declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) (02/28/91)
Lately, I've been working closely with a (primarily Macintosh) company which has recently expressed an interest in developing products for the NeXT. The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some bundled software. What software? How about a nice, small modem program similar (but better) $-) than Communicae, and also some user-friendly UUCP-installation software. Would there be enough interest in this package, at a list price of about $800 or so? Or would there be interest in the software alone? Would the modem program be useful, or are people satisfied with tip and Communicae? Would the UUCP-installer be necessary, or would most people rather do it themselves? Perhaps this post is a bit out of place here, but I'd like to see what kind of market there is... If this company does move their modem over to the NeXT, the rest of their product line will follow - and certain other companies will do the same. And that, IMHO, is A Good Thing for the NeXT community. -Declan / declan@remus.rutgers.edu
bennett@mp.cs.niu.edu (Scott Bennett) (02/28/91)
In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > > [text deleted --SJB] > >Would there be enough interest in this package, at a list price of >about $800 or so? Or would there be interest in the software alone? >Would the modem program be useful, or are people satisfied with tip >and Communicae? Would the UUCP-installer be necessary, or would most >people rather do it themselves? I've never seen Communicae, so I can't comment on it. tip(1) is useful for what it does, but, of course, is extremely limited. I don't much like the idea of a UUCP installation program/script. Automatic UNIX configuration-for-dummies programs that I have had the misfortune to encounter invariably do at least some things wrong and/or put things where I don't want them to go. They frequently leave security hazards strewn in trail. Email is *not* the sort of thing that *I* would want set up behind my back, as it were. Besides, getting a UUCP link going is not particularly difficult if hardware problems are not involved. If someone wanted to tackle something non-trivial that manufacturers (including NeXT) generally distribute with abundant errors, they could take a look at sendmail.cf. > >Perhaps this post is a bit out of place here, but I'd like to see what >kind of market there is... If this company does move their modem over >to the NeXT, the rest of their product line will follow - and certain >other companies will do the same. And that, IMHO, is A Good Thing for >the NeXT community. > >-Declan / declan@remus.rutgers.edu Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG Systems Programming Northern Illinois University DeKalb, Illinois 60115 ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett@cs.niu.edu * * BITNET: A01SJB1@NIU * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "WAR is the HEALTH of the STATE" --Albert Jay Nock (I think:-) * **********************************************************************
ifjrs@acad3.alaska.edu (STANNARD JOHN R) (02/28/91)
In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes... > >Lately, I've been working closely with a (primarily Macintosh) company >which has recently expressed an interest in developing products for >the NeXT. > >The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: >a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some >bundled software. What software? How about a nice, small modem program >similar (but better) $-) than Communicae, and also some user-friendly >UUCP-installation software. > >Would there be enough interest in this package, at a list price of >about $800 or so? Or would there be interest in the software alone? >Would the modem program be useful, or are people satisfied with tip >and Communicae? Would the UUCP-installer be necessary, or would most >people rather do it themselves? > Do it! I'd be very interested; believe it or not, a lot of us are not programmers and/or new to Unix--include the UUCP-installer. John > >-Declan / declan@remus.rutgers.edu -- John Stannard ifjrs@acad3.fai.alaska.edu BITNET: IFJRS@ALASKA KL7JL@KL7JL.AK.USA.NA kl7jl.ampr.org [44.22.0.1] "God is the Answer!" "Oh?? ... er, ... What was the Question?" --
waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu (03/01/91)
In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: [...material deleted...] > The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: > a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some > bundled software. I'd be interested if the data baud rate (in addition to the fax baud rate) were also 9600 baud. What baud rate did you plan? c.f.waltrip Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu> Opinions expressed are my own.
lclarke@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Lawrence Clarke) (03/02/91)
waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes: > In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, > declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > [...material deleted...] > > The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: > > a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some > > bundled software. > I'd be interested if the data baud rate (in addition to the fax baud > rate) were also 9600 baud. What baud rate did you plan? > > c.f.waltrip > > Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu> > > Opinions expressed are my own. Agree !! All the other FAX modems are 9600 Fax 2400 modem. I need 9600 for FAX and MODEM. If so I'd buy.... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * lclarke@questor.wimsey.bc.ca | c/o TRIUMF Operations Group * * larry@triumfcl.bitnet | University of British Columbia * * Compuserve: 70441,1776 | 4004 Wesbrook Mall * * Phone: +1 604 275-5902 | Vancouver, British Columbia * * FAX: +1 604 275-4184 | Canada V6T 2A3 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ogawa@orion.arc.nasa.gov (Arthur Ogawa) (03/02/91)
In article <3ue6X3w164w@questor.wimsey.bc.ca> lclarke@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Lawrence Clarke) writes: |waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes: | |> In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, |> declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: |> [...material deleted...] |> > The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: |> > a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some |> > bundled software. Prometheus Promodem Plus is 9600/9600 data/fax with v.32, v.42 (and maybe v.42bis). For those who want more power: the Prometheus Ultima is 14400/9600 dat/fax and supports (in addition to the above) v.32bis. I have not tried these out. They are bundled with Mac or DOS software; I am not aware of any NeXT software for these. My question: does Declan McCullagh's proposed product involve a hardware modem, or not?
