[comp.dcom.modems] Trailblazer vs. USR 9600 HST

ghoti@killer.UUCP (Alan Perry) (12/15/87)

Hi,
  I just recently got a USRobotics 9600 HST modem and recently have seen alot
of input about the Telebit Trailblazer modem.  I was wondering if there is 
really any future in the Trailblazer since the recent press release about the
licensing agreement between USR and Hayes concerning the concurrent development
of the 9600 technology.  I have to wonder if the Trailblazer really has a 
chance against such stiff competition?  I mean, USR and Hayes joining together
in an effort to develop the 9600 technology has to put a real crimp in the
other guys' modem development...  Any inputs on this?  If there is an interest,
I will post the text of the article which (somewhat) detailed the licensing 
agreement...

- Ghoti  (a.k.a. Alan Perry)

pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov) (12/21/87)

In article <2473@killer.UUCP>, ghoti@killer.UUCP (Alan Perry) writes:
> Hi,
>   I just recently got a USRobotics 9600 HST modem and recently have seen alot
> of input about the Telebit Trailblazer modem.  I was wondering if there is 
> really any future in the Trailblazer ....

  Of course, no one can really say.  My own feeling is that the Tr~ra{lblazer
  will survive, in a niche market situatuion, at least: the tech{ology strikes
  me as being ideally suited to the reality of the analog systems that will be
  with us for a{ least a few years more (and beyond that, in more out-of-the-
  way areas).  

  VenTel is now marketing the modem under its name as well...

   greg pavlov, fstrf, anherst, ny.

paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) (12/22/87)

I read somewhere (perhaps here) recently that USR and Hayes are getting
together to try to standardize their 9600-baud modems.  Apparently while
the carrier and frequencies and whatnot are set in the V.32 standard (or
whichever), the back-ward-channel for full-dup, compression, timing for
fallback to lower baud rates & carriers, etc are NOT.  Which is why none (?)
of the existing 9600 baud direct-dial modems can speak to eachother unless
made by the same company.

So, Hayes and USR will try to set an industry standard in the area of 9600
baud modemry that is left open in the V.?? standard.  Fine.

Telebit is a very nice modem, though.  I wonder if they can adapt to the
coming "industry standard" with another ROM release...?  Those of us buying
the Trailblazers to connect to UUNET and other USENET sites would all, I'm
sure, like to know if we are about to own Edsels or not..

In <492@hscfvax.harvard.edu> pavlov@hscfvax.harvard.edu (G.Pavlov) writes:
>
>  VenTel is now marketing the modem under its name as well...
>
>   greg pavlov, fstrf, anherst, ny.

Great!

--
Paul Vixie
paul%vixie@uunet.uu.net

david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- Resident E-mail Hack) (12/22/87)

In article <757@vixie.UUCP> paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
>Telebit is a very nice modem, though.  I wonder if they can adapt to the
>coming "industry standard" with another ROM release...?  Those of us buying
>the Trailblazers to connect to UUNET and other USENET sites would all, I'm
>sure, like to know if we are about to own Edsels or not..

Yeah, I was worried about that too ..

so I called Mike Ballard to ask that and a few other questions.

Every question I asked along these lines was answered that it
would simply be a ROM change.  Yes, they can emulate any of the
9600 baud protocols with a ROM change.  (Maybe even higher speed?)
Adding more protocols a la the UUCP and Kermit stuff is also
simple ROM changes.  (I wonder how much room they have left
in their ROM's).

In other words ... they have good enough control over what happens
on the phone line that they can do just about anything they want to.

He also said that Telebit was making efforts in the CCITT committee's
to have PEP established as one of the Official Protocols.

