home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
/ NetNews Offline 2 / NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso / news / comp / dcom / modems-part2 / 10757 < prev    next >
Encoding:
Text File  |  1996-08-05  |  1.1 KB  |  24 lines
  1. Newsgroups: comp.dcom.fax,comp.dcom.modems
  2. Path: news.space.net!greenie!gert
  3. From: gert@greenie.muc.de (Gert Doering)
  4. Subject: Re: Q: Class 2 vs Class 2.0
  5. Organization: GreeniE
  6. Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 19:59:23 GMT
  7. Message-ID: <DpprJ0.L7x@greenie.muc.de>
  8. References: <314806F3.55AF@none.com> <4i97ds$q2q@nntp1.best.com> <pumaDoHB8y.LrI@netcom.com> <314e0ca6.43085862@news1.io.org> <4j7l55$p4c@tribune.cris.com> <4j81vn$aqc@lori.albany.net> <DpDwA9.BtK@greenie.muc.de> <4kdnm7$qhd@lori.albany.net> <morris-0904962107570001@morris.vip.best.com>
  9.  
  10. morris@best.com (Paul Morris) writes:
  11.  
  12. >My understanding was that class 2 and class 2.0 were NOT the same thing.
  13.  
  14. They aren't. Most things are "similar", but there are slight but
  15. significant differences (e.g., most commands are shorter in 2.0, 
  16. having only three letters where class 2 had longer command names).
  17.  
  18. gert
  19. -- 
  20. Yield to temptation ... it may not pass your way again!  --  Lazarus Long
  21.                                                             //www.muc.de/~gert
  22. Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert@greenie.muc.de
  23. fax: +49-89-3243328                         gert.doering@physik.tu-muenchen.de
  24.