home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: darkstar.prodigy.com!davidsen
- From: davidsen@tmr.com (bill davidsen)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: Is 33.6 only available for USR?
- Date: 19 Jan 1996 21:03:16 GMT
- Organization: TMR Associates, Schenectady NY
- Message-ID: <4dp0uk$952@usenety1.news.prodigy.com>
- References: <4dd14b$odp@grid.direct.ca> <30FA9B32.4862@fishnet.net> <4dh7j3$81i@shellx.best.com> <30FCE339.36B9@fishnet.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: darkstar.prodigy.com
- Originator: davidsen@darkstar.prodigy.com
-
- In article <30FCE339.36B9@fishnet.net>, John White <jwhite@fishnet.net> wrote:
-
- | I was simply stating that from my testing 33.6k V34+ simply has not
- | shown itself to be a big boost in performance and was saying
- | that it is not a problem to not have 33.6K especially as implemented
- | now. Possibly in the future when code becomes more refined we will start
- | to see more performance improvements.
-
- I think there is significantly better performance between modems
- having V.34+ on bad lines, and I am hearing that most people see
- better connects to other modems as well.
-
- When going to a modem which may be less capable, a less than optimal
- sysbol rate might be used, or coding, or whatever. If I did a lot of
- connects I would take the time to try disabling features one at a
- time and doing at least four connects per setting.
-
- This does not (to me) indicate a flaw in the USR, but only that if
- the negotiation process is flawed the negotiation may result in a
- bad result. I've seen enough posted about the Rockwell modem
- problems to believe that the USR implementation contains more of the
- optional features, and on that measure is "better."
-
- You certainly seem to have more room to play with setting on the
- USR, although I use USR a lot more than others (my clients choose).
- --
- Bill Davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
- Davidsen's first rule of system administration:
- He learns to swim fastest who is thrown in the deepest water.
-