I do wonder if getting a different brand of modem would help though. I
I think a lot of the problems is my ISP. They have pretty much abandoned
the dialup, but they know that some of us rural people cant connect any
other way. so they keep a few modems running for those of us who have a
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because my
cellphone dont get a signal.
In message <1fio0d9pouhfijehel9a2ludovp9p1a6n5@4ax.com>,
james@nospam.com writes:
[]
I do wonder if getting a different brand of modem would help though. I
It might ...
[]
I think a lot of the problems is my ISP. They have pretty much abandoned >>the dialup, but they know that some of us rural people cant connect any >>other way. so they keep a few modems running for those of us who have a
... as long as the "spiral of death" isn't caused by the other end.
(I still can't understand why you don't get it with Windows 98, but I >sympathise that you're fed up of trying things!)
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because my >>cellphone dont get a signal.Would it be possible to erect some sort of aerial - do cellular signals >reach your location but too far above ground level? Or are you so remote >that you are not in a coverage area at all? I appreciate it'd be
awkward, since modern 'phones don't have an aerial socket, and it'd have
to be bidirectional, which makes boosters difficult (though can be
done), but if there is a signal, two passive but high-gain (i. e. >directional) aerials connected together, in your loft or on a pole,
_might_ make life a bit more bearable.
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:20:27 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> wrote:
In message <1fio0d9pouhfijehel9a2ludovp9p1a6n5@4ax.com>,
james@nospam.com writes:
[]
I do wonder if getting a different brand of modem would help though. IIt might ...
[]
I think a lot of the problems is my ISP. They have pretty much abandoned >>> the dialup, but they know that some of us rural people cant connect any... as long as the "spiral of death" isn't caused by the other end.
other way. so they keep a few modems running for those of us who have a
(I still can't understand why you don't get it with Windows 98, but I
sympathise that you're fed up of trying things!)
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because myWould it be possible to erect some sort of aerial - do cellular signals
cellphone dont get a signal.
reach your location but too far above ground level? Or are you so remote
that you are not in a coverage area at all? I appreciate it'd be
awkward, since modern 'phones don't have an aerial socket, and it'd have
to be bidirectional, which makes boosters difficult (though can be
done), but if there is a signal, two passive but high-gain (i. e.
directional) aerials connected together, in your loft or on a pole,
_might_ make life a bit more bearable.
Thanks for starting a new thread. I was considering doing the same.
I have never understood why Win98 works and not any NT based OS. I still
have Win2000 installed on the same computer as Win98. All I use it for
is to do backups, because Win98 cant handle those external hard drives
on USB. I love Win98, but USB support has always been lousy. By (dual) booting to Win2000, I can copy everything from my HDD to my backup,
including the Win98 OS files. I would have XP instead in that partition,
but this computer is not quite up to Xp level for power and such.
No, I dont get a usable cellphone signal. I live down a hill, cellphone signals are poor to start with, and being downhill from the nearby town,
I dont get much. Sometimes I get one bar, but have to go outside (metal covered house). But I know I will lose the signal at any time during the call. Other times I dont get any signal. Most of the time I drive up the
hill to make calls. Thats why I keep my landline. In bad weather or an emergency, I rely on that landline. I do not have long distance on that landline, but I can call all local emergency numbers as well as persons
or busineesses in the immediate area. I dont make many long dist. calls,
but when I do, I do have to go up that hill and use the cellphone.
I do think the dialup problem is on the other end (ISP), but that still
dont explain why Win98 works and not any NT based OSs.
Being rural has it's disadvantages, but I'll accept the technology disadvantages before I'd ever live in a city. The firsdt part of my life
was in a city, and I hated it.
I know they sell signal boosters for cellphones. I am sure that having
an antenna on the roof and a booster could solve the metal house
limitations, but I'd still be boosting a very weak signal.