tjb@IceCube.unh.edu (Thomas J. Baker) (03/06/91)
In article <1991Feb28.124431.1@capd.jhuapl.edu> waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes: >In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, >declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > [...material deleted...] >> The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: >> a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some >> bundled software. > I'd be interested if the data baud rate (in addition to the fax baud > rate) were also 9600 baud. What baud rate did you plan? The V.32 specifies 9600 baud. > >c.f.waltrip > >Internet: <waltrip@capsrv.jhuapl.edu> > >Opinions expressed are my own. Why not use a V.32bis modem though? V.32bis is the standard for 14,400 baud without compression. Most stuff I transfer with a modem is already compressed so I don't get much benefit using V.42bis compression. The pure 50% speed increase would be pretty useful. While we're on the subject, are there any plans by anyone to make a card modem for the NeXT Cube? I've got three empty slots and two full serial ports and a card modem would be ideal. Maybe integrate it into one of those answering machine setups, with automagic switching if the call was a fax, or another modem. Just some thoughts... tjb -- ____________________________________________________________________________ | INTERNET: tjb@IceCube.unh.edu USPS: Thomas Baker | | USENET: uunet!IceCube.unh.edu!tjb P.O. Box 213 | | NeXT: tjb@IceCube.unh.edu Durham, NH 03824 | | Voice: (603) 862-4490 | |__________________________________________________________________________|
drin@nro.cs.athabascau.ca (Adrian Smith) (03/09/91)
declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: > > Lately, I've been working closely with a (primarily Macintosh) company > which has recently expressed an interest in developing products for > the NeXT. > > The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: > a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some > bundled software. What software? How about a nice, small modem program > similar (but better) $-) than Communicae, and also some user-friendly > UUCP-installation software. I'd be interested, but what's the chance of the modem being V32/V32.bis/V42/V42.bis? USR has just released one of these, and it's about $800 (Canadian). I'd be willing to buy one right now, except for the lack of proper fax capabilities onboard the thing... > > Would there be enough interest in this package, at a list price of > about $800 or so? Or would there be interest in the software alone? > Would the modem program be useful, or are people satisfied with tip > and Communicae? Would the UUCP-installer be necessary, or would most > people rather do it themselves? Definitely. I'd like the bundled package I currently make do with tip, but it's a *bit* lacking... > > Perhaps this post is a bit out of place here, but I'd like to see what > kind of market there is... If this company does move their modem over > to the NeXT, the rest of their product line will follow - and certain > other companies will do the same. And that, IMHO, is A Good Thing for > the NeXT community. > > -Declan / declan@remus.rutgers.edu
barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (03/10/91)
>declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: >> >> The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: >> a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some >> bundled software. What software? How about a nice, small modem program >> similar (but better) $-) than Communicae, and also some user-friendly >> UUCP-installation software. >> -Declan / declan@remus.rutgers.edu Initially, I thought this was a good idea---and there still might be a niche for it. But now I prefer the "solution" from Software Engineering Solutions: try and integrate all phone related services (modem, fax, answering machine, and even the telephone itself) into a single NextStep application for phone management. (As suggested by Varun Mitroo, perhaps the NeXT itself could be turned into a telephone! This is a big savings, since then the phone is already black :-) In short, lets open our mind to addressing the full spectrum of phone activities in a consistent, elegant fashion, and get away from thinking about modem, fax, ans machine, etc as totally unrelated products. -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet)
rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) (03/11/91)
In article <1991Mar5.214042.10428@IceCube.unh.edu> tjb@IceCube.unh.edu (Thomas J. Baker) writes: #In article <1991Feb28.124431.1@capd.jhuapl.edu> waltrip@capd.jhuapl.edu writes: ##In article <Feb.27.18.04.50.1991.25123@remus.rutgers.edu>, ##declan@remus.rutgers.edu (Declan McCullagh/LZ) writes: ## [...material deleted...] ### The product I'm thinking of will be a telecommunications package deal: ### a V.32/V.42/V.42bis modem with full 9600 bps fax capabilities and some ### bundled software. ## I'd be interested if the data baud rate (in addition to the fax baud ## rate) were also 9600 baud. What baud rate did you plan? # #The V.32 specifies 9600 baud. # #Why not use a V.32bis modem though? V.32bis is the standard for 14,400 baud without #compression. Most stuff I transfer with a modem is already compressed so I don't get #much benefit using V.42bis compression. The pure 50% speed increase would be pretty #useful. There exists already such a modem. It is the DSI 9624 LE with the Plus option. It's a full V.32bis, MNP5, V.42, V.42bis and Fax Group 3 modem. A friend of mine and I are working on a driver (finally) and will post when it is ready. (There is midterm time however that might delay this a little...) Ronald ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." G.B. Shaw | rca@cs.brown.edu or antony@browncog.bitnet
drin@nro.cs.athabascau.ca (Adrian Smith) (03/12/91)
rca@cs.brown.edu (Ronald C.F. Antony) writes: > > There exists already such a modem. It is the DSI 9624 LE with the Plus > option. It's a full V.32bis, MNP5, V.42, V.42bis and Fax Group 3 > modem. > > A friend of mine and I are working on a driver (finally) and will post > when it is ready. (There is midterm time however that might delay this > a little...) Any idea where a person can get such a modem? The only V.32bis/V.42bis modem I've seen in Canada is the USR one, and there's no fax modem capability built in. And since I'm in a question-asking mood, how much for one of these modems? -drin > > Ronald > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persist > in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on th > unreasonable man." G.B. Shaw | rca@cs.brown.edu or antony@browncog.bitne