petty@ralvm31.vnet.ibm.com ("Jack Petty") (06/20/91)
This will probably be of interest. I have deleted some boilerplate.
Jack Petty
&C -91C0619011- WORLD NEWS TODAY JUN 19 1991 871560
&D Telebit Offers Support Of V.32bis Standard.
&DD 1 170B0631
910619
FULL TEXT ONLINE
Telebit Corp. (NASDAQ:TBIT), a pioneer of high-speed!%modems,!"
dial-up internetworking, and wide-area communication products
announced Wednesday an upgrade path from its T1600 V.32!%modem!"to the
CCITT V.32bis standard.
"Supporting the V.32bis standard is consistent with Telebit's
continuing commitment to provide upgrade paths to our customers,"
said Michael K. Ballard, vice president of Business Development.
This policy will allow any new or existing T1600 customer to
upgrade from the V.32 standard speed of 9,600 bps to the 14,400 bps
capability provided by V.32bis. The T1600 upgrade price will be
$249.
Telebit Corp., Sunnyvale
Mary Hopkins, 408/745-3061, or 1-800-TELEBIT
Business Wire
Sunnyvale, CAedhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) (06/23/91)
In article <9106210703.AA23753@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> petty@ralvm31.vnet.ibm.com ("Jack Petty") writes: >This will probably be of interest. I have deleted some boilerplate. => . . . . . . => This policy will allow any new or existing T1600 customer to => upgrade from the V.32 standard speed of 9,600 bps to the 14,400 bps => capability provided by V.32bis. The T1600 upgrade price will be => $249. Interesting; that's almost half what I paid for my T1600 in the first place; $545+$249=$794, which is quite a bit more than, say, a USR V.32bis modem ($595 or so). I'll be quite interested to see how the two compare in performance. -Ed Hall edhall@rand.org
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (06/23/91)
edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) writes: >In article <9106210703.AA23753@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> petty@ralvm31.vnet.ibm.com ("Jack Petty") writes: >>This will probably be of interest. I have deleted some boilerplate. >=> . . . . . . >=> This policy will allow any new or existing T1600 customer to >=> upgrade from the V.32 standard speed of 9,600 bps to the 14,400 bps >=> capability provided by V.32bis. The T1600 upgrade price will be >=> $249. >Interesting; that's almost half what I paid for my T1600 in the first >place; $545+$249=$794, which is quite a bit more than, say, a USR >V.32bis modem ($595 or so). I'll be quite interested to see how the >two compare in performance. I would venture them to perform quite close.. The T1600 is more expensive, and Telebit in the past (at least with my dealings) have been friendly on the phone, but on the other hand they wanted to charge me for firmware upgrades - while USR has ALWAYS provided me FREE firmware upgrades. Both companies have 800 support. Let's face it, since USR has been shipping v.32bis now for 8 months - they have most of the bugs worked out - where as telebit is just jumping on the bandwagon. Will telebit be raising the retail price of the T1600 when v.32bis is included? -- Larry Snyder, NSTAR Public Access Unix 219-289-0287/317-251-7391 HST/PEP/V.32/v.32bis/v.42bis regional UUCP mapping coordinator {larry@nstar.rn.com, ..!uunet!nstar.rn.com!larry}
jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) (06/24/91)
In article <1991Jun23.122514.27945@nstar.rn.com> larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes: > I would venture them to perform quite close.. The T1600 is more > expensive, and Telebit in the past (at least with my dealings) have > been friendly on the phone, but on the other hand they wanted to charge > me for firmware upgrades - while USR has ALWAYS provided me FREE > firmware upgrades. Both companies have 800 support. Let's face it, > since USR has been shipping v.32bis now for 8 months - they have most > of the bugs worked out - where as telebit is just jumping on the bandwagon. I phoned Telebit tech support the other day since I was having some problems connecting with some sites at 9600bps with MNP5. I spoke to a fellow named Randy Dole. He was *very* helpful and agreed to send out the latest T2500 ROMs (v7.03) to me to figure out if that was the problem. The ROMs came a couple of days later (FedEx!), free of charge of everything. The only stipulation was that I return the old 7.00 ROMs to them. Fine, I sent it back SnailMail ( 98 cents ). So.... I don't know why Telebit charged you. Or why they didn't charge me. But I just wanted to straighten out that they don't charge everyone for upgrades. And no, I'm no-one special, I only have one T2500 and that's about it. No inside connections. Now, I'd *love* to see v32bis on the T2500. But I hear that it just doesn't have enough horsepower (not to mention the serial port is stuck at 19200 max). Sigh........ I wish Telebit would do *something* about the v32bis solution. Kind of reminds me of Apple..... A great company with great products, that slept on its laurels for *too* long. - jiro nakamura jiro@shaman.com -- Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com Shaman Consulting +1 607 277-1440 Voice/Fax/Data "Bring your dead, dying shamans here!"
gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) (06/24/91)
In article <1991Jun23.174109.2978@shaman.com> jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) writes: >In article <1991Jun23.122514.27945@nstar.rn.com> larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry >Snyder) writes: >> >> [...] >> ...and Telebit in the past (at least with my dealings) have >> been friendly on the phone, but on the other hand they wanted to charge >> me for firmware upgrades - while USR has ALWAYS provided me FREE >> firmware upgrades. >> > > I phoned Telebit tech support the other day since I was having some >problems connecting with some sites at 9600bps with MNP5. I spoke >to a fellow named Randy Dole. He was *very* helpful and agreed to send >out the latest T2500 ROMs (v7.03) to me to figure out if that was >the problem. > So.... I don't know why Telebit charged you. Or why they didn't charge >me. But I just wanted to straighten out that they don't charge everyone >for upgrades. And no, I'm no-one special, I only have one T2500 and >that's about it. No inside connections. > It's pretty simple, actually. If you're having problems because of a bug in the firmware, and a new version of firmware is available that fixes that bug, you get the upgrade at no charge. If you're simply looking to get a new feature (for example V.42/V.42bis or Password Security), or just want the "latest and greatest" for no other reason besides "because it's there", then you'll have to pay to get the upgrade. In other words: If you need a fix, it's free; if you just want more bells and whistles, it's not free. > > Now, I'd *love* to see v32bis on the T2500. But I hear that it just >doesn't have enough horsepower (not to mention the serial port is stuck >at 19200 max). Sigh........ I wish Telebit would do *something* about >the v32bis solution. Kind of reminds me of Apple..... A great company >with great products, that slept on its laurels for *too* long. > Please rest assured that Telebit will not leave T2500 owners swinging in the wind. I can't give specifics (mostly because I haven't been told them), but Telebit is not going to ignore the needs of their customers for V.32bis. The recent announcement of an upgrade price for the T1600 is evidence of that. The T1600 has been on the market for only seven months, and therefore represents a small part of Telebit's customer base. If Telebit is going to make V.32bis available for their (relatively) few T1600 customers, do you really think they will ignore the large numbers of TB+ and T2500 customers...? >Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com -- .------------------------------------------------------------------------. | Greg Andrews | UUCP: {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!gandrews | | | Internet: gandrews@netcom.COM | `------------------------------------------------------------------------'
hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) (06/24/91)
In article <1991Jun24.014347.5895@netcom.COM> gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) writes: > [...] >Please rest assured that Telebit will not leave T2500 owners swinging in >the wind. I can't give specifics (mostly because I haven't been told >them), but Telebit is not going to ignore the needs of their customers >for V.32bis. The recent announcement of an upgrade price for the T1600 >is evidence of that. The T1600 has been on the market for only seven >months, and therefore represents a small part of Telebit's customer base. >[...] And after seven months they expect me (actually, mine are about 2 months old) to make an investment of more than half the cost of the new modem to upgrade it to a standard that was finished when I purchased the modem. If all that it takes is a firmware upgrade, then I don't appreciate being gouged for my brand loyalty (that's what I get for not switching brands to "that other modem company" who has had a V.32bis modem out for a while now). If it takes new hardware, then why wasn't someone watching the shop while V.32bis was being developed (surely someone was paying attention, no?)? Can someone from Telebit explain what we are getting for our $$$? It's not like we've been using these modems for years and now want a free ride to a brand new standard (this argument might hold for the T2500 users though). Those of us who purchased T1600's new damn well that V.32bis was coming *soon* and trusted Telebit to give us an easy, reasonably priced upgrade path. g. -- George Hartzell voice: (415) 725-7421 Stanford Yeast Genome Project fax: (415)-723-7016 Stanford School of Medicine, Rm S337 email: hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU Stanford, CA 94305-5120