The only way to get high speed internet here is a satellite, and that's
very costly around here. They sell the whole package, TV, Internet, and
other stuff, at a cost of well over $100 per month. I cant afford it,
and I do not want the tv part. I have a 40ft tv antenna, and I get
enough tv stations to suit me. I mostly just watch ME-TV anyhow. I'm
elderly and like the old shows. Modern tv is crap in my opinion.
james@nospam.com wrote:[]
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:20:27 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> wrote:
[](I still can't understand why you don't get it with Windows 98, but
I sympathise that you're fed up of trying things!)
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because myWould it be possible to erect some sort of aerial - do cellular
cellphone dont get a signal.
signals reach your location but too far above ground level? Or are
[]Thanks for starting a new thread. I was considering doing the same.
I have never understood why Win98 works and not any NT based OS. I
No, I dont get a usable cellphone signal. I live down a hill,
cellphone
signals are poor to start with, and being downhill from the nearby town,
I dont get much. Sometimes I get one bar, but have to go outside (metal
or busineesses in the immediate area. I dont make many long dist. calls,
but when I do, I do have to go up that hill and use the cellphone.
I do think the dialup problem is on the other end (ISP), but that
still
dont explain why Win98 works and not any NT based OSs.
Is your roof that far below the height you get when you "go up thatan antenna on the roof and a booster could solve the metal house
limitations, but I'd still be boosting a very weak signal.
and I do not want the tv part. I have a 40ft tv antenna, and I get
James has said he doesn't like MoDem cards, and has ropey USB support,enough tv stations to suit me. I mostly just watch ME-TV anyhow. I'm
elderly and like the old shows. Modern tv is crap in my opinion.
There are multiple kinds of dialup modems.
On my laptop, the softmodem function is done with a
sound chip. That means the laptop still needs a DAA,
but the ADC (analog to digital converter) function is
done with a sound chip. The driver situation on the
james@nospam.com wrote:separate
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:20:27 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> wrote:
In message <1fio0d9pouhfijehel9a2ludovp9p1a6n5@4ax.com>,
james@nospam.com writes:
[]
I do wonder if getting a different brand of modem would help though. IIt might ...
[]
I think a lot of the problems is my ISP. They have pretty much abandoned >>>> the dialup, but they know that some of us rural people cant connect any >>>> other way. so they keep a few modems running for those of us who have a >>> ... as long as the "spiral of death" isn't caused by the other end.
(I still can't understand why you don't get it with Windows 98, but I
sympathise that you're fed up of trying things!)
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because myWould it be possible to erect some sort of aerial - do cellular signals >>> reach your location but too far above ground level? Or are you so remote >>> that you are not in a coverage area at all? I appreciate it'd be
cellphone dont get a signal.
awkward, since modern 'phones don't have an aerial socket, and it'd have >>> to be bidirectional, which makes boosters difficult (though can be
done), but if there is a signal, two passive but high-gain (i. e.
directional) aerials connected together, in your loft or on a pole,
_might_ make life a bit more bearable.
Thanks for starting a new thread. I was considering doing the same.
I have never understood why Win98 works and not any NT based OS. I still
have Win2000 installed on the same computer as Win98. All I use it for
is to do backups, because Win98 cant handle those external hard drives
on USB. I love Win98, but USB support has always been lousy. By (dual)
booting to Win2000, I can copy everything from my HDD to my backup,
including the Win98 OS files. I would have XP instead in that partition,
but this computer is not quite up to Xp level for power and such.
No, I dont get a usable cellphone signal. I live down a hill, cellphone
signals are poor to start with, and being downhill from the nearby town,
I dont get much. Sometimes I get one bar, but have to go outside (metal
covered house). But I know I will lose the signal at any time during the
call. Other times I dont get any signal. Most of the time I drive up the
hill to make calls. Thats why I keep my landline. In bad weather or an
emergency, I rely on that landline. I do not have long distance on that
landline, but I can call all local emergency numbers as well as persons
or busineesses in the immediate area. I dont make many long dist. calls,
but when I do, I do have to go up that hill and use the cellphone.
I do think the dialup problem is on the other end (ISP), but that still
dont explain why Win98 works and not any NT based OSs.
Being rural has it's disadvantages, but I'll accept the technology
disadvantages before I'd ever live in a city. The firsdt part of my life
was in a city, and I hated it.
