home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: ix.netcom.com!netnews
- From: jsalb@ix.netcom.com (Jesse Salb)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
- Subject: Re: WFWG comm driver vs. Win 3.1 comm driver
- Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 04:45:16 GMT
- Organization: Netcom
- Message-ID: <3109ada0.1984110@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
- References: <31068dbd.82725947@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <4e8l0i$99l@hg.oro.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: lax-ca25-26.ix.netcom.com
- X-NETCOM-Date: Fri Jan 26 8:45:15 PM PST 1996
- X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99c/16.141
-
- On Thu, 25 Jan 1996 19:17:42 GMT, estarry@oro.net (Ed Starry) wrote:
-
- >jsalb@ix.netcom.com (Jesse Salb) wrote about {WFWG comm driver vs. Win 3.1
- >comm driver} in 'comp.dcom.modems'...
- >
- >~ In trying to troubleshoot an intermittent hang I've been having with
- >~ Procomm/Win 2.11, a technician on their Compuserve forum told me to
- >~ replace the COMM.DRV that comes with WFWG 3.11 with the older COMM
- >~ driver that came with Win 3.1. Can this possibly be right? It was my
- >~ impression that the WFWG driver is vastly improved over the older
- >~ driver, much faster, etc.
- >===========================================
- >
- > You're joking, aren't you??
- >
- > What's causing your intermittent hang is something I can't answer,
- >insufficient data. However, regarding the different <comm.drv> files I will
- >comment on.
- >
- > They are not interchangeable! The <comm.drv> in WfW v3.11 integrates with
- >other files, <serial.386> and <vcomm.386>, where <comm.drv> from Win v3.1
- >wouldn't know a <vcomm.386> if it fell over one.
- >
- > As to one <comm.drv> being better than the other, it's moot, they both
- >stink.
- >
- > Ed..
-
- Ed,
-
- What is a better replacement for comm.drv?
-
- Jesse
-
-