kowals@studsys.mu.edu (kowalski) (03/15/89)
[This doesn't seem to be (strictly speaking) a new product announcement,
but seemed like it might have wide-spread interest. I apologize to any
offended by its nature. -mod]
USENET NODES
NOW
GET UNIVERSAL HIGH SPEED
MODEM COMPATIBILITY AND SAVE
$1,100!!
As a USENET node, I'm sure you are interested in reduced board time and
lower phone bills through the use of high speed modems. However, up to
now you had to choose a proprietary non-standard high speed modem or a
high priced incompatible V.32 modem.
Now authorized USENET nodes can upgrade their boards to full V.32
compatibility at an extraordinary savings.
U.S. Robotics-- the leader in high speed modems to the sysop community--
is offering USENET nodes the fully CCITT V.32 compatible, Courier Dual
Standard high speed modem for only $699. A savings of $900 off the list
price!
UNIVERSAL COMPATIBILITY FOR YOUR BOARD!!!
V.32 is the CCITT standard for high speed modems (9600 bps). It is the
only standard. The HST is the defacto standard for sysop communications
with over 5,000 nodes installed.
With the HST Dual Standard, you now can have both.
That's right, 9600 bps world wide V.32 compatibility, plus access to the
entire installed base of HST's. And at a price some companies charge for
their 2400 bps modems.
The HST Dual Standard supports not only high speed V.32, but also 2400,
1200, and 300 bps, ensuring you that your node can now talk to everyone--
worldwide!
A special bonus for High Speed modem users--
Over the years, many of you may have purchased non-standard modems. The
problem-- they are only single sourced and they are NOT V.32 compatible.
If you have one of these non-standard products (and we won't mention any
names), USR will give you a special bonus--
Get HST/ix software (a $300 value) for $100-- an additional $200
savings!!!
The HST/ix software provides full UUCP communications, plus data
compression for through put up to 30,000 bps. It's one of the most
powerful UNIX communications products on the market-- and we'll give you
this software at $200 off the suggested retail price if you give us your
old modem in exchange for the Dual Standard. That's right-- give us your
old modem and we'll give you $200 off the price of HST/ix software.*
You get--
- Universal Modulation Compatibility-- V.32, V.22 bis, V.21, Bell
103, plus HST mode;
- Powerful Communications Software; AND
- $1,100 off our suggested list price of both
products !!!
ACT NOW - it's a unique opportunity. Here's all you need to do:
1.) First contact USR at 1-800-Dial USR and speak to Susan Pompa--
she'll ask you a few questions about your board.
2.) Then send us $699 (check or money order). Don't send us your old
modem yet-- we wouldn't want your board to be down for one minute.
3.) When you receive your USR Dual Standard, install it on your board
and send us your warranty card, your old modem and $100. We'll send
you the HST/ix software, a $300 value.
The only restriction-- you must be a valid USENET node and you must act
before April 30, 1989.
You're important to U.S. Robotics.
USR has been the sysop standard for over four years-- first with our
Courier 2400 then with the high speed Courier HST. We have a long term
commitment to BBS operators. We believe that you are important to us and
to our industry-- and we want to support your efforts. We want to help
you maintain your board with the latest communications equipment.
With the HST Dual Standard, we have the best USENET node solution. In
short--your node will be able to communicate with everyone. It's our way
of introducing the product to the UNIX community and to support your
USENET efforts.
Now--Don't forget!!
You must act before April 30, 1989 to get the--
- HST Dual Standard (with full V.32 compatibility), PLUS -
HST/ix software,
AND - Save $1,100.
We appreciate the opportunity to support you and I hope you take
advantage of this great opportunity.