I'm not afraid to buy these modems.  We have two on order here
right now.  I'd even buy one for home if I could afford it.
If worse comes to worse, they change their modems around to
become compatible with whatever standard emerges and possibly
keep their own standard in the ROM's as well.  If things go
really bad and they fold ... well, there's a number of people
around who own Telebit's so we won't feel terribly lonely :-).
-- 
<---- David Herron -- The E-Mail guy            <david@ms.uky.edu>
<---- or:                {rutgers,uunet,cbosgd}!ukma!david, david@UKMA.BITNET
<----
<---- Winter health warning:  Remember, don't eat the yellow snow!

sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) (12/23/87)

In article <757@vixie.UUCP> paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
>Telebit is a very nice modem, though.  I wonder if they can adapt to the
>coming "industry standard" with another ROM release...?  Those of us buying
>the Trailblazers to connect to UUNET and other USENET sites would all, I'm

I have heard rumours that they can and will if there is an industry standard
for these types of modems. 

I also heard that Telebit may be trying to get their protocol recogonized as
a standard.

The same source also said that Telebit has shipped more high speed modems
than both Hayes and US Robotics combined, which seemed reasonable given that
they have been shipping the Trailblazer since early '86 (I think, could be
earlier).

-- 
{ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision,uunet}!van-bc!Stuart.Lynne Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532

randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) (12/25/87)

In article <7907@e.ms.uky.edu> david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- Resident E-mail Hack) writes:
>Yeah, I was worried about that too ..
>so I called Mike Ballard to ask that and a few other questions.
>Every question I asked along these lines was answered that it
>would simply be a ROM change.

FidoNet folk got into Telebits a good while ago.  At the time, we were also
told that we would be able to follow the upgrade path with low cost ROM changes
all the way.  For that reason, many FidoNetters got Blazers (though many got
USR/HSTs too).

And then TeleBit announced the TB+.  Needless to say, there is considerable
flaming in the rlevant FidoNet echos on the subject.  Quite a few folk seem
too feel that they were misled, and now it will cost > $1000 to 'upgrade'.

I am not saying that Telebit was wrong, or the FidoNetters were either.  I
do suggest that we take promises that it will merely require a ROM change
with considerable salt, especially when coming from Telebit.
-- 
randy%oresoft.uucp@tektronix.tek.com                     FidoNet:1:105/6.6
randy%oresoft.uucp%tektronix.tek.com@relay.cs.net        +1 (503) 245-2202

wayne@fmsrl7.UUCP (//ichael R. //ayne) (12/27/87)

In article <100@oresoft.UUCP> randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) writes:
->In article <7907@e.ms.uky.edu> david@ms.uky.edu (David Herron -- Resident E-mail Hack) writes:
->>Yeah, I was worried about that too ..
->>so I called Mike Ballard to ask that and a few other questions.
->>Every question I asked along these lines was answered that it
->>would simply be a ROM change.
->
->FidoNet folk got into Telebits a good while ago.  At the time, we were also
->told that we would be able to follow the upgrade path with low cost ROM changes
->all the way.  For that reason, many FidoNetters got Blazers (though many got
->USR/HSTs too).
->
->And then TeleBit announced the TB+.  Needless to say, there is considerable
->flaming in the rlevant FidoNet echos on the subject.  Quite a few folk seem
->too feel that they were misled, and now it will cost > $1000 to 'upgrade'.
->
->I am not saying that Telebit was wrong, or the FidoNetters were either.  I
->do suggest that we take promises that it will merely require a ROM change
->with considerable salt, especially when coming from Telebit.

	Er, what is your complaint?  As far as I can tell, the TB and the TB+
are operationally the same although the TB can not do hardware compression.
This does not seem like THAT big of a deal, why bother with the upgrade?
Perhaps you should clarfiy your position??

/\/\ \/\/
-- 
Michael R. Wayne  ***  TMC & Associates  ***  INTERNET: wayne@ford-vax.arpa
uucp: {philabs | pyramid} !fmsrl7!wayne   OR   wayne@fmsrl7.UUCP
>> If you own an MPulse, please contact me to exchange info and experiences <<

norm@ontenv.UUCP (Norman Soley) (12/28/87)

In article <757@vixie.UUCP>, paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
> I read somewhere (perhaps here) recently that USR and Hayes are getting
> together to try to standardize their 9600-baud modems.  Apparently while
> the carrier and frequencies and whatnot are set in the V.32 standard (or
> whichever), the back-ward-channel for full-dup, compression, timing for
> fallback to lower baud rates & carriers, etc are NOT.  Which is why none (?)
> of the existing 9600 baud direct-dial modems can speak to eachother unless
> made by the same company.
> 
> So, Hayes and USR will try to set an industry standard in the area of 9600
> baud modemry that is left open in the V.?? standard.  Fine.
  