bill@camco.Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) (06/24/91)
In <1991Jun24.045215.12967@morrow.stanford.edu> hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) writes: >And after seven months they expect me (actually, mine are about 2 >months old) to make an investment of more than half the cost of the >new modem to upgrade it to a standard that was finished when I >purchased the modem. If all that it takes is a firmware upgrade, then >.....deleted..... I'll second this! I just installed a t1600 here about a week ago (it sat on the shelf for a month till I found time to attack installation). If I'd wanted to pay 250 more I'd kick in an extra 50 bucks or so and waited for the T2500 replacement! IMHO, Telebit will be making a major PR gaffe if they charge existing T1600 customers more than a nominal fee for this upgrade. This reminds me of Unify Corporations asking me to pay $1,500 for an ``upgrade'' to the UNIFY 4.0 database product when all I wanted was bug fixes that had been around for years. UNIFY was a major player the the Unix DBMS market when I started using it in 1984. Where are they now? Bill -- INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software UUCP: ...!thebes!camco!bill 6641 East Mercer Way uunet!camco!bill Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) (06/25/91)
In article <1991Jun24.045215.12967@morrow.stanford.edu> hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) writes: > >And after seven months they expect me (actually, mine are about 2 >months old) to make an investment of more than half the cost of the >new modem to upgrade it to a standard that was finished when I >purchased the modem. If all that it takes is a firmware upgrade, then >I don't appreciate being gouged for my brand loyalty (that's what I >get for not switching brands to "that other modem company" who has had >a V.32bis modem out for a while now). If it takes new hardware, then >why wasn't someone watching the shop while V.32bis was being developed >(surely someone was paying attention, no?)? > I wish I could explain the reasoning behind the upgrade, but as I said before, I simply don't have any more details besides those given in the announcement. I don't know whether it's going to be merely a new set of chips or a trade-in to a new modem. > >Can someone from Telebit explain what we are getting for our $$$? > I hope that you got a V.32/MNP5/V.42bis modem with 38400 bps support at a price competitive with similar brands? > >Those of us who purchased T1600's new damn well that V.32bis was coming >*soon* and trusted Telebit to give us an easy, reasonably priced upgrade >path. > Given the info that we actually have about the upgrade (it will exist and it will cost about $250), are you saying that it's not easy or reasonably priced? >George Hartzell email: hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU -- .------------------------------------------------------------------------. | Greg Andrews | UUCP: {apple,amdahl,claris}!netcom!gandrews | | | Internet: gandrews@netcom.COM | `------------------------------------------------------------------------'
zjdg11@hou.amoco.com (Jim Graham) (06/25/91)
In article <1096@camco.Celestial.COM> bill@camco.Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes: >In <1991Jun24.045215.12967@morrow.stanford.edu> hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) writes: > >>And after seven months they expect me (actually, mine are about 2 >>months old) to make an investment of more than half the cost of the >>new modem to upgrade it to a standard that was finished when I >>purchased the modem. If all that it takes is a firmware upgrade, then >>.....deleted..... > >I'll second this! ditto! I have a Telebit T-2500 that I've owned since Feb. --- if Telebit comes along with a REASONABLY priced upgrade to v.32bis (I'm told by our local rep that firmware upgrades are typically $ 75 or so....I could live with that for V.32bis), but if they come along and make the upgrade cost any more than that, you can bet I won't be getting it! I only paid $ 800 (after tax, postage, etc) for the modem....I'd be insane to pay something like $ 250 for a firmware revision. Let's just hope they're reading all this. --jim Standard disclaimer....These thoughts are mine, not my employer's. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Share and Enjoy! (Sirius Cybernetics Corporation, complaints division) 73, de n5ial Internet: zjdg11@hou.amoco.com or grahj@gagme.chi.il.us Amateur Radio: TCP/IP: jim@n5ial.ampr.org (44.72.47.193) Packet: BBS went QRT for good...still searching for new one. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) (06/26/91)
