gandia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2000 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem


> 
> I just looked, just in case I had missed something.  All Diamond
> PCI modems *are* WinModems.  You should get a model number, which
> will be on the card, like Model 2920.  They use 4-digits like
> that.
> "Supra Express" is meaningless as they use this term on ALL the
> modems that they make (ie, SupraExpress = ModemMadeByDiamond ).
>
> A few WinModems, depending on the chipset and vintage, will have
> limited functionality as a regular modem.  Generally enough to
> allow
> for non-compressed communications at 1,200.
> 
> 
> There are some things that distinguish the Lucent WinModems from
> the
> rest, the main one being that ALL Lucent LT modems look the same
> from
> the computer's point of view.  It does not matter which
> manufacturer
> the modem is from, if its an LT chipset, it will use the SAME
> driver.
> 

> 
> I can say more about Lucent, but will withold it for now.  It is a
> great outfit.
> 
> There are a couple more WinModems with Linux aspirations.  The
> ones
> that are non-Lucent have limited functionality.  Either only at
> 1200
> bps, or can be used as dialers and voice only, not data.
> 

> 
> In particular, you should be on the lookout for Rockwell Chipset
> modems.  Most of those are WinModems, and some are particularly
> bad such as the HSP and HCF WinModems.  Rockwell sold the chip
> division to Connexant, so you will also see them with that label
> on the chip.  They also make externals and ISA modems, some of 
> which are not WinModems.  You should be aware that as an ISP,
> and a person that has wide contacts among ISP's, I can tell you
> that Rockwell/Connexant modems are simply the worse.  I see a lot
> of advertising hype about this and that modem, but if the fine
> print says its a Rockwell or Connexant, I advise you to pass.
> If they *do not* mention the chipset, you can assume it is
> Rockwell
> or Connexant WinModem technology as it accounts for about 90% of
> the modem market share today.
> 
> A Rockwell winModem costs the OEM only about $3 to put in, so you
> know now why they are sold so widely.  There is not much to them,
> mostly empty chips.  The Lucent chips have some meat in them, ie,
> hardware that helps the software do some things.  Better junk.
> 
> As an ISP, I have seen and worked with thousands of modems.  For
> all practical purposes "I have seen them all" (I do get a surprise
> now and then, usually not pleasant).  Often I get folks that have
> spent a lot of money on a computer and insist that their modem is
> of the "best quality".  Or had very good luck with a Rockwell
> and insist that they are "the best" type around.  Most, if not all
> of these fold have been exposed to just one or two modems in their
> life, and their knowledge is flawed.
> 
> If you go out and buy a Modem, stick it in a Windows 95 computer,
> fire it up, and insert a disk when the thing says "new hardware
> detected".  And then use it successfuly to dial up your ISP, I
> do not think that I would call that as 'experienced with this
> or that modem'.  It is merely anecdotal experience of the type
> that
> the manufacturer hopes you have.  To know a modem you have to
> experience horror stories with that type, or conversely, 
> experience nothing but good from this other type.  
> 


OK, you gave us the "bad" news, now recommend a good internal modem (based on your 
experience) that is affordably priced (http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[ibi]

I've done the modem dance with name brands for several years. Thus far I
have found one modem that works flawlessly with Windows and Linux.
USR 56k V.90 External with the TI chipset. It was recognized the first
time in Linux and every time since. Save time, save money and save
aggravation. It ain't cheap but you gets what you pays for. 

Pj
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

"Istvan B." wrote:
> 
> I just thought I mention this:
> Actually, it doesn't have to be a WinModem (although this one probably is) to
> have this problem.
> I had (just sold it today) a Diamond SupraExpress PCI modem, which is not a
> winmodem, yet I had the same problems

I just looked, just in case I had missed something.  All Diamond
PCI modems *are* WinModems.  You should get a model number, which
will be on the card, like Model 2920.  They use 4-digits like
that.
"Supra Express" is meaningless as they use this term on ALL the
modems that they make (ie, SupraExpress = ModemMadeByDiamond ).