I had a phone conversation a while back with the local Telebit Rep
about modem standards. He was relaying information from other sources
and was a little confused. So was I. Therefore anything I say here
should be confirmed or denied by those who really know whats going on.

Apparently CCITT is developing a more robust standard for 9600 baud
Async, full duplex, error correcting modems. They looked at a number
of proposals including Hayes's V series. What is now being proposed is
a combination of the Hayes proposal and the British Telecom one (both
use a Variant of LAP in their 9600 Baud modems).

> Telebit is a very nice modem, though.  I wonder if they can adapt to the
> coming "industry standard" with another ROM release...?  Those of us buying
> the Trailblazers to connect to UUNET and other USENET sites would all, I'm
> sure, like to know if we are about to own Edsels or not..

As well the CCITT is now soliciting proposals for similar standards for
19.2K modems and Telebit has entered one. If their proposal is
selected they would have to a) place PEP in the public domain or b)
freely licence PEP.

Telebit is waiting for the results of the above efforts before they do
anything about adding more high speed protocols to the Trailblazer.
They are still working on other neat things similar to the G-protocol
spoofing.
  
So, if the information I was given proves correct the CCITT standards
which will emerge over the next year will AND Telebit's response to
them will determine if your Trailblazer is an Edsel. My past
experience with Telebit would indicate that it will not be.

[I apologize in advance for any falsehoods I may have spread here.
 I am not connected in any way with Telebit, nor have I recieved any
 bribes, kickbacks, or any other renumberation from them]
-- 
Norman Soley - Data Communications Analyst - Ontario Ministry of the Environment
UUCP:	utzoo!lsuc!ncrcan!---\			VOICE:	+1 416 323 2623
	{utzoo,utgpu}!sickkids!ontenv!norm	ENVOY:	N.SOLEY
	{mnetor,utgpu}!ontmoh/

randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) (12/29/87)

I believe what folk with TB-s fear is being left off the train that Mr. Gobol
describes a few messages above, newer ROMs being bigger, less RF, ...
-- 
randy%oresoft.uucp@tektronix.tek.com                     FidoNet:1:105/6.6
randy%oresoft.uucp%tektronix.tek.com@relay.cs.net        +1 (503) 245-2202

dave@onfcanim.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (12/29/87)

In article <2473@killer.UUCP> ghoti@killer.UUCP (Alan Perry) writes:
>Hi,
>  I just recently got a USRobotics 9600 HST modem and recently have seen alot
>of input about the Telebit Trailblazer modem.  I was wondering if there is 
>really any future in the Trailblazer since the recent press release about the
>licensing agreement between USR and Hayes concerning the concurrent development
>of the 9600 technology.  I have to wonder if the Trailblazer really has a 
>chance against such stiff competition?

Given the state of Hayes engineering, I certainly hope so.  For example,
take the brand-new "V-series Smartmodem 2400".

I use some of our modems for both dialin and dialout.  They sit there
waiting for incoming calls most of the time, but sometimes uucico or tip
use them for calling others modems.  Under these circumstances, you
would like the modem to be reset to a "standard" configuration after
each use automatically.  You can, in fact tell the Hayes to reset
whenever DTR drops and rises.  You can also tell it not to auto-answer
unless DTR is asserted - necessary for dialin use.  Unfortunately,
these two options are mutually exclusive - you can't have the modem
use DTR for reset unless you give up DTR control of answer.  The Telebit
does this fine.

If a modem is to be used for dialout, command recognition must be
enabled.  However, you do NOT want the "+++" command escape to be
recognized when the modem is handling an incoming call, or operating
in originate mode with uucico.  Unfortunately, there is no way at all
to permanently disable the +++ escape without turning off command
recognition entirely.  The Telebit provides two ways of doing this.

