linwood@ingr.UUCP (Linwood Varney) (11/05/88)
I don't like to jump into the middle of heated discussions like this, but I thought I would add my two cents worth. I have both a Telebit Trailblazer+ and UDS v.32 modem on my machine. The biggest complaint I have about the Telebit Trailblazer is that it takes quite awhile to get ALL those blasted registers set exactly like you want them. Once you have it set right, it works great. I have never had any problem with it. On the other hand the UDS v.32 modem has given a few problems. I do not know if it is specific to my v.32 or if it is a generic problem, but the when I echo characters to the UDS modem fast, (as opposed to typing them 1 at a time) it garbles the output. It accepts the data fine, but echos back garbage (ex: I send "ATDT 5551234" I see "AuxT~xux|". The UDS v.32 supports a limited Hayes AT command set, some commands (such as ATT) do not work. Also for some reason the modem gets confused every couple of days (showing pure garbage in the display LCD on the front), and I have to turn off to reset it. One final problem with the modem itself, is occasionally when a uucp converstation is active, I get a packet of bad data, and after a period of time, I loose the connection. The Trailblazer handles bad lines better. The biggest design complaint about the UDS v.32 modem I have, is that I can not use it to talk at low speeds, such as 1200/2400 baud. The machine, that I am running on only Has two serial ports, so I am forced to pool my resources as much as possible. Therefore all low speed calls have to go through the Trailblazer. Also there seems to be very few people out there, from my point of view, that have a v.32 modem to talk to. The only other machines I talk to are other internal machines we have set up with UDS v.32 modems. My general statement here is not which modem is better/worse. It is just a relation of the problems I have had. The market today is changing very fast. Nine months ago I was not even considering a modem faster than 2400 baud, no one then had a good high speed protocol defined. With the rising cost of phone bills, and the amount of time it takes to transfer data, Telebit seemed to have a very good solution. Now I have two different High Speed modems. I don't expect things to change much very soon, but who knows what the next couple of years will bring. Linwood Varney @ Intergraph Corp. Network Communcations Department. uunet!ingr!linwood ingr!linwood@uunet.uu.net
ron@ron.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie) (11/08/88)
> On the other hand the UDS v.32 modem has given a few problems. I do not > know if it is specific to my v.32 or if it is a generic problem, but the > when I echo characters to the UDS modem fast, (as opposed to typing them > 1 at a time) it garbles the output. It accepts the data fine, but echos > back garbage (ex: I send "ATDT 5551234" I see "AuxT~xux|". The UDS v.32 This is almost certainly a word lenght mismatch. Make sure the number of databits, parity presence, and number of stop bits adds up to the same number for both the DTE and the modem. > The biggest design complaint about the UDS v.32 modem I have, is that I > can not use it to talk at low speeds, such as 1200/2400 baud. We've tested the Penril Alliance V.32 here ($1345) against nearly every modem in our posession V.32, Microcom MNP V.29's, 103, and 212. The only modem it won't talk to is a Vadic 3400 protocol 1200 baud modem. It will talk to the UDS V.32 and whatever it is that Tymnet uses. -Ron