Sincerely,
Robert P. Polychron
Director of North American Sales
P.S. Remember to get the ball rolling, just call Susan Pompa at 1-800-
Dial USR or 312-982-5001.csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (03/15/89)
In article <18612@mcdchg.chi.il.us> kowals@studsys.mu.edu (kowalski) writes: >[I apologize to any offended by its nature. -mod] Offended? No. Puzzled, certainly. Amused, too. >USENET NODES.... >As a USENET node, I'm sure you are interested in reduced board time.... Node? Board time? Is that something like MTBF? >Now authorized USENET nodes can upgrade their boards.... Boards? Those are what I plug into my card cage. >U.S. Robotics-- the leader in high speed modems to the sysop community.... Sysop? Is that something like system call? Or pseudo op? I hate to publically belittle a vendor, but it is pretty obvious that USR took their generic BBS offer, and did a global-search-and replace from "Fidonet" or whatever to "Usenet." How can I expect USR to respond to my needs when they won't even bother to investigate Usenet enough to get the terminology right? Usenet is not a BBS, but apparently USR doesn't understand that. The entire premise of this article is that Telebit offers only a proprietary non-standard modem, and USR is offering standard modems. This neatly neglects to mention that USR has been selling "proprietary non-standard" modems for years, and of course also neglects the fact that Telebit is also now selling true V.32 modems. Even the name "Dual Standard" is terribly pompous, since it suggests that the HST proprietary protocol somehow became a "standard." Well, yes, maybe to the BBS community. But I'm a Usenet "node," what do I care about BBS standards that I cannot use? I *do* care about the "dual standard" Telebit T2500; I can use *both* of its "standards." For that matter, even today true V.32 modems are not exactly falling off the trees. This will change over the next year or two, but I'm sure not throwing my TrailBlazer away yet. Telebit has proven they will bend over backwards to meet my needs. USR has proven only that they can make an inexpensive modem. The new USR modem may be a terrific product. But this announcement turns me off something awful. <csg>
rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (03/16/89)
In article <18612@mcdchg.chi.il.us> kowals@studsys.mu.edu (kowalski) writes: > >U.S. Robotics-- the leader in high speed modems to the sysop community-- >is offering USENET nodes the fully CCITT V.32 compatible, Courier Dual >Standard high speed modem for only $699. A savings of $900 off the list Looks like this is the cheaper way for Telebit users to up/down-grade to V.32. $100 less than up/down-grading a Plus to a T2500, unless you bought recently. Of course, the T2500 is a software platform -- who knows what improvements Telebit will or won't offer to the T2500, and at what price? But can you believe USR still pushing the 30,000 BPS claim? Come on guys, get real, and learn a little about how your (potential) customers really move their data. Even the 'board' users are moving (pre-compressed) .ARCs that the 'sysops' provide. Here on the Usenet we move (LZW pre-compressed) .Zs from 'site' to 'site', according to the configuration set up by the 'system or news administrator'. Sysops? we don't need no stinkin' sysops -- we're an anarchy (modulo a few net-gurus). -- Rick Richardson | JetRoff "di"-troff to LaserJet Postprocessor|uunet!pcrat!dry2 PC Research,Inc.| Mail: uunet!pcrat!jetroff; For anon uucp do:|for Dhrystone 2 uunet!pcrat!rick| uucp jetroff!~jetuucp/file_list ~nuucp/. |submission forms. jetroff Wk2200-0300,Sa,Su ACU {2400,PEP} 12013898963 "" \d\r\d ogin: jetuucp
jiii@visdc.UUCP (John E Van Deusen III) (03/18/89)