In article <1991Jun25.042541.3928@netcom.COM> gandrews@netcom.COM (Greg Andrews) writes: [...] In article <1991Jun24.045215.12967@morrow.stanford.edu> hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (George Hartzell) writes: > [...] I wish I could explain the reasoning behind the upgrade, but as I said before, I simply don't have any more details besides those given in the announcement. I don't know whether it's going to be merely a new set of chips or a trade-in to a new modem. I understand that we should keep our ears tuned for more info. It should be coming "soon". >Can someone from Telebit explain what we are getting for our $$$? I hope that you got a V.32/MNP5/V.42bis modem with 38400 bps support at a price competitive with similar brands? I meant the price of the upgrade. I was (obliquely) asking whether it would be a modem swap, a board swap, a chip swap, or??? >Those of us who purchased T1600's new damn well that V.32bis was coming >*soon* and trusted Telebit to give us an easy, reasonably priced upgrade >path. Given the info that we actually have about the upgrade (it will exist and it will cost about $250), are you saying that it's not easy or reasonably priced? No, I don't consider it easy (not if I have explain the cost) or reasonably priced. Imagine the following conversation with one's [possibly imaginary] boss: Boss: Didn't you just buy those modems for $X? Me: Yep. Boss: And now you want 1/2X to upgrade them to a [not so] new standard [V.32bis]? Me: Yep. Boss: Isn't it true that you could have purchased modems from *censored* that already did V.32bis for 1.2X? Me: Uhm, yep. Boss: Well? Me: Well, I expected (based on Telebit's past track record of providing good support and accepting responsibility for their problems [e.g. free ROM replacements to cover bugs]) that their newly designed modem [based on their custom DSP chipset] would either be able to handle a standard could not possibly have snuck up on their engineers (they must have someone following standards, right?), or that they would admit their goof and not make me pay to undo it. Now, maybe one should never trust a company to look out for anything other than their own interests, but that's awfully cynical. How can they hope to build up any brand loyalty (why do they think I bought the T1600, even when I could have had a V.23bis modem for a bit more? 'cuz I like[d] their products and attitudes). **Remember that I'm not talking about upgrading an older modem to a flashy new standard that was only a twinkle in the standard's committee's collective eye when the modem was designed, but rather one which I only recently bought (one of them isn't even unpacked yet).** I think that we should try to control our hysteria on this until we have more info (what was that about Pandora's box?). Once we know what's involved, whether it might be available discounted from our vendors (after all, telebit quotes list prices for their modems, maybe this is a list price for the upgrade [but then again, why would a vendor discount the upgrade, they have a relatively captive market]), whether there might be a grandfather clause (modems purchased since company X announced *their* V.32bis modem will get a free/cheap upgrade and/or a free Telebit frisbee as a thank you gift). To any Telebit folk who might be watching, What's Up? g. -- George Hartzell voice: (415) 725-7421 Stanford Yeast Genome Project fax: (415)-723-7016 Stanford School of Medicine, Rm S337 email: hartzell@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU Stanford, CA 94305-5120
mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier) (06/27/91)
For Better or Worse My name is Marty Likier and I'd like to announce my presence on the internet. I'm the marketing product manager for modems at Telebit. Although I am new to the Telebit organization (about 6 months), I recognize the fact that Telebit has built a very strong reputation for being an innovator in leading edge technology. Our innovations have lead to a very loyal following. Right now, I also recognize that many of our past (and hopefully future supporters) are questioning what is going on within the Telebit organization. This is mainly due to the fact that Telebit, as an organization, has said very little publically. Lost the technological lead? I have heard many comments to the effect that "Telebit is no longer a technology leader" and "just about every modem manufacturer has announced, or is currently shipping a V.32bis product and Telebit has none". Well for the record, I would like to state that Telebit is still a technology leader. This may not be so apparent to all of you who view Telebit as