On Mon, 08 May 2000, John P. Verel wrote:
> > a BASIC (not foolproof) test is this: is it PCI? If so,
> > it's about 99.5% sure it's a WinModem. SOME WinModems have
> > (beta) drivers for Linux. I'd still scrap it for a 100%
> > hardware modem.
> > John
> Gee, that's news to me. My USR PCI internal modem works fine and is
> not a Winmodem. One way to proceed is to examine the manufacturers
> packaging and web site carefully. Any statement that the modem
> REQUIRES any Microsoft system means it is a Winmodem...to be avoided.
>
Notice I said "(not foolproof)"? That was a
GENERALIZATION. As the old saying goes, generalizations
are. It was not meant to be a hard-and-fast rule of thumb.
The vast majority of PCI modems these days are WinModems.
Which is why I recommend to people that they get an
external serial modem or an internal PCI modem. I know of
TWO modems now which are non-WinModems: the Phoebe
TI-chipset USR Clone and now a USR PCI. Is it a Courier or
a Sportster? I believe all Sportster PCIs made in the last
two-three years are WinModems (at least the 56k ones.) If
I'm wrong, I'll gladly admit it. I'd like to know what to
recommend to clients, but it's hard w/o knowing some
SPECIFIC modems. I know AOpen's FM-56 has two versions: a
WinModem and a Non-WinModem. So does the Phoebe. It's hard
to know w/o SEEING what the customer is looking at, so I
generally recommend AGAINST any PCI modem.
John
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
