Re: [hylafax-users] problems with Multitech Modem MT 2834ZDXb

[Karl Denninger <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 02:24:02PM -0700, Lee Howard wrote:
> On 2003.10.06 13:33 Karl Denninger wrote:
> 
> > However, the troubling common point behind all this is that somehow,
> > my
> > various fax machines, many made by HP (various "all in one" products)
> > over
> > the years have NEVER failed to send or receive a fax.  Not once.  Oh
> > sure,
> > a couple of times they ran into a noisy line and had to have the
> > transmission
> > resent, but never once did I find a machine on the other end that
> > would
> > simply not talk to these machines.
> > 
> > This happens <ALL THE TIME> with "fax modems", irrespective of brand,
> > and
> > there are people out there, myself included, who consider it
> > completely
> > unacceptable behavior bordering on false advertising when a company
> > sells
> > a modem claiming fax compatability that in fact can talk to WELL UNDER
> > 100%
> > of the fax machines out here.  

> Karl, I'll afford you some latitude to openly voice your complaints 
> without my rebuttal about an outdated modem with troublesome firmware 
> knowing that you had such a headache with them before, but it is quite 
> erronious to take that experience and subsequently categorize "all fax 
> modems" as similar beasts.  You simply have no license to make blanket 
> reliability statements that cover all fax modems - or even all fax 
> modems made by any particular manufacturer (including MultiTech) when, 
> by virtue of your statements, you obviously have not had the faith or 
> made the effort to know better.

And you have no license to make such blanket statements about my experience
without first inquiring as to what it actually has been!

I've run Hylafax for a LONG time on various hardware.  I have gone through
DOZENS of fax modems trying to find ones that will behave.

Perhaps you have tens of thousands of dollars to THROW AWAY on various
hardware that turns out to be buggier than a roach motel.  

I do not.  

I have thus fallen back on Class 1, which puts 90+% of the problem in the 
Hylafax software's lap, where I can actually patch it and fix it if I have 
to.  

And I have had to.  

But at least I can.

That I <RARELY> post on this list does not mean that I'm "new" to Hylafax.
Nothing could be further from the truth.  I've been a production user of
this software since long before it was called Hylafax.

> A 10% failure rate is completely unacceptable, and you are 
> misconstruing your own situation if you expect everyone out here to 
> believe that such a failure rate is anywhere near normal or that 
> everyone should simply accept such failures as normal for "all fax 
> modems".  I've never even seen such sustained failure rates with the 