simply a modem manufacturer. But the fact is (1) October 1990, Telebit was the first to offer dial-up internetworking with the Telebit NetBlazer, a dial-up IP router. (2) May 1991, Telebit was the first company to offer a LAN async communication server (ACS) with interface speeds of 57,600bps (our Telebit ACS). You may believe that we are lagging in the time to market a V.32bis modem, but actually this modem lag is a planned part of a grander scheme called product diversification. This diversification is a Telebit metamorphosis where we are transforming ourselves from being a box (modem) manufacturer to becoming a total dial-up system solution company. Additional realities of this diversification is that engineering resources, ie dollars, people, etc., must be divided between all areas of our new product developments. These operating expenses are a fact of life and yes we do operate under a budget. Product upgrades Telebit has made a tradition of providing upgrade paths for our customers. This tradition includes the recently announced V.32bis upgrade for the T1600 and yes it entails a return to the factory for a hardware replacement. Believe me if it was just a simple matter of replacing a ROM we wouldn't be charging $249! However I can assure you that Telebit will not penalize you for buying the T1600 and wanting to upgrade to V.32bis. By this I mean that the list price for the V.32bis modem offering will not be less than the T1600 list price of $795 plus the cost of the $249 upgrade ($1044). I know this argument is based on the fact that you paid list for your T1600, which I know none of you have, but even if you paid the street price of $500-$550 and add the $249 you will still come up with a very good price/performance ratio for a V.32bis modem. T2500/PEP owners Nothing to report today other than to say all of you have not been forgotten. I am very interested in hearing your comments or questions and I will address them to the best of my ability. I believe that there are many facts about Telebit that you are unaware of and I would be glad to share them with each of you over a cup of coffee. I can be reached at: ============================================================================ Marty Likier | Marketing Product Manager | "You are only limited by your Telebit Corporation | imagination...which means you are Voice: 408-745-3126 | limited at all." FAX: 408-745-3802 | unknown internet: mlikier@telebit.com | ============================================================================
jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) (06/27/91)
In article <1991Jun26.202632.21097@telebit.com> mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier) writes: > Lost the technological lead? > I have heard many comments to the effect that "Telebit is no longer a > technology leader" and "just about every modem manufacturer has > announced, or is currently shipping a V.32bis product and Telebit has > none". Well for the record, I would like to state that Telebit is still > a technology leader. This may not be so apparent to all of you who view > Telebit as simply a modem manufacturer. But the fact is (1) October 1990, > Telebit was the first to offer dial-up internetworking with the Telebit > NetBlazer, a dial-up IP router. (2) May 1991, Telebit was the first company > to offer a LAN async communication server (ACS) with interface speeds of > 57,600bps (our Telebit ACS). You may believe that we are lagging in the time > to market a V.32bis modem, but actually this modem lag is a planned part > of a grander scheme called product diversification. This diversification > is a Telebit metamorphosis where we are transforming ourselves from being > a box (modem) manufacturer to becoming a total dial-up system solution > company. Additional realities of this diversification is that engineering > resources, ie dollars, people, etc., must be divided between all areas > of our new product developments. These operating expenses are a fact of > life and yes we do operate under a budget. v32bis for my T2500 would be nice, but what about an upgrade for the PEP modulation scheme? I mean, 18,000 bps used to be great throughput but now with the advent of v32bis with 19200 bps FULL DUPLEX, I think the usefullness of PEP has taken a nose dive (except for noisy circuits where it is still the industry leader). Come on Telebit, surely with all the technological changes that have happened, you can easily double PEP's throughput (or at least make it full duplex) can't you? - jiro nakamura jiro@shaman.com -- Jiro Nakamura jiro@shaman.com Shaman Consulting +1 607 277-1440 Voice/Fax/Data "Bring your dead, dying shamans here!"