> as I did with winmodems. It is heavily dependant on full plug'n'play support
> because of the way it communicates through the PCI
> port. On the RedHat hardware compatibility list it is listed as non-compatible.
> But I have found a file VERY hidden on the modem's
> driver disk which had a few lines on how to use it under Linus. This involved
> the use of the DOS driver (which I coud not fin anywhere) and LOADLIN and a few
> changes in autoexec.bat. So, in short, I would have had to 'warm boot' Linux.

A few WinModems, depending on the chipset and vintage, will have
limited functionality as a regular modem.  Generally enough to
allow
for non-compressed communications at 1,200.

MS-DOS is not equal to non-WinModem.  It is perfectly possible to 
write a DOS driver for a WinModem, and some manufacturers have
done
this.  In Fact, it is possible to write a WinModem driver that
runs
under Linux, and it is then called a LinModem.  AT&T/Lucent has
opened the design of their chip to Linux folks, and the Lucent
LT Modems now have Linux drivers for them.  

There are some things that distinguish the Lucent WinModems from
the
rest, the main one being that ALL Lucent LT modems look the same
from
the computer's point of view.  It does not matter which
manufacturer
the modem is from, if its an LT chipset, it will use the SAME
driver.

There are variants if the modem also is a voice one; using the
generic
modem data driver might make you lose the voice capability. 
However,
the generic driver will always work for LT's.  This is a bragging
point on the part of Lucent.  (The voice stuff is external to
their
chipset).

I can say more about Lucent, but will withold it for now.  It is a
great outfit.

There are a couple more WinModems with Linux aspirations.  The
ones
that are non-Lucent have limited functionality.  Either only at
1200
bps, or can be used as dialers and voice only, not data.

One year ago, if you had said PCI modem, I could have
authoritatively
told you it was a WinModem (or RPI, same thing in the end). 
However,
that has changed.  

There are now three modems that are PCI and not WinModems.  They
are quite rare and not in common availability in the USA.  I have
never seen one in any catalog and they are brands you never heard
of.  Multitech also makes a PCI modem that is not a WinModem if
you
accept the fact that WinModem means a modem that has the DSP and
Compression/ECC implemented in Software.  The Multitech has it in
hardware and is technically not a WinModem.  However, it requires
a special driver anyway as it does not look like a regular serial
port.  This driver has only been released for Windows.  

I use a Broader definition of WinModem as "does not respond as a
regular modem and requires special software to work available only
under Microsoft Windows".  But you are welcome to disagree with me
on that and call the Multitech a non-winmodem.

If you do not want to take my word for PCI = WinModem, or harbor
any doubts about your ISA or USB modem being Win or Regular, the
final authoritative listing can be found at

http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html

and read down and go to the link "View the Entire Table" which
is 345K long and has the best listing.  

In particular, you should be on the lookout for Rockwell Chipset
modems.  Most of those are WinModems, and some are particularly
bad such as the HSP and HCF WinModems.  Rockwell sold the chip
division to Connexant, so you will also see them with that label
on the chip.  They also make externals and ISA modems, some of 
which are not WinModems.  You should be aware that as an ISP,
and a person that has wide contacts among ISP's, I can tell you
that Rockwell/Connexant modems are simply the worse.  I see a lot
of advertising hype about this and that modem, but if the fine
print says its a Rockwell or Connexant, I advise you to pass.
If they *do not* mention the chipset, you can assume it is
Rockwell
or Connexant WinModem technology as it accounts for about 90% of
the modem market share today.

A Rockwell winModem costs the OEM only about $3 to put in, so you
know now why they are sold so widely.  There is not much to them,
mostly empty chips.  The Lucent chips have some meat in them, ie,
hardware that helps the software do some things.  Better junk.