I just gave up on the Hayes for dialout use, and use the Telebit and
a Vadic va2400 exclusively.

At least the new Hayes models no longer support sending Morse code...

graefe@tramp.Colorado.EDU (GRAESE WILLIAM S) (12/31/87)

In article <324@ontenv.UUCP> norm@ontenv.UUCP (Norman Soley) writes:
=In article <757@vixie.UUCP>, paul@vixie.UUCP (Paul Vixie Esq) writes:
=Apparently CCITT is developing a more robust standard for 9600 baud
=Async, full duplex, error correcting modems. They looked at a number
=of proposals including Hayes's V series. What is now being proposed is
=a combination of the Hayes proposal and the British Telecom one (both
=use a Variant of LAP in their 9600 Baud modems).


I was very impressed with the TB Plus report on here a while ago regarding
stability.  It sounds extreemly impressive, and I hope they can add on
FDX.(or does it already support it- I thought it did 9600/300 combined FDX)
I would like to see that become the new standard.
!---------graefe@tramp.Colorado.EDU------------------------!   ,---.     !
! Bill       |(insert something terribly witty, humorous, )!   | _   _   !
! GraeFe, Jr.|(and inspiring in this space:               )!   `-+-' |   !
!---------{sunybcs, hao}!boulder!tramp!graefe--------------!     `---'   !

csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst) (12/31/87)

In article <100@oresoft.UUCP> randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) writes:
>For that reason, many FidoNetters got Blazers (though many got USR/HSTs too).

Curious. My understanding from newsletters and private mail was that very few
Fidonet sites were fiddling with high-speed modems, since it was (correctly)
determined that the technology wasn't quite ready yet.

>And then TeleBit announced the TB+.  Needless to say, there is considerable
>flaming in the rlevant FidoNet echos on the subject.  Quite a few folk seem
>too feel that they were misled, and now it will cost > $1000 to 'upgrade'.

Even curiousier. The functional improvements in the TrailBlazer+ are increased
RAM space, the replacement of the ACIA chip with an SCC, and some support for
interactive operation. The only things a TB+ can do that the original 'Blazer
cannot are Lempel-Ziv compression and synchronous protocols, neither of which
were ever promised on the old platform. On the other hand, V.22, V.22bis, MNP,
and the 'g'-spoof, which were not available on our original modems and *were*
promised, have turned out very well.

I have been a Telebit cynic from day 1. So far, they have made good on every
promise to deliver new functionality through ROM upgrades.

<csg>

randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) (01/01/88)

A count of the number of 9600 baud nodes in the current FidoNet nodelist shows
249 nodes, not counting possible duplicate listings (hosts, hubs, ...).
That's over ten percent of the nodes.

The current nodelist format does not provide for a reliable count of how many
are from what vendor.  This too shall pass.

Again, it's not that the current TB ROM upgrade did not meet the FidoNetters'
needs.  It's that they are very worried that the next ones (or the one after)
won't.
-- 
randy%oresoft.uucp@tektronix.tek.com                     FidoNet:1:105/6.6
randy%oresoft.uucp%tektronix.tek.com@relay.cs.net        +1 (503) 245-2202

marc@mfbbs.UUCP (Marc Randolph) (01/02/88)

In article <12375@pyramid.pyramid.com> csg@pyramid.pyramid.com
						     (Carl S. Gutekunst) writes:
<In article <100@oresoft.UUCP> randy@oresoft.UUCP (Randy Bush) writes:
>>For that reason, many FidoNetters got Blazers (though many got USR/HSTs too).

<Curious. My understanding from newsletters and private mail was that very few
<Fidonet sites were fiddling with high-speed modems, since it was (correctly)
<determined that the technology wasn't quite ready yet.

	There are more than 160 HST's alone on FidoNet.  I don't know how many
Trailblazer's there are, but I suspect the number is quite a bit less.  Maybe
Randy knows some numbers...
-- 
---
 Marc Randolph     UUCP: ...!rutgers!pbox!romed!mfbbs!marc
                   FidoNet: 170/329 or 170/220