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) (06/28/91)
In a letter to All, Marty Likier (mlikier@telebit.com ) wrote: >My name is Marty Likier and I'd like to announce my presence >on the internet. I'm the marketing product manager for modems >at Telebit. I'm sure that a lot of people on the Net will have something to say to you! I read with interest your comments about Telebit's diversification and they came as no surprise to me, really; in fact, I suspect that they represent what Netlanders fear most: Telebit is developing a corporate independence from the future of the modem market. You see, as long as Telebit *was* modems, it was forced to keep up with the latest and the greatest, and to offer its customers the best service. This, in large part, was responsible for Telebit's "loyal following" (the other major factor was UUCP spoofing, which people have since discovered is not necessary on V.32 or V.32bis modems, the latter of which can provide higher throughput than PEP anyway). The modem market is changing, with the advent of common standards that no longer require a compromise in features or speed, and competition is bringing the prices down quickly. Telebit customers *need* Telebit to follow those trends... if diversification implies any level of compromise whatsoever to Telebit's modem operation, then Telebit had better prepare to fall from its current position as a market influence into the ranks of the also-rans. There is no room among industry leaders for any manufacturer who is not prepared, for whatever reason, to dedicate its ALL to the maintenance of a quality product with current features and competetive prices. -- Geoffrey Welsh - Operator, Izot's Swamp BBS (FidoNet 1:221/171) root@zswamp.uucp or ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root 602-66 Mooregate Crescent, Kitchener, ON, N2M 5E6 Canada (519)741-9553 "He who claims to know everything can't possibly know much" -me
chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) (06/28/91)
According to mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier): >.. the recently announced V.32bis upgrade for the T1600 ... entails a >return to the factory for a hardware replacement. What?! If memory serves, the V.32bis standard was close to completion before the T1600 even existed. How smart was it for Telebit to go ahead with a modem that would need a hardware change for V.32bis? Answer: not at all. I wish I'd bought USR. -- Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT <chip@tct.com>, <uunet!pdn!tct!chip> "I want to mention that my opinions whether real or not are MY opinions." -- the inevitable William "Billy" Steinmetz
dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun26.202632.21097@telebit.com> mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier) writes: | Lost the technological lead? | I have heard many comments to the effect that "Telebit is no longer a | technology leader" and "just about every modem manufacturer has | announced, or is currently shipping a V.32bis product and Telebit has | none". Well for the record, I would like to state that Telebit is still | a technology leader. This may not be so apparent to all of you who view | Telebit as simply a modem manufacturer. But the fact is (1) October 1990, | Telebit was the first to offer dial-up internetworking with the Telebit | NetBlazer, a dial-up IP router. (2) May 1991, Telebit was the first company | to offer a LAN async communication server (ACS) with interface speeds of | 57,600bps (our Telebit ACS). (1) Isn't the Netblazer a copy of KA9Q running in a box full of clone hardware? (2) My copy of the 'Telebit ACS' is labelled 'Paradata ACS' with a sticker that says 'Now a Telebit company'. Expansion through acquisition is fine (McGraw-Hill is rather fond of it), but I don't really count that as technological innovation on the part of the acquiring company. -- Craig Jackson dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com {bbn,axiom,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}
emv@msen.com (Ed Vielmetti) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun26.202632.21097@telebit.com> mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier) writes:
You may believe that we are lagging in the time
to market a V.32bis modem, but actually this modem lag is a planned part
of a grander scheme called product diversification.