I know they sell signal boosters for cellphones. I am sure that having
an antenna on the roof and a booster could solve the metal house
limitations, but I'd still be boosting a very weak signal.
The only way to get high speed internet here is a satellite, and that's
very costly around here. They sell the whole package, TV, Internet, and
other stuff, at a cost of well over $100 per month. I cant afford it,
and I do not want the tv part. I have a 40ft tv antenna, and I get
enough tv stations to suit me. I mostly just watch ME-TV anyhow. I'm
elderly and like the old shows. Modern tv is crap in my opinion.
There are multiple kinds of dialup modems.
They all have to (somehow) do the following.
RJ-11 --- DAA ------------------ ADC ------------------ DSP ---- (PPP)
Data Access convert beeps convert samples
Arrangement into digital samples in the frequency
Separate phone high at 8KHz rate. Just domain, to 0/1 in
voltage from PC low like a sound chip. time domain. The
voltages. Dumb cct, frequencies
"like a piece of iron". into bins orbuckets
(just like ADSL!).
On your USR Sportster, there is a chip called a Datapump
inside the modem. It does DSP at 80-90MHz or so. It's
a processor doing the DSP function. The USR Sportster
should be relatively consistent from one OS to another.
That's why we buy them, consistent performance without
need of ugly drivers. The modem works at the "AT command"
level. The spiral of death, is solely a function of the
firmware behavior of the DSP. Modems like this, when flashed
up to V92, basically run a different firmware that
includes the DSP function for V92 protocol. The firmware
file should be a little larger, as the firmware has to
be able to drop back from V92->V90->V34 and so on.
On a "Winmodem" or softmodem, the card you buy is really
cheap, because it contains a DAA plus an ADC. The DSP portion
is done by the system processor. This means you're on the hook
for a driver which does DSP. A well-written DSP algo, can
actually do 1% better transfer rates than the Sportster
(I tested this, and couldn't believe my eyes, and
had to repeat the A/B testing several times to be sure).
The driver, makes *all* the difference. No driver, no workie.
So the Winmodem has the DAA (transformer) plus an analog
to digital converter. Well, how could we make that even
cheaper ?
On my laptop, the softmodem function is done with a
sound chip. That means the laptop still needs a DAA,
but the ADC (analog to digital converter) function is
done with a sound chip. The driver situation on the
laptop is no different than the one in the previous
paragraph. No matter what OS, a driver with DSP code
in it is needed to convert the laptop sound chip output,
into ones and zeros for the PPP protocol the OS terminates.
While I used to believe the Sportster was superior
in every way, and I was always shopping for datapump
modems, the reality is, if you're lucky, and the
other kind comes with a "good driver", it can work
just as well. And that's really the trick. Do the
customer reviews indicate a driver is available
for the OS in question ? What do the customers
think of the driver ? Is it crap ? Even the Sportster
can have its issues, but I discovered the "generic"
dialup string is frequently enough to make the
Sportster work OK. Just because WinXP "can't find"
an entry for the most modern Sportster, you can
actually make it work with the "generic" modem
detection.
Paul
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:56:48 -0500, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
james@nospam.com wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 15:20:27 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"There are multiple kinds of dialup modems.
<G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> wrote:
In message <1fio0d9pouhfijehel9a2ludovp9p1a6n5@4ax.com>,Thanks for starting a new thread. I was considering doing the same.
james@nospam.com writes:
[]
I do wonder if getting a different brand of modem would help though. I >>>> It might ...[]
I think a lot of the problems is my ISP. They have pretty much abandoned >>>>> the dialup, but they know that some of us rural people cant connect any >>>>> other way. so they keep a few modems running for those of us who have a >>>> ... as long as the "spiral of death" isn't caused by the other end.
