Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Mark Wickens]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 02:20:32PM -0500, Stephen Adolph wrote:
> Mark, what is the model number on your machine?
> thx Steve
> 
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Mark Wickens 
> wrote:
> 
> > Note however that I never have seen any of the additional function key
> > soft labels (such as CALL) within the TELECOM program itself. Maybe that
> > was a UK ROM mod?
> >
> > On 16 December 2015 at 19:03, Mark Wickens 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks for the responses - as it happens it was more down to me not
> >> entering the modem stat specification correctly into the terminal program.
> >> Once I got something accepted then I heard the 'ping' of the relay to
> >> switch in the modem circuit and was able to hear the familiar screeching
> >> via the acoustic coupler.
> >>
> >> I haven't got anything to work reliably however which is a shame but it
> >> was a long stretch. I bought a 'retro' bluetooth handset and paired it with
> >> my mobile phone. There may be still some mileage in it but I suspect there
> >> are too many compression algorithms in the way.
> >>
> >> I may need to resort to a direct connection cable or external modem
> >> instead.
> >>
> >> Mark.
> >>
> >> On 16 December 2015 at 18:30, John Gardner  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Historically,  telecom regulation in the UK was rather different
> >>>
> >>> than what we're used to - Television receivers required licenses,
> >>>
> >>> for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm speculating
> >>>
> >>> that built-in modems may have (had) some similar dis-incentive
> >>>
> >>> built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >

Hi

I have a Model 102 with serial number 908300060. I also have a Model 200
to try which sports the prohibited sticker also. I recently acquired a
non-functioning Model 100 which I'll get round to fault-finding in
January and an NEC which I haven't done much with yet (the down-cursor
key is non-functioning and appears to be a custom key compared to the
rest of the keyboard together with all the cursor keys).

I am interested in the possibility of implementing a protocol that is
resilient to compression algorithms so any additional information would
be gratefully received. My idea was to use the Model 102 to blog about
my retrochallenge from various weird and wonderful locations with only an
acoustic coupler and a mobile phone. I would require access only
'back-to-base' so could implement something custom at the other end too.

I have just bought some 8-pin DIN connectors so am going to wire up my
own direct cable and attempt to call out with that. I did receive a
cable with the Model 200 but it is in poor condition and I'm not
entirely convinced that it is wired up correctly.

Which leads to a question - if the cable is wired up with two
connections only to the phone connector would you expect to have audio
feedback provided within the Model 102 whilst handshaking? My
experiments attempting to get this cable to work have involved using a
separate phone to dial and initiate the connection.

I may also look into the rom of this Model 102 and see what there is
around the dialing calls for example. This is the bit that seems to be
missing from my ROM.

Regards, Mark.

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Peter Vollan]

As far as I know, the still seek out and prosecute and throw in jail
TV viewers for operating a set without paying their license fee. This
does seem heavy hand, as much as I like the BBC


On 16 December 2015 at 10:30, John Gardner  wrote:
> Historically,  telecom regulation in the UK was rather different
>
> than what we're used to - Television receivers required licenses,
>
> for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm speculating
>
> that built-in modems may have (had) some similar dis-incentive
>
> built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Peter Vollan]

Do you mean to say that it will not accept the M?


On 16 December 2015 at 10:23, Marko Peussa  wrote:
> If we are to believe wikipedia, UK models might not have a modem.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark Wickens  kirjoitti 16.12.2015 kello 16.42:
>
>> This is a bit weird but when I use TELECOM with the switches on the 102 set 
>> to ACP and ORIG and an acoustic coupler attached I am unable to specify a 
>> STAT of M711E for example.
>>
>> I also don't see the function labels mentioned in the manual.
>>
>> Is it possible that my Model 102 has had the modem functionality disabled 
>> being a UK model?
>>
>> It's all a bit weird! Unless for example the DIR/ACP  switch isn't 
>> functioning correctly - presumable even with it set to DIR you would expect 
>> to see modem related function labels such as F2 being call.
>>
>> My understanding is that the 'M' in the STAT string means use the PHONE 
>> connection and a number means use the RS232 connection.
>>
>> Regards, Mark.

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Peter Vollan]

Yes, eliminate the Acoustic Coupler from the equation.

On 16 December 2015 at 11:03, Mark Wickens  wrote:
> Thanks for the responses - as it happens it was more down to me not entering
> the modem stat specification correctly into the terminal program. Once I got
> something accepted then I heard the 'ping' of the relay to switch in the
> modem circuit and was able to hear the familiar screeching via the acoustic
> coupler.
>
> I haven't got anything to work reliably however which is a shame but it was
> a long stretch. I bought a 'retro' bluetooth handset and paired it with my
> mobile phone. There may be still some mileage in it but I suspect there are
> too many compression algorithms in the way.
>
> I may need to resort to a direct connection cable or external modem instead.
>
> Mark.
>
> On 16 December 2015 at 18:30, John Gardner  wrote:
>>
>> Historically,  telecom regulation in the UK was rather different
>>
>> than what we're used to - Television receivers required licenses,
>>
>> for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm speculating
>>
>> that built-in modems may have (had) some similar dis-incentive
>>
>> built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.
>
>

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Marko Peussa]

Thanks for trying it out! It would be great to get that working, but the GSM 
voice compression of a mobile phone is tough beast to beat. Also, some 'retro' 
handsets say they 'enhance' the sound, thus I believe there might some filters 
in those.