So you're going to lag behind in more areas than just V.32bis? Charming.
--Ed
emv@msen.com
feeling grumpy because we still can't do dialup UUCP through our
netblazer, since even if you're in binary telnet mode it eats the
escape character.mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) (06/29/91)
In article <1991Jun27.030207.1969@shaman.com> jiro@shaman.com (Jiro Nakamura) writes: >but now with the advent of v32bis with 19200 bps FULL DUPLEX, I think Minor nit-picky point: V.32bis is 14400bps FDX, not 19200bps. (However, with V.42 and even a little bit of compression from V.42bis, you'll probably get at least 19200bps throughput.) >happened, you can easily double PEP's throughput (or at least make it >full duplex) can't you? One thing I'd like to see in PEP is dynamic, partial line turnaround. The connection starts out as 50/50 send/receive, and as more data is sent in one direction than the other, the modems gradually turn around more and more channels. If protocol spoofing is active, perhaps the connection could start out as 75/25 send/receive or something like that, to give you increased initial throughput. Such a modification would allow much better performance on full-duplex links without much effort. The modems would just have to keep track of how many characters have been sent and received (something I believe they already do, anyway), and negotiate some way to turn around individual channels. -- Marc Unangst | mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us | "Bus error: passengers dumped" ...!hela!mudos!mju |
png@netcom.COM (Peter Glaskowsky) (06/29/91)
From article <286B5AD0.1C4B@tct.com>, by chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg): > > If memory serves, the V.32bis standard was close to completion before > the T1600 even existed. How smart was it for Telebit to go ahead with > a modem that would need a hardware change for V.32bis? Answer: not at > all. I may just finish writing this message, and then delete it, but we'll see... ...See, I was a modem design engineer at Telebit from May through September of last year. You'll find my initials on the bottom of your T1600 PCB, underneath the line interface transformer. So much for my credentials. I was the lead engineer on a different modem design project, but when the Board of Directors decided to lay off 10% of the company, I was one of the unlucky ones. Perhaps the fact that I'd completed my part of the work on the new design just the day before had something to do it. V.32bis wasn't complete when the T1600 design was finalized, but you're right; basically we knew what would be required, and the T1600 wasn't fast enough to handle it. It was never meant to be! This was a deliberate and _correct_ plan. There's such a thing as cost-effectiveness, you know. That, and a desire to provide a widely diversified product line, made it inevitable that Telebit should have a less-expensive model with V.32 but not V.32bis. A V.32bis modem will necessarily be significantly more expensive than a V.32-only modem; it would be silly for Telebit to design a V.32-only modem which was burdened with all the extra costs required for V.32bis. Ford doesn't put the a V-8 engine in every car, just so it can offer cheap firmware upgrades. It wouldn't be sensible. Why expect modem vendors to do this? I'm not going to go into the details of how much more expensive a V.32bis modem needs to be, and I'm not going to tell anyone what I know about Telebit's future modem plans, so don't bug me for that kind of stuff. I really don't have much respect for Telebit's BOD, but I think they have a heck of a good engineering team, and I'm not going to second-guess them. . png
sethcohn@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us (seth cohn) (06/29/91)
> You see, as long as Telebit *was* modems, it was forced to keep up with > the latest and the greatest, and to offer its customers the best service. > This, in large part, was responsible for Telebit's "loyal following" (the > other major factor was UUCP spoofing, which people have since discovered is > not necessary on V.32 or V.32bis modems, the latter of which can provide > higher throughput than PEP anyway). > -- > Geoffrey Welsh - Operator, Izot's Swamp BBS (FidoNet 1:221/171) > root@zswamp.uucp or ..uunet!watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root > 602-66 Mooregate Crescent, Kitchener, ON, N2M 5E6 Canada (519)741-9553 - ok, well, you claim that a v32bis connection with UUCP can get better CPS than a uucp spoofed PEP, if so HOW? my understanding (and mind you, i'm not the clearest on this.. mostly from a friend) is that UUCP looks for too many "acknowledges" of some sort, to allow the connection speed to get very high. I was told 700 cps on a v32bis uucp connection was good questions: 1) does someone have a list of CPSs for v32bis, pep (with at w/o spoofing) and anyother major standards like v32 and HST? 2) if v32bis CAN do betterthan pep w/ spoofing, HOW does it have to be setup? any thing special? 3) would/could modifying the uucp code itself (in the uucico) be 1) posible 2)worthwhile 3)what should be changed? Seth (hoping to get a usenet feed someday on my v32bis USR modem) Seth Cohn, Service Tech. 607-273-2815 voice 607-272-7002 BBS All things posted are opinions by me, of me, for me, or to me. And another thing..........I'm not sure you're real.
edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) (06/30/91)
In article <286B5AD0.1C4B@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes: >According to mlikier@telebit.com (Marty Likier): >>.. the recently announced V.32bis upgrade for the T1600 ... entails a >>return to the factory for a hardware replacement. > >What?! > >If memory serves, the V.32bis standard was close to completion before >the T1600 even existed. How smart was it for Telebit to go ahead with >a modem that would need a hardware change for V.32bis? Answer: not at >all. In fairness to Telebit, I see that Hayes has had the same experience. V.32bis appears to be a bit harder to do *right* than was first expected; it wouldn't surprise me if Telebit--like Toby says about Hayes--decided they couldn't maintain their standards with just a change in firmware. >I wish I'd bought USR. I did. The T-1600 does significantly better on marginal connections than my USR Dual Standard, even with the USR running at 9600 instead of 14400. (It seems to do a LOT better than the Telebit T-2500 using V.32; my impression is that Telebit rushed this one to market a bit too soon just to get on the V.32 bandwagon, and before they made any real commitment to the standard.) If the V.32bis version of the T-1600 maintains the same level of performance as the V.32 version, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it over USR--if price is no object. For some folks, that's a pretty big "If", though. I'm still debating whether to shell out the $249 for the upgrade. -Ed Hall edhall@rand.org
drazil@netcom.COM (Devin Ben-Hur) (06/30/91)
In article <1991Jun29.224210.16470@rand.org> edhall@rand.org (Ed Hall) writes: >I did. The T-1600 does significantly better on marginal connections >than my USR Dual Standard, even with the USR running at 9600 instead >of 14400. Have you called USR tech support? There have been a number of bug fixes to the USR V.32[bis] firmware in the last 6 months. If the dates on your ROMs (ATI7 will display these) are older than May, your marginal connection problems with the Dual may well be firmware bugs. -- Devin Ben-Hur 415/948-1067, 415/949-3941 drazil@netcom.com "To go is to return. Take the afternoon off."
tony@jassys.UUCP (Tony Holden) (07/01/91)
sethcohn@alchemy.ithaca.ny.us (seth cohn) writes: > I was told 700 cps on a v32bis uucp connection was good I get +-872 with just plain v.32. -- Tony Holden live on the edge, tony@jassys Bank in Texas
nolan@helios.unl.edu (Michael Nolan) (07/01/91)
On a UUCP connection at 19200 between two T1600's, I'm getting speeds of around 918 bytes/second for binary files, 1314 bytes/second for text files. (Setting S111=30 for uucp g spoofing has little effect, I get 1305 on text without it.) (19200 is the fastest I can connect the modem to one system, when I try Zmodem to a Mac Plus connecting at 38400, I get 2200+ cps for text files, 1100-1200 for binary files.) By way of comparison, when I receive news from a T2500 using V.32, I get about 715 bytes/second. Michael Nolan nolan@helios.unl.edu