(I still can't understand why you don't get it with Windows 98, but I >>>> sympathise that you're fed up of trying things!)
landline from them. Where I live, I must have a landline because myWould it be possible to erect some sort of aerial - do cellular signals >>>> reach your location but too far above ground level? Or are you so remote >>>> that you are not in a coverage area at all? I appreciate it'd be
cellphone dont get a signal.
awkward, since modern 'phones don't have an aerial socket, and it'd have >>>> to be bidirectional, which makes boosters difficult (though can be
done), but if there is a signal, two passive but high-gain (i. e.
directional) aerials connected together, in your loft or on a pole,
_might_ make life a bit more bearable.
I have never understood why Win98 works and not any NT based OS. I still >>> have Win2000 installed on the same computer as Win98. All I use it for
is to do backups, because Win98 cant handle those external hard drives
on USB. I love Win98, but USB support has always been lousy. By (dual)
booting to Win2000, I can copy everything from my HDD to my backup,
including the Win98 OS files. I would have XP instead in that partition, >>> but this computer is not quite up to Xp level for power and such.
No, I dont get a usable cellphone signal. I live down a hill, cellphone
signals are poor to start with, and being downhill from the nearby town, >>> I dont get much. Sometimes I get one bar, but have to go outside (metal
covered house). But I know I will lose the signal at any time during the >>> call. Other times I dont get any signal. Most of the time I drive up the >>> hill to make calls. Thats why I keep my landline. In bad weather or an
emergency, I rely on that landline. I do not have long distance on that
landline, but I can call all local emergency numbers as well as persons
or busineesses in the immediate area. I dont make many long dist. calls, >>> but when I do, I do have to go up that hill and use the cellphone.
I do think the dialup problem is on the other end (ISP), but that still
dont explain why Win98 works and not any NT based OSs.
Being rural has it's disadvantages, but I'll accept the technology
disadvantages before I'd ever live in a city. The firsdt part of my life >>> was in a city, and I hated it.
I know they sell signal boosters for cellphones. I am sure that having
an antenna on the roof and a booster could solve the metal house
limitations, but I'd still be boosting a very weak signal.
The only way to get high speed internet here is a satellite, and that's
very costly around here. They sell the whole package, TV, Internet, and
other stuff, at a cost of well over $100 per month. I cant afford it,
and I do not want the tv part. I have a 40ft tv antenna, and I get
enough tv stations to suit me. I mostly just watch ME-TV anyhow. I'm
elderly and like the old shows. Modern tv is crap in my opinion.
They all have to (somehow) do the following.
RJ-11 --- DAA ------------------ ADC ------------------ DSP ---- (PPP)
Data Access convert beeps convert samples
Arrangement into digital samples in the frequency >> Separate phone high at 8KHz rate. Just domain, to 0/1 in >> voltage from PC low like a sound chip. time domain. The >> voltages. Dumb cct, frequencies separate
"like a piece of iron". into bins or buckets
(just like ADSL!). >>
On your USR Sportster, there is a chip called a Datapump
inside the modem. It does DSP at 80-90MHz or so. It's
a processor doing the DSP function. The USR Sportster
should be relatively consistent from one OS to another.
That's why we buy them, consistent performance without
need of ugly drivers. The modem works at the "AT command"
level. The spiral of death, is solely a function of the
firmware behavior of the DSP. Modems like this, when flashed
up to V92, basically run a different firmware that
includes the DSP function for V92 protocol. The firmware
file should be a little larger, as the firmware has to
be able to drop back from V92->V90->V34 and so on.
On a "Winmodem" or softmodem, the card you buy is really
cheap, because it contains a DAA plus an ADC. The DSP portion
is done by the system processor. This means you're on the hook
for a driver which does DSP. A well-written DSP algo, can
actually do 1% better transfer rates than the Sportster
(I tested this, and couldn't believe my eyes, and
had to repeat the A/B testing several times to be sure).
The driver, makes *all* the difference. No driver, no workie.
So the Winmodem has the DAA (transformer) plus an analog
to digital converter. Well, how could we make that even
cheaper ?
On my laptop, the softmodem function is done with a
sound chip. That means the laptop still needs a DAA,
but the ADC (analog to digital converter) function is
done with a sound chip. The driver situation on the
laptop is no different than the one in the previous
paragraph. No matter what OS, a driver with DSP code
in it is needed to convert the laptop sound chip output,
into ones and zeros for the PPP protocol the OS terminates.
