NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #26/NN_1992_26.iso/spool/comp/dcom/modems/16782

Text File | 1992-11-12 | 5.8 KB | 107 lines

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Path: sparky!uunet!ferkel.ucsb.edu!taco!rock!stanford.edu!ames!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.iastate.edu!scl1.al.iastate.edu!tlm
From: [e-mail] (Dr. T.L. Marchioro II)
Subject: Re: Why is Supra able to sell?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:00:08 GMT
Lines: 95

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bill Johnston) writes:

>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David Hunter) writes:
>>I have a Supra v.32bis.  [...many problems...]

>>My main question is, Why am I still reading
>>positive things about Supras in the computer mags as if they work just super?

>For the same reason that many articles posted to the net are positive:
>the answer is that people use modems in many different ways.  I mainly
>use the Supra to dial into the same terminal server every day.  About
>25% of the time it fails to connect on the first try and hits on the
>second.  While connected it performs as expected, so I'm satisfied.

>The people who have been complaining are typically using the Supra
>for more demanding applications like unattended uucp and dialing up
>a variety of BBSs, and it should be clear by now that the Supra is
>not the best modem in the world at negotiating connections.

>Another factor (IMO) is that this most recent wave of price cuts
>has brought many more novices (relatively speaking) into the
>high-speed telecomm game -- frequently with serial cards, cables,
>and computers that are poorly suited to the application.  This is
>unavoidable, and we'll probably have to wait for another generation
>of hardware and software before generic v.32bis modems are really
>"plug-n-play".

I'd like to voice strong agreement with this, particularly the last
paragraph.  My Supra worked like a charm straight out of the box and
has had absolutely NO troubles at all in two months of daily use for
dial-up, dial-in and file transfer. Does that make it a great modem?
Hard to say, it worked as advertised, but part of that was because I
had my system properly set up in the first place.  On my NeXTstation
(a Unix workstation for those who don't know) generic 2400 baud modems
were just plug-and-play, but the first 9600  modem I used (an ATI I
borrowed from the department for a few months) caused me all sorts of
troubles. None of those problems proved to be anything *wrong* with the
ATI (itself a pretty good data modem) or with the NeXT; instead it
turned out I just had to get everything set up "just right" so they
could work together.  Took me a couple of weeks of regular tinkering,
and I had the advantages of a background as a low-level Unix sys-admin
(and good friends who had run far more complicated networks of workstations).
Given that I'd worked things out for *one* 9600 baud modem it's not
so surprising that the next one, the Supra, worked "out of the box"
but that doesn't make the ATI modem bad, or the Supra one good.

The casual user (who thinks that $300 means just a faster version of the
2400 modem he's used to) is likely in for a disappointment as problems
are encountered which actually require understanding how things work :-)

The complaints about the Supra modem seem to fall into two --- actually
I guess three --- categories:
#1 are those, from both novices and experts,  of the "it came broken" type
and these seem to be genuine problems in quality control, but (a) these
types of posts have been relatively few and seem to be becoming rarer with
time and (b) when you're getting something for such a low price  you have
to expect problems on occasion.  The thing to do is to make Supra back up
their product. (see #3 below)
#2  are the far more common complaints of "how do I get my Supra to do X?"
(or, the way it's usually written "My #$%^$*^&(%^$$# Supra won't do X!!!"
I have to take these with a grain of salt (or two) because it's never
clear whether theproblem lies with modem, the computer, the software,
the owner, or some combination. In any event "your mileage may vary"
and I don't really think these complaints say that much about the quality
of the modem (also, under these circumstances it's no surprise that the
reviews in the magazines, written by people who understand the details of
how modems work, are generally favorable).

#3 are the complaints occasionally voiced about Supra's poor customer
service.  Again, I tend to be a little wary here.  Having worked in
retail some myself I view "customer service" as being a function of
both the customer and the company --- i.e. there are some people who
aren't happy no matter what you do for them, while others will give
up too easily and not let you know what the real problem is.  All I can
say is that Supra has messed up a bit for me in this regard --- they failed
to send me notification of the H and J ROM upgrades, but that whenever I
call them about something (on their 800 number mind you) I can always find
someone willing to take the time to give me a hand. Perhaps I've been
lucky, or (more likely in my opinion) perhaps it's because I take a
definite attitude of "polite but firm" inthese cases.  I don't yell or
make demands, but also make it clear there is a problem which has to be
corrected before I'll be satisfied.  Of course, this process is generally
helped by the fact that if something is wrong I usually have some idea of
what and why; once again, the casual user using their first high speed
modem will be at a disadvantage and the obvious temptation is to blame
Supra.

Overall I think it's a great modem for the price, but I have no doubt
that if I'd sprung the extra $ for a USR or a Telebit I'd be
happier still (with the modem, but not with my bank account :-)

Tom