One standard data protocol that is able to go through GSM voice compression is 
the dual tone frequency matching (DTFM). This can be used for data, but it 
would be slower, and of course would require its own terminal program with DTFM 
coder/decoder on both ends to be useful.

DTFM encoders/decoders are commercially available...


Peter Vollan  kirjoitti 19.12.2015 kello 0.56:

> Yes, eliminate the Acoustic Coupler from the equation.
> 
> On 16 December 2015 at 11:03, Mark Wickens  wrote:
>> Thanks for the responses - as it happens it was more down to me not entering
>> the modem stat specification correctly into the terminal program. Once I got
>> something accepted then I heard the 'ping' of the relay to switch in the
>> modem circuit and was able to hear the familiar screeching via the acoustic
>> coupler.
>> 
>> I haven't got anything to work reliably however which is a shame but it was
>> a long stretch. I bought a 'retro' bluetooth handset and paired it with my
>> mobile phone. There may be still some mileage in it but I suspect there are
>> too many compression algorithms in the way.
>> 
>> I may need to resort to a direct connection cable or external modem instead.
>> 
>> Mark.
>> 
>> On 16 December 2015 at 18:30, John Gardner  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Historically,  telecom regulation in the UK was rather different
>>> 
>>> than what we're used to - Television receivers required licenses,
>>> 
>>> for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm speculating
>>> 
>>> that built-in modems may have (had) some similar dis-incentive
>>> 
>>> built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.
>> 
>> 

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Mark Wickens]

>
> My Model 102 does have a BT 'prohibited' sticker on the bottom of it. As
> previously mentioned there doesn't appear to be any issues with the
> hardware. I checked the documentation for the Hayes Accura V.92 modem I'm
> attempting to communicate with and it would appear that by default 300 baud
> uses the Bell 103J standard.
>
> I need to attach my acoustic coupler to a landline to confirm that the
> issues *isn't* to do with either bluetooth or mobile phone compression.
>
>

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Marko Peussa]

If we are to believe wikipedia, UK models might not have a modem.

Cheers,

Mark Wickens  kirjoitti 16.12.2015 kello 16.42:

> This is a bit weird but when I use TELECOM with the switches on the 102 set 
> to ACP and ORIG and an acoustic coupler attached I am unable to specify a 
> STAT of M711E for example. 
> 
> I also don't see the function labels mentioned in the manual.
> 
> Is it possible that my Model 102 has had the modem functionality disabled 
> being a UK model?
> 
> It's all a bit weird! Unless for example the DIR/ACP  switch isn't 
> functioning correctly - presumable even with it set to DIR you would expect 
> to see modem related function labels such as F2 being call.
> 
> My understanding is that the 'M' in the STAT string means use the PHONE 
> connection and a number means use the RS232 connection.
> 
> Regards, Mark.

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Mark Wickens]

Thanks for the responses - as it happens it was more down to me not
entering the modem stat specification correctly into the terminal program.
Once I got something accepted then I heard the 'ping' of the relay to
switch in the modem circuit and was able to hear the familiar screeching
via the acoustic coupler.

I haven't got anything to work reliably however which is a shame but it was
a long stretch. I bought a 'retro' bluetooth handset and paired it with my
mobile phone. There may be still some mileage in it but I suspect there are
too many compression algorithms in the way.

I may need to resort to a direct connection cable or external modem instead.

Mark.

On 16 December 2015 at 18:30, John Gardner  wrote:

> Historically,  telecom regulation in the UK was rather different
>
> than what we're used to - Television receivers required licenses,
>
> for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm speculating
>
> that built-in modems may have (had) some similar dis-incentive
>
> built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.
>

Re: [M100] No modem in my Model 102?

[Doug Jackson]

On 16 December 2015 at 18:30, John Gardner > wrote:


Historically, telecom regulation in the UK was rather
different
than what we're used to - Television receivers
required licenses,
for instance.  Data was charged for by the byte.  I'm
speculating
that built-in modems may have (had) some similar
dis-incentive
built-in for the manufacturer or retailer.



One of the *big* things here in Australia that caused issue with the 
Telecom Approval process was that the specific line isolation 
transformer used in the machine was considered too small and therefore 
unable to provide the 3KV isolation that was required, so it was never 
approved.  In the same era, modems here were pretty big.


Another issue would have been that the modem used Bell 103 tones, not 
CCITT v.21 which was standard in Australia (and probably the UK), so 
that was also unacceptable.


I remember spending ages experimenting with resistors and capacitors in 
the active bandpass filters within the modem to allow CCITT tones to 
operate.It worked reasonably well, but was never perfect.


Doug

--
Doug Jackson

Dougs Word Clocks.com Pty Ltd

www.dougswordclocks.com