While I used to believe the Sportster was superior
in every way, and I was always shopping for datapump
modems, the reality is, if you're lucky, and the
other kind comes with a "good driver", it can work
just as well. And that's really the trick. Do the
customer reviews indicate a driver is available
for the OS in question ? What do the customers
think of the driver ? Is it crap ? Even the Sportster
can have its issues, but I discovered the "generic"
dialup string is frequently enough to make the
Sportster work OK. Just because WinXP "can't find"
an entry for the most modern Sportster, you can
actually make it work with the "generic" modem
detection.
Paul
My Sportsters (I have two of them) are both V92. External Serial cable
types.
I had another one that was V90, and I did not notice any difference
beween the V90 and V92. But that V90 one died.
I'm looking on ebay at a NEW Supra Express 56K ITU standard.
Also an external serial modem.
The box says "Shotgun ready for speeds up to 112K
Voicemail, Internet and Fax
56K ITU standard V90 and K56Flex.".
I dont know what ITU means....
It is V90, but what is K56Flex?
Is that better than just V90?
And what about that "Shotgun Ready"?
I know there are some people online who I'd like to shoot, but I'm not
into murdering anyone online by pulling the trigger on my modem. <LOL>
Seriously what does the shotgun ready mean?
Like I said, I am considering buying another brand of modem. I hear that Supra is one of the better brands. BUt if it's just anoither V90, isnt
that gonna work the same as my Sportster?
I noted that these Supra ones sell for a lot more than the USR sportster modems sell for on Ebay. The cheapest one I found is $30 (but its NEW
and still in the box). Most of the Sportsters sell for $15 to $20, but
most are USED.
Whats a real joke is that there are sellers trying to sell 1200 baud
Supra modems for $90. Who in their right mind would even want a 1200
baud modem, much less pay that much for one?
There are a lot of Supra modems selling that are USB type, but I cant
use them on my Win98 machine, so I wont buy a USB type.
My Sportsters (I have two of them) are both V92. External Serial cable
types.
I had another one that was V90, and I did not notice any difference
beween the V90 and V92. But that V90 one died.
I'm looking on ebay at a NEW Supra Express 56K ITU standard.
Also an external serial modem.
The box says "Shotgun ready for speeds up to 112K
Voicemail, Internet and Fax
56K ITU standard V90 and K56Flex.".
I dont know what ITU means....
It is V90, but what is K56Flex?
Is that better than just V90?
And what about that "Shotgun Ready"?
I know there are some people online who I'd like to shoot, but I'm not
into murdering anyone online by pulling the trigger on my modem. <LOL>
Seriously what does the shotgun ready mean?
Like I said, I am considering buying another brand of modem. I hear that Supra is one of the better brands. BUt if it's just anoither V90, isnt
that gonna work the same as my Sportster?
I noted that these Supra ones sell for a lot more than the USR sportster modems sell for on Ebay. The cheapest one I found is $30 (but its NEW
and still in the box). Most of the Sportsters sell for $15 to $20, but
most are USED.
Whats a real joke is that there are sellers trying to sell 1200 baud
Supra modems for $90. Who in their right mind would even want a 1200
baud modem, much less pay that much for one?
There are a lot of Supra modems selling that are USB type, but I cant
use them on my Win98 machine, so I wont buy a USB type.
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) - a standards body.
*******
Shotgunning, combines the bandwidth of two modems.
It's not practical, and is some kind of sad joke.
Teaming, is the same idea, with two NICs on a computer.
Generally the NICs are identical (as the teaming software
is provided by the manufacturer of the chip, and selling
a second one is in their best interests).
On ADSL, MLPPP is the teaming of multiple ADSL connections.
My ISP will sell you up to 7 ADSL connections, for seven times
the monthly price.
In some cases, the lunacy might make sense, but most
of the time, it doesn't. In some cases, you don't
get to combine the bandwidth into a single IP connection,
and must use a multi-connection downloader software
to get the enhanced transfer rate from a single site.
*******
There were two "camps" of chip makers. One camp made K56 solutions.
