myth@ultra.dec.com (05/20/87)
My experiences with this model, manufactured by CTS, have been mixed. On
one hand, their service is very good -- the modem arived two days after I
ordered it (by phone), and was backed by a 30-day money-back guarantee.
And it has many nice features: Hayes 2400 compatibility, including speaker,
call progress detection, synchronous communication support, non-volatile
configuration memory (no DIP switches!!), and internal speaker.
On the other hand, the modem is made of cheap plastic. The speaker sounds
tinny (poorly digitized) and there is no volume control at all (although the
speaker can be turned off). There are no SD and RD (send/receive data) LED
indicators on the front panel, though there are several other useful
LEDs there. It is impossible to change the tone-dialing timing from 100ms
(register S11 is ignored). Worst of all, susceptability to line noise,
especially at 1200 baud, is particularly great. The support representative
at CTS told us to buy some sort of filter from our local telco -- right.
(Other modems work fine on the same lines with no noise and no filter.)
All in all, I think the price and guarantee are right, and the quality is
acceptable, at least for most home users. Though I know other users who
have elected to send their modems back for the refund, I am quite satisfied
with mine and have learned to live with its limitations.
myth%ultra.dec.com@decwrl.dec.com
The above opinions are my own.paver@milano.UUCP (06/03/87)
We have a number of CTS 2424ADH modems that also marginal performers. When the line quality is good, the modems work fine. If there's any line noise, they're close to worthless. Worse than other modems because the noise usually causes a disconnect along with the annoying garbage on the screen. We won't buy them again. They also lack a speaker.-- ------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Paver ----> paver@mcc.arpa OR ut-sally!im4u!milano!paver Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corp (MCC) 9430 Research Blvd Austin, Texas 78759 (512) 834-3316
werner@utastro.UUCP (06/05/87)
[ InfoWorld of June 1, 1987, page 60 ] the comparison was done using a telephone connection simulator to ensure consistency; controlled amounts of imperfections were injected into the connection to determine how well each modem worked in the face of common line defects. performance was compared measuring the following: Line Defect Tolerance, Worst-Case-MNP, MNP-Ideal_Conditions. the results were summarized as follows: 1) the performance and features of the Microcom AX/2400c are hard to beat [it was the only one with level 5 MNP(compression) and expensive at $899] 2) the Multi-Tech Systems Multimodem 224E was second best at $649 with best performance under noisy conditions but "only" level 4 MNP and *only* class A FCC (should not be used in a residential area) 3) the Qubie BT2400E deserves honorable mention for its low price of $209. NOTE: the comparison is very limited and, probably, not very informative for use outside the US or for anything but simple 2,400 Baud connections. PS: the CTS Datacomm 2424 AMH looks like the WORST modem of the lot !!!
dale@trantor.UUCP (06/10/87)
In article <1865@utastro.UUCP>, werner@utastro.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) writes: > > > 2) the Multi-Tech Systems Multimodem 224E was second best at $649 with best > performance under noisy conditions but "only" level 4 MNP and *only* > class A FCC (should not be used in a residential area) I have had a Multitech 224E for about 2 weeks and am very happy with it. I have had no problems using it for my uucp connection without using any protocols. I bought it because BYTE reviewed modems a few months ago and the 224E came out 2 or 3. I was also able to buy it for $488 from Reptek, a rep in the San Jose area. I would recommend it. Also, my manuals say MNP Level 3, not 4. -- Dale Satterfield at dlb!trantor!dale