In article <18612@mcdchg.chi.il.us> (kowalski) writes: | |U.S. Robotics-- the leader in high speed modems to the sysop community- |is offering USENET nodes the fully CCITT V.32 compatible, Courier Dual |Standard high speed modem for only $699. A savings of $900 off list | |Looks like this is the cheaper way for Telebit users to up/down-grade |to V.32. $100 less than up/down-grading a Plus to a T2500, unless you |bought recently. Of course, the T2500 is a software platform... Let's quickly look a little closer at the USR "deal". Because the TB+ is a "software platform", it does two jobs, uucp(1) & compression, that the USR "Dual Standard" HST requires a software package, (that runs on your machine, not in the modem), to perform. The package can be obtained for either $300 or $800, depending upon whether you give USR full list or $100 plus a modem worth about $700 on the open market. The USR deal therefore costs $200 MORE than upgrading to the T2500, and you lose the ability to talk with PEP modems. What do you have when you are done? A used T2500 is probably worth $1400; a used USR HST & software, $1000 max, (can it be worth any more than they are willing to sell it for?). Thus, the real difference in cost plus value received might be $700 in favor of the Telebit upgrade. -- John E Van Deusen III, PO Box 9283, Boise, ID 83707, (208) 343-1865 uunet!visdc!jiii
rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (03/18/89)
In article <491@visdc.UUCP> jiii@visdc.UUCP (John E Van Deusen III) writes: >In article I write: >|Looks like this is the cheaper way for Telebit users to up/down-grade >|to V.32. $100 less than up/down-grading a Plus to a T2500, unless you >|bought recently. Of course, the T2500 is a software platform... > >The USR deal therefore costs $200 MORE than upgrading to the T2500, and >you lose the ability to talk with PEP modems. No, the HSR is still cheaper, because I'm talking about existing Telebit owners. You keep BOTH modems, the telebit for PEP, and the HST for V.32. All your uucp still goes thru the PEP modem. The intangible, of course, is the value of the T2500 'software platform'. In my opinion, they haven't delivered on that promise in the past, even for minor requests like real Hayes compatible autobaud. Now, I don't give a whit about V.32 at this point. I only point out the alternatives. Healthy competition is good for all of us end users. The dual standard I'll buy into has FAX as one of the standards. -- Rick Richardson | JetRoff "di"-troff to LaserJet Postprocessor|uunet!pcrat!dry2 PC Research,Inc.| Mail: uunet!pcrat!jetroff; For anon uucp do:|for Dhrystone 2 uunet!pcrat!rick| uucp jetroff!~jetuucp/file_list ~nuucp/. |submission forms. jetroff Wk2200-0300,Sa,Su ACU {2400,PEP} 12013898963 "" \d\r\d ogin: jetuucp
snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) (03/19/89)
In article <18612@mcdchg.chi.il.us> kowals@studsys.mu.edu (kowalski) writes: | GET UNIVERSAL HIGH SPEED | MODEM COMPATIBILITY AND SAVE | $1,100!! A "universal" high speed modem that doesn't speak the most common high speed modem protocol on usenet. Doesn't sound very universal or compatible to me. | As a USENET node, I'm sure you are interested in reduced board time and | lower phone bills through the use of high speed modems. However, up to | now you had to choose a proprietary non-standard high speed modem or a | high priced incompatible V.32 modem. I've heard of atime, ctime, mtime, GMT time, and localtime, but this "board" time is a new one. Must have something to do with being universally incompatible. | Now authorized USENET nodes can upgrade their boards to full V.32 | compatibility at an extraordinary savings. I guess unauthorized USENET nodes like kremvax are out of luck. | U.S. Robotics-- the leader in high speed modems to the sysop community-- | is offering USENET nodes the fully CCITT V.32 compatible, Courier Dual | Standard high speed modem for only $699. A savings of $900 off the list | price! I paid less than that for my modem and it goes faster. | That's right, 9600 bps world wide V.32 compatibility, plus access to the | entire installed base of HST's. And at a price some companies charge for | their 2400 bps modems. What companies currently charge $699 for a 2400 baud modem and how many are they selling? Many 2400 baud modems sell for significantly less. | The HST Dual Standard supports not only high speed V.32, but also 2400, | 1200, and 300 bps, ensuring you that your node can now talk to everyone-- | worldwide! But it can't talk at high speed to anyone I talk to. | A special bonus for High Speed modem users-- | | Over the years, many of you may have purchased non-standard modems. The | problem-- they are only single sourced and they are NOT V.32 compatible. | If you have one