The other made X2 solutions.
Rockwell was the K56Flex camp. Rockwell spun off its chip making
portion as Conexant. Towards the end of this web page, it
suggests Conexant still owns the data modem business.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conexant
The datapump version of Conexant chips is possibly called "ACF".
Some of this info, is needed on the Linux side, for setting
up modems, and otherwise we might not have got any
taxonomy info at all.
http://modemsite.com/56k/rockacf.asp
This is a picture of my Diamond MultiMedia Supra brand modem,
with a Rockwell chip inside (making it K56Flex).
Supra was bought by DiamondMM (1995). This product was
made some time in 1998 maybe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supra,_Inc.
Main chip RCVDL56ACFW/SP ACF = single chip modem w. datapump
Rockwell 1998 Week 8
CY7C109-15 Static RAM for processor
Atmel AT49F020 Flash EEPROM (reprogrammable)
(213,951 bytes)
https://s8.postimg.org/459vr7nz9/Diamond_Supra_ACF.jpg
The question then is, how do we track down a list of
ACF modems ? They might not be the only flavor of K56Flex.
Another supplier of ACF might be Creative.
*******
This is the only list I found so far. And of course,
it doesn't sound like the year 2017 here. Some of the
text strings hint at K56 or ACF. HCF is not the same thing
(probably a softmodem of some sort). There are also X2 modems
mixed into this lot.
http://xmodem.org/modems/extlist.html
Paul
james@nospam.com wrote:
My Sportsters (I have two of them) are both V92. External Serial cable
types.
I had another one that was V90, and I did not notice any difference
beween the V90 and V92. But that V90 one died.
I'm looking on ebay at a NEW Supra Express 56K ITU standard.
Also an external serial modem.
The box says "Shotgun ready for speeds up to 112K
Voicemail, Internet and Fax
56K ITU standard V90 and K56Flex.".
I dont know what ITU means....
It is V90, but what is K56Flex?
Is that better than just V90?
And what about that "Shotgun Ready"?
I know there are some people online who I'd like to shoot, but I'm not
into murdering anyone online by pulling the trigger on my modem. <LOL>
Seriously what does the shotgun ready mean?
Shotgun is combining two dial-up modems on two different copper phone
lines. http://www.modemhelp.net/faqs/shotgun.shtml for its details.
Like I said, I am considering buying another brand of modem. I hear that
Supra is one of the better brands. BUt if it's just anoither V90, isnt
that gonna work the same as my Sportster?
I noted that these Supra ones sell for a lot more than the USR sportster
modems sell for on Ebay. The cheapest one I found is $30 (but its NEW
and still in the box). Most of the Sportsters sell for $15 to $20, but
most are USED.
Wow, I remember Supra. I think I had its 28.8k external modem I bought
from my college roommate, but its connection sucked with 16800 speed. :(
Whats a real joke is that there are sellers trying to sell 1200 baud
Supra modems for $90. Who in their right mind would even want a 1200
baud modem, much less pay that much for one?
Were they brand new and unopened?
There are a lot of Supra modems selling that are USB type, but I cant
use them on my Win98 machine, so I wont buy a USB type.
I tried a couple winmodems at work. Dang they suck. Also, they don't
work under a Mac Mini's Mac OS X v10.9. (no driver). :(
This gets very complicated and confusing to me. To sum it up, from what
you said, it seems like there is V90 / 92 and K56 Flex. The two basic options. Since my Sportsters have never given me a decent connection
using XP, I want to try something else. Since the Sportsters are V90/92,
I assume I need to try the K56Flex. Is that correct?
This Supra Express modem says it has BOTH the V90 and K56Flex. Is that a
good choice for me, or is there something better (another brand)?
What should I be looking for? Model numbers will help a lot more than
all this highly technical info. I cant see what chip is being used when
I look at modems on ebay or whereever.
| Sysop: | Rempala |
|---|---|
| Location: | Richlands, NC |
| Users: | 113 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 122:41:04 |
| Calls: | 373 |
| Files: | 6 |
| Messages: | 110,810 |