As an ISP, I have seen and worked with thousands of modems.  For
all practical purposes "I have seen them a

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> I just thought I mention this:
> Actually, it doesn't have to be a WinModem (although this one probably is) to
> have this problem.
> I had (just sold it today) a Diamond SupraExpress PCI modem, which is not a
> winmodem, yet I had the same problems
> as I did with winmodems. It is heavily dependant on full plug'n'play support
> because of the way it communicates through the PCI
> port. On the RedHat hardware compatibility list it is listed as non-compatible.
> But I have found a file VERY hidden on the modem's
> driver disk which had a few lines on how to use it under Linus. This involved
> the use of the DOS driver (which I coud not fin anywhere) and LOADLIN and a few
> changes in autoexec.bat. So, in short, I would have had to 'warm boot' Linux.
> 
If memory serves, the Diamond Supra Express IS a "soft
modem." I *could* be confusing it with the SupraMax,
though. I know one of these is an HCF modem. I believe the
PCI versions of the Supra Express ARE HCF modems, and I
think the Supra Max is as well. 
HCF is just as dirty a word as "WinModem." Please
double-check me on this, but I'm pretty sure that the DSE
is a Soft Modem, just like the USR WinModems.
Ok. I just went and viewed the "WinModem" page from 
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html. Every PCI
version of the Supra Express is listed as either a WinModem
or unknown. The EXTERNAL modems should work fine.
John

RE: [expert] Modem Problem

[Civileme]

On Tue, 07 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> If you have a dual boot system, you might want to check under windows, if
> your modem has "HCL" in the description. If so, you are had, and have to buy
> a new modem (external will do the trick).

Ummm, make that external for an ordinary serial port.  There are now USB
winmodems for sale, which are also external.

Civileme


> 
> Regards
>  
> Fred de Klein
>  
> tel: 01908 656106 (w)
>   0780 8254445(mob)
> http://www.bigfoot.com/~klein_it <http://www.bigfoot.com/~klein_it> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Istvan B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 07 March 2000 12:16
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem
> 
> 
> I just thought I mention this:
> Actually, it doesn't have to be a WinModem (although this one probably is)
> to
> have this problem.
> I had (just sold it today) a Diamond SupraExpress PCI modem, which is not a
> winmodem, yet I had the same problems
> as I did with winmodems. It is heavily dependant on full plug'n'play support
> because of the way it communicates through the PCI
> port. On the RedHat hardware compatibility list it is listed as
> non-compatible.
> But I have found a file VERY hidden on the modem's
> driver disk which had a few lines on how to use it under Linus. This
> involved
> the use of the DOS driver (which I coud not fin anywhere) and LOADLIN and a
> few
> changes in autoexec.bat. So, in short, I would have had to 'warm boot'
> Linux.
> 
> Istvan
> 
> Ramon Gandia wrote:
> 
> > "Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D." wrote:
> > >
> > > I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a
> > > Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the
> ISA
> > > PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message
> that
> > > the modem is busy.
> >
> > It used to work?  In Windows 95/98 maybe.  The Zoom PCI modem,
> > as with 99.99% of all PCI modems, is a WinModem.  In other words,
> > the parts are stripped out of it, and the functions are in a
> > Win95 "driver program" that is proprietary and does not work
> > in Linux.  You need a new modem.  It will also improve the
> > performance under Windows.  Trust me, I am an ISP.
> 
> --
>  ___  POWERED BY L
> | Istvan Bronowiecki|_   I
> | Melbourne, Australia  |  http://me.alphalink.com.au |  N
> |___|  [EMAIL PROTECTED]|  U
> |_|  X MANDRAKE 7

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[John Aldrich]

On Mon, 06 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a 
> Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the ISA 
> PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message that 
> the modem is busy.
> 
Win Modem. 99.999% of all PCI modems are WinModems. Go to
http://www.o2.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html for the low-down
on what's a software modem and what isn't.
John

RE: [expert] Modem Problem

[fred . deklein]

If you have a dual boot system, you might want to check under windows, if
your modem has "HCL" in the description. If so, you are had, and have to buy
a new modem (external will do the trick).

Regards
 
Fred de Klein
 
tel: 01908 656106 (w)
  0780 8254445(mob)
http://www.bigfoot.com/~klein_it <http://www.bigfoot.com/~klein_it> 


-Original Message-
From: Istvan B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 07 March 2000 12:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [expert] Modem Problem


I just thought I mention this:
Actually, it doesn't have to be a WinModem (although this one probably is)
to
have this problem.
I had (just sold it today) a Diamond SupraExpress PCI modem, which is not a
winmodem, yet I had the same problems
as I did with winmodems. It is heavily dependant on full plug'n'play support
because of the way it communicates through the PCI
port. On the RedHat hardware compatibility list it is listed as
non-compatible.
But I have found a file VERY hidden on the modem's
driver disk which had a few lines on how to use it under Linus. This
involved
the use of the DOS driver (which I coud not fin anywhere) and LOADLIN and a
few
changes in autoexec.bat. So, in short, I would have had to 'warm boot'
Linux.