of these non-standard products (and we won't mention any | names), USR will give you a special bonus-- | | Get HST/ix software (a $300 value) for $100-- an additional $200 | savings!!! Let me guess, a MS-DOS binary? | 1.) First contact USR at 1-800-Dial USR and speak to Susan Pompa-- | she'll ask you a few questions about your board. My board is made of Lexan (tm) and I slice tomatoes on it. | 2.) Then send us $699 (check or money order). Don't send us your old | modem yet-- we wouldn't want your board to be down for one minute. But I don't use my old modem to slice tomatoes. It would be a pain to clean. | 3.) When you receive your USR Dual Standard, install it on your board | and send us your warranty card, your old modem and $100. We'll send | you the HST/ix software, a $300 value. I hope the USR Dual Standard is dishwasher safe. Oh, I get it, dual standard means you can wash it by hand *or* in the dishwasher! Sort of expensive for slicing tomatoes on, though. I think I'll keep my lexan. | You're important to U.S. Robotics. So important that U.S. Robotics is willing to make a fool of themselves by going after our business without having the slightest idea of what we want or need in a modem. | We want to help you maintain your board with the latest communications | equipment. Thank you, but I think my cutting board can get by without it. | With the HST Dual Standard, we have the best USENET node solution. No you don't. | In short--your node will be able to communicate with everyone. No, my node can communicate with everybody now, but if I used your modem I'd be stuck at 2400. | It's our way of introducing the product to the UNIX community and to | support your USENET efforts. If you are interested in the USENET market, I suggest you learn a thing or two about it. First, the vast majority of traffic is compressed in the host. For good reason, it's more efficent that way. So don't bother quoting throughput figures using compression in the modem. We don't care. Second, what counts in a USENET modem are: (1) throughput sending compressed news batches via UUCP 'g' protocol, (2) ability to maintain a connection and reasonable throughput when the phone line quality is poor, (3) reliability of the hardware and good technical support when problems occur, (4) use of the 'AT' command set is probably a good idea, (5) decent interactive response for dial-up sessions, (6) SLIP support may very well become important in the near future, (7) some sites would like FAX support, (8) naturally, it also needs to speak 2400/1200/300 Items 1 and 2 are currently best achieved via the PEP(tm) protocol. There is therefore a large installed base of PEP modems, and any high-speed modem wishing to penetrate the usenet market had better talk PEP. V.32 would be nice, but probably not essential to most sites at this time. Sites that also talk to BBS systems might care about talking HST. Usenet sites run on a wide variety of hardware which are *not* binary compatable with each other, and never will be. Software needs to be source, in a very common, efficient language. C is a good choice. A modem that talks PEP and V.32 and HST and 2400/1200/300 might be very popular. Anything less is NOT universal. Naturally, the price would have to be reasonable. Good luck. _____ /_____\ Snoopy "My dot-matrix does Postscript." /_______\ |___| tekecs.wv.tek.com!sopwith!snoopy qiclab!sopwith!snoopy |___| sun!nosun!illian!sopwith!snoopy parsely!sopwith!snoopy
chris@skat.usc.edu (Christopher Ho) (03/21/89)
In article <142@sopwith.UUCP> snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) writes: >In article <18612@mcdchg.chi.il.us> kowals@studsys.mu.edu (kowalski) writes: >| GET UNIVERSAL HIGH SPEED >| MODEM COMPATIBILITY AND SAVE [...] >A "universal" high speed modem that doesn't speak the most common >high speed modem protocol on usenet. Doesn't sound very universal [...] >Second, what counts in a USENET modem are: (1) throughput sending compressed >news batches via UUCP 'g' protocol, (2) ability to maintain a connection and >reasonable throughput when the phone line quality is poor, (3) reliability [...] >Items 1 and 2 are currently best achieved via the PEP(tm) protocol. There >is therefore a large installed base of PEP modems, and any high-speed modem >wishing to penetrate the usenet market had better talk PEP. V.32 would >be nice, but probably not essential to most sites at this time. Sites [...] >A modem that talks PEP and V.32 and HST and 2400/1200/300 might be >very popular. Anything less is NOT universal. Naturally, the price Despite the marginal advantages of Telebit's PEP, it is a proprietary protocol. As such, it is unfortunately doomed in the long run to only a passing mention in a history chapter. How many of you remember (or more importantly, use) Racal-Vadic's 1200 bps protocol? 