storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) (05/05/91)
I have recently been hearing a lot about a CompuComm CSP modem which is a 9600bps modem which can do up to 38,4kpbs with compression, yet it is not V.32 compliant, and is one quarter the price at about $180. I simply do not trust these modems and would like to know (much) more about them, such as how they get the speed without the price, and why no modem has used this up until now... Any information would help clear up a LOT of problems. Thanks you. ./*- -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ storm@cs.mcgill.ca McGill University It's 11pm, do YOU Marc Wandschneider Montreal, CANADA know what time it is? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
shihsun@roof.Princeton.EDU (Shih-ping S Sun) (05/06/91)
In article <1991May5.000049.8146@cs.mcgill.ca> storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: > >I have recently been hearing a lot about a CompuComm CSP modem which is a >9600bps modem which can do up to 38,4kpbs with compression, yet it is not V.32 >compliant, and is one quarter the price at about $180. > >I simply do not trust these modems and would like to know (much) more about >them, such as how they get the speed without the price, and why no modem has >used this up until now... The CompuCom modem is $169 for the Sysop Deal, from what i undersatnd. They have a pretty large following in the WWIVnet (of which I am a sysop). In fact, one of our servers (@1021 in St. Louis) uses a CompuCom. They use a proprietary 9600 protocol, so a CompuCom will only do high speeds with another CompuCom. I am not sure that they will do 38.4. All CompuCom boards are listed as 19.2 in the WWIvnet data files. S. Spencer Sun '94
jdb@bitcave.in-berlin.de (Joern D. Busch) (05/06/91)
storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: >I have recently been hearing a lot about a CompuComm CSP modem which is a >9600bps modem which can do up to 38,4kpbs with compression, yet it is not V.32 >compliant, and is one quarter the price at about $180. I am using a CC SpeedModem Combo for several months now, running it in my BBS, joining the CC sysop program. If you'll contact CC, say hi from me to Cynthia Murray (you'll probably get her on the phone). First of all, forget about the 38.400. That speed is supposed to be accomplished by an external protocol which is written especially for the SpeedModem {Combo,Champ}. Also forget about compatibility with any other highspeed modem at speeds above 2400/MNP. That out of the way, these modems really do deliver 9600bps when talking to one of their kind, with or without their own error correction protocol. Also you get 2400/MNP5 with any other modem supporting that, and with the SpeedModem Combo 9600bps send/receive fax, too (BitFax software included). As far as I know, current pricing is $279 for the Combo, and $159 for the Champ. They builded their highspeed technology from scratch, with the goal of doing it as cheap as possible. One particulary interesting design decision is that they made the signal processor usable by any other firmware they might come up with. Plans exist to implement voice mail capabilities some time this sommer. These modems come as internal models, configurable in 22 combinations of the port adresses 278, 2e8, 368, 378 and 3e8 with the IRQs 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9. Standard COM1 and COM2 as well as quasi-standard COM3 and COM4 are possible, of course. The modem card looks like a 16450 to your software, but it doesn't really have that UART on it. With DOS and X00, I lock the speed to 19200 and have no problems with it. I also tried to install it in a unix box, but the FAS async driver doesn't recognise the 16450 emulation. The stock asy driver doesn't work very well at high speeds, it especially doesn't seem to do hw handshaking right. If anyone succeeded in using a CC in a Unix/386 box, I'd definetely like to hear about that. Of course, it is a pity that you cannot talk to other highspeed modems with a CC, but that's why it is that cheap (they say that V.32[bis] is very expensive to build). You get a lot of value: 2400/MNP5, 9600 fax, 9600 CSP. Also they start to get wide-spread: EXEC-PC already has some lines equipped with CCs, I heard. I also heard CI$ is considering it. Customer service is excellent, firmware upgrades are free, warranty is 5 (five) years, and you have a 30 day money back guarantee. One warning to overseas, though: here in Germany, I had some problems with Germany's non-standard telephone lines. A change in a resistor value helps for nearly all installations, but I had one case where we weren't able to make the CC work (yet). Note that this doesn't apply to USA (and Canada?) users, I heard they work nicely out of the box over there. I hope this is the kind of information you were looking for. I'm afraid it sounds a bit like sales blurb; if so, please ignore that. Joern. -- Joern D. Busch, Postfach 210401, 1000 Berlin 21, FRG, (+49 30) 3931111 jdb@bitcave.in-berlin.de ..!mcsun!unido!fub!einoed!bitcave!jdb ..which reality?
larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) (05/06/91)
shihsun@roof.Princeton.EDU (Shih-ping S Sun) writes: >The CompuCom modem is $169 for the Sysop Deal, from what i undersatnd. >They have a pretty large following in the WWIVnet (of which I am a >sysop). In fact, one of our servers (@1021 in St. Louis) uses a >CompuCom. They use a proprietary 9600 protocol, so a CompuCom will only >do high speeds with another CompuCom. I am not sure that they will do >38.4. All CompuCom boards are listed as 19.2 in the WWIvnet data files. what protocol do these modems use? Is it full duplex? -- 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}
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) (05/06/91)
In a letter to All, Marc WANDSCHNEIDER (storm@cs.mcgill.ca ) wrote: >I have recently been hearing a lot about a CompuComm CSP [...] >Any information would help clear up a LOT of problems. Well, a friend has one on order for us to play with, but it has yet to appear and CompuCom claims that they're short of some chip needed to manufacture it. According to their advertising, the CompuCom is a true 9600 bps modem that simply isn't compatible with any of the existing standards (keep in mind that the Telebit Trailblazer, the USRobotics Courier HST, and the Hayes V-Series Smartmodem 9600 are also not compatible with any 'standard' save their own, but they're all perfectly good 9600+ bps modems). They're currently available only in PC-internal modems (supposedly with an NS16550AFV for a UART). I can't see any reason why they shouldn't live up to CompuCom's claims, except perhaps that their price is much lower than any other 9600 bps dialup modem I've seen and the resulting value would be too good to be true. Keep in mind, though, that there aren't yet many CompuComs out there and that, until your feed or some of your fave BBSes get one, it's just a 2400MNP modem. Still it's not badly priced for a decent 2400MNP... -- 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
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) (05/07/91)
In a letter to All, Larry Snyder (larry@nstar.rn.com ) wrote:
>what protocol do these modems use? Is it full duplex?
It is definitely *not* full duplex. The CompuCom folks state in their ads
(quite correctly, actually) that the echo cancellation required for full
duplex 9600 is part of what makes others' modems more expensive; USR and
Hayes both avoided full duplex when developing their proprietary 9600 bps
protocols to reduce costs.
I've been told - but can't confirm, nor can I find in the propoganda
anywhere - that the SpeedModem is asymmetrical, like the HST. If/when we get
one out here, I'll let you all know what I can find out about it.
--
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" -mesveinare@Lise.Unit.NO (Svein Are Martinsen) (05/07/91)
I have been using the speedmodem for only a few days now, but I have already been very
pleased with it.
The service from CompuCom is more than excellent. I have never been in touch with a "nicer"
and efficient company. They sent me my modem just the day I ordered it, however it took
some time by mail over to Norway.
The modem is working fine even over a very noissy internal network!
The fact that you can only speak to similar CompuCom modems at 9600 bps doesn't bother me
very much. I think you will have to search for quite some time if you are going to find even a 2400 bps modem with MNP5 and BOTH send and recieve fax (at 9600 bps) (which the CompuCom Speedmodem Combo also has).
Besides, due to the low pricing policy of CompuCom I think there won't be too long before it becomes a kind of a standard like the other 9600 bps modems (v.32, USR, Trailblazer).
The CompuCom Speedmodems (especially the Combo at $279) is so good and affordable that I couldn't afford not to buy it. Here in Norway I would have had to pay more for even a simple 2400 bps modem without MNP5 and without fax.
Joern D. Busch from Germany seemed to have minor problems connecting it to the public network (article 5299). All I had to do (in Norway) was to cross two of the wires, before
connecting it to the wall-outlet.
PS!
The best BBS for CompuCom 9600 capabilities I have been connected to (until now) is the
"Sputnik" BBS in England.
More and more BBS's seems to support the full capabilities of the CompuCom Speedmodem.
The list (that I recieved with my modem) of such BBSs is already quite long (mostly US BBSs, but according to the documentation disk more than 100 international ones are
available). However I would be glad if anybody could send me a list of EUROPEAN BBSs
currently supporting the Speedmodems 9600 facilities.
--
=======================================================
Svein Are Martinsen
Email: sveinare@idt.unit.no
sveinare@lise.unit.no
sveinare@solan.idt.no
Computer Science/Telematics, NTH, Norwayshihsun@glasses.Princeton.EDU (Shih-ping S Sun) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May05.203915.25477@nstar.rn.com> larry@nstar.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes: >shihsun@roof.Princeton.EDU (Shih-ping S Sun) writes: > >>CompuCom. They use a proprietary 9600 protocol, so a CompuCom will only > >what protocol do these modems use? Is it full duplex? Look again and you'll see your answer... <grin> I do not know if they are true full duplex (like V.32). WWIVnet transfers are primarily one-way, so full duplex is not of extreme importance to us (thus the preponderance of HST and Dual Standards in WWIVnet) S. Spencer Sun '94
rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) (05/08/91)
In article <1991May5.000049.8146@cs.mcgill.ca> storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes: > >I have recently been hearing a lot about a CompuComm CSP modem which is a >9600bps modem which can do up to 38,4kpbs with compression, yet it is not V.32 >compliant, and is one quarter the price at about $180. > >I simply do not trust these modems and would like to know (much) more about >them, such as how they get the speed without the price, and why no modem has >used this up until now... They get the speed without the price because a) they don't have to comply with any existing standards, b) everything is done with a DSP, c) it's not 9600 full duplex, with only a small backchannel I believe. Why has nobody used it up till now? Someone at CompuCom got a bright idea. CompuCom has been around for a long time, so they have had plenty of time for research. -- Standard disclaimer applies, you legalistic hacks. | Ron Dippold