Istvan

Ramon Gandia wrote:

> "Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D." wrote:
> >
> > I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a
> > Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the
ISA
> > PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message
that
> > the modem is busy.
>
> It used to work?  In Windows 95/98 maybe.  The Zoom PCI modem,
> as with 99.99% of all PCI modems, is a WinModem.  In other words,
> the parts are stripped out of it, and the functions are in a
> Win95 "driver program" that is proprietary and does not work
> in Linux.  You need a new modem.  It will also improve the
> performance under Windows.  Trust me, I am an ISP.

--
 ___  POWERED BY L
| Istvan Bronowiecki|_   I
| Melbourne, Australia  |  http://me.alphalink.com.au |  N
|___|  [EMAIL PROTECTED]|  U
|_|  X MANDRAKE 7

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Istvan B.]

I just thought I mention this:
Actually, it doesn't have to be a WinModem (although this one probably is) to
have this problem.
I had (just sold it today) a Diamond SupraExpress PCI modem, which is not a
winmodem, yet I had the same problems
as I did with winmodems. It is heavily dependant on full plug'n'play support
because of the way it communicates through the PCI
port. On the RedHat hardware compatibility list it is listed as non-compatible.
But I have found a file VERY hidden on the modem's
driver disk which had a few lines on how to use it under Linus. This involved
the use of the DOS driver (which I coud not fin anywhere) and LOADLIN and a few
changes in autoexec.bat. So, in short, I would have had to 'warm boot' Linux.

Istvan

Ramon Gandia wrote:

> "Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D." wrote:
> >
> > I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a
> > Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the ISA
> > PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message that
> > the modem is busy.
>
> It used to work?  In Windows 95/98 maybe.  The Zoom PCI modem,
> as with 99.99% of all PCI modems, is a WinModem.  In other words,
> the parts are stripped out of it, and the functions are in a
> Win95 "driver program" that is proprietary and does not work
> in Linux.  You need a new modem.  It will also improve the
> performance under Windows.  Trust me, I am an ISP.

--
 ___  POWERED BY L
| Istvan Bronowiecki|_   I
| Melbourne, Australia  |  http://me.alphalink.com.au |  N
|___|  [EMAIL PROTECTED]|  U
|_|  X MANDRAKE 7

RE: [expert] Modem Problem

[fred . deklein]

This sounds like you have a winmodem, which will never work under Linux.

Regards
 
Fred de Klein
 
tel: 01908 656106 (w)
  0780 8254445(mob)
http://www.bigfoot.com/~klein_it  


-Original Message-
From: Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 07 March 2000 00:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [expert] Modem Problem
Importance: High


I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a 
Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the ISA 
PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message that 
the modem is busy.

Help will be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Re: [expert] Modem Problem

[Ramon Gandia]

"Stephen P. Molnar, Ph.D." wrote:
> 
> I've just reinstalled Mandrake Helios on my pentium platform.  I have a
> Zoom 56K PCI Faxmodem that used to work.  The boot process sets up the ISA
> PnP devices, but when I look for the modem with kppp I get a message that
> the modem is busy.

It used to work?  In Windows 95/98 maybe.  The Zoom PCI modem,
as with 99.99% of all PCI modems, is a WinModem.  In other words,
the parts are stripped out of it, and the functions are in a
Win95 "driver program" that is proprietary and does not work
in Linux.  You need a new modem.  It will also improve the
performance under Windows.  Trust me, I am an ISP.

-- 
Ramon Gandia = Sysadmin == Nook Net
http://www.nook.net[EMAIL PROTECTED]
285 West First Avenue tel. 907-443-7575
P.O. Box 970  fax. 907-443-2487
Nome, Alaska 99762-0970  Alaska Toll Free. 888-443-7525