'Nuff said. The reason protocol spoofing was added on Telebits was because of the relatively high overhead of turning the PEP channel around. V.32 doesn't suffer from this problem. Our organization waited a long time for V.32 modems to come down to reasonable prices. Although I chafed impatiently and suggested Telebits several times, I'm now convinced we did The Right Thing. It's not clear what useful purpose Snoopy's scathing article serves. A $699 price is very competitive for a V.32 modem. Chris
csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (03/22/89)
In article <15994@oberon.USC.EDU> chris@skat.usc.edu (Christopher Ho) writes: >Despite the marginal advantages of Telebit's PEP.... Prove to me they are only "marginal" better. I say DAMQAM/PEP, for basically half-duplex communication like UUCP, is a *lot* better. >...it is a proprietary protocol. As such, it is unfortunately doomed in the >long run to only a passing mention in a history chapter. Like Bell 212A, also a "proprietary" protocol? At least two other companies are now licensed to manufacture PEP modems. >How many of you remember (or more importantly, use) Racal-Vadic's 1200 bps >protocol? The RV 1200bps protocol died because you couldn't talk to anyone with it, and it wasn't significantly better than Bell 212A. On the other hand, out of 350 UUCP sites we talk to, my TrailBlazer talks to well over half of them. >The reason protocol spoofing was added on Telebits was because of the >relatively high overhead of turning the PEP channel around. V.32 doesn't >suffer from this problem. True. V.32 suffers from other problems. >Our organization waited a long time for V.32 modems to come down to >reasonable prices. Although I chafed impatiently and suggested >Telebits several times, I'm now convinced we did The Right Thing. No. You did the wrong thing. My six TrailBlazers paid for themselves on just local calls. Never mind the many thousands I saved on long distance. We would have dropped off the USENET if it weren't for the TrailBlazers, and we have several BayBone sites that use TrailBlazers exclusively. >A $699 price is very competitive for a V.32 modem. Oh yes! I agree emphatically with this. And for those of us with applications that really need V.32 -- SNA/SDLC, or X.25 for example -- I am going to stock up. But for USENET, there is no one talk to to, unless I use my TrailBlazer. USR's half-hearted attempt to appeal to my USENET applications is not going to cause me to buy any of their modems. <csg>
rja@edison.GE.COM (rja) (03/25/89)
In article <15994@oberon.USC.EDU>, chris@skat.usc.edu (Christopher Ho) writes: > Our organization waited a long time for V.32 modems to come down to > reasonable prices. Although I chafed impatiently and suggested > Telebits several times, I'm now convinced we did The Right Thing. > > It's not clear what useful purpose Snoopy's scathing article serves. > A $699 price is very competitive for a V.32 modem. A Trailblazer sends already compressed data at 18Kbps roughly versus the HST sending already compressed data in V.32 mode at 9.6Kbps. It seems to me you are getting what you are paying for. The Trailblazer pays for the extra cost IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME as has been repeatedly pointed out. Most companies want the shortest cost of transmission of data and that is both modems and cost of time on long-distance bills and replacing modems every few years is a normal occurrence. If someone really does come out with a better modem for use on the net then I'm sure lots of people will buy it, but in the mean time they will have saved many $$$ by using the TB. The views here are economic not religious.