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) (05/08/91)
In a letter to All, Ron Dippold (rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com ) wrote: >Why has nobody used it up till now? Someone at CompuCom got >a bright idea. >CompuCom has been around for a long time, so they have had >plenty of time for research. Their 2400 bps modems have been around for a couple of years, but I understand that their 9600 bps modem just hit the market near the end of last year. It's quite posisble that the components used have become cheap enough for CompuCom's intended market only in the past year or so. -- 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
RAF@CU.NIH.GOV ("Roger Fajman") (05/09/91)
> More and more BBS's seems to support the full capabilities of the CompuCom > Speedmodem. Here's one BBS SYSOP who does not intend to support that modem. I think that introducing a new proprietary protocol at this time is a disservice to users. Roger Fajman SYSOP, Capital PC User Group Member Information Exchange (CPCUG MIX) RAF@CU.NIH.GOV
cosheff@bitcave.in-berlin.de (Charles O. Shefflette) (05/09/91)
root@zswamp.uucp (Geoffrey Welsh) writes: > In a letter to All, Larry Snyder (larry@nstar.rn.com ) wrote: > >what protocol do these modems use? Is it full duplex? > It is definitely *not* full duplex.[...] > I've been told - but can't confirm, nor can I find in the propoganda > anywhere - that the SpeedModem is asymmetrical, like the HST. From quite a bit of experience with the CompuComs here in Germany, and the work it took to get them to work relatively reliably (along with Joern Bush and a couple of other people here) we've made a few observations: 1. The protocol is definately asymmetrical. It appears to use 300bps mode (or something close to that) while in single character mode - at that point it is full duplex. When a packet of characters is to be transmitted the modem goes to a 9600bps forward channel with a low speed (presumably around 300bps) back channel. This tends to cause some problems on extremely noisy lines, but in general is not too inconvenient. We've seen transfer rates approaching 930cps using Zmodem here. 2. After listening to it for a while, it appears that CompuCom is using the V.29 modulator to do the 9600bps data transfer. As you may or may not be aware, V.29 is the signalling protocol used by high-speed CCITT Group III FAXes. This makes quite a bit of sense, actually, since the modulator and demodulator are already existing and work quite well. This does mean, though that this is not a full duplex modem - it has a high speed forward channel (for the one which is sending the most data) and a low speed reverse channel (as mentioned above). 3. We've had quite a bit of problems getting the modems to work correctly here in Germany. You may or may not have the same types of problems in other countries. The modems appear to work quite well in the US, though. In any case, most of the problems we've had are in relation to the 9600bps modes - the 2400bps MNP5 modes are quite good in any case. After experimenting quite a bit and spending many hours working on the modems and modifying them (with a few suggestions from CC) we managed to find a combination which seems to be fairly close and only requires a bit of "playing" to make it work in most circumstances. As a result of this work we did, CC is now shippingtheir Rev 1.4 and 1.6 modems with the modifications we worked outinstalled (at least the ones headed this way.) This modem is really quite a nice modem, it does CCITT V.22, V.22bis, MNP4 and MNP5, plus the CCITT 9600bps protocl, PLUS CCITT Group III FAX at up to 9600bps! That's quite a steal for the price, even if the 9600bps is a bit of a problem. I'm really waiting for the external version of the modem to come out though. I'd really rather not have an internal one if I could avoid it.... Hope this helps. Chuck Shefflette =========================================================================== cosheff@bitcave.in-berlin.de | Reality? We don't need no steenking | reality here!
hendricp@wanda.waiariki.ac.nz (05/12/91)
We installed a SpeedModem in our BBS in December, and after ironing out some initial problems it's working well here. At first, it wouldn't recognise 'busy' signals correctly, mistaking ringing for busy. Shortly after reporting this to CCC, a free upgrade EEPROM appeared, which fixed it. Apart from that, no phone compatibility probs here in New Zealand. I've seen one computer so far in which it wouldn't work at all. It had an IDE HD controller with on-board serial ports which appeared to be somewhat non- standard, and stuffed up the IRQ settings. > noisy lines, but in general is not too inconvenient. We've seen transfer > rates approaching 930cps using Zmodem here. Same here with EC, but up to 960 cps without error correction. Of course, the new bi-directional protocols won't work too well with this modem, due to the slow back-channel. > This modem is really quite a nice modem, it does CCITT V.22, V.22bis, I agree with that. Peter Hendricks, Sysop The Beast BBS, Rotorua, NZ
bigd@dorsai.com (David Shapiro) (05/21/91)
RAF@CU.NIH.GOV ("Roger Fajman") writes: > > More and more BBS's seems to support the full capabilities of the CompuCo > > Speedmodem. > > Here's one BBS SYSOP who does not intend to support that modem. I think that > introducing a new proprietary protocol at this time is a disservice to users. I have the SpeedModem on my BBS (The Gooey (GUI) BBS @ 212-876-5885) because it is the most inexpensive 9600 bps capable modem you can get, and a 2400 MNP modem wouldn't cost much less. For a price of only $169, you can literally afford to look at it as a 2400 MNP with the capability for 9600. I am doing a good service for my users who can't afford $425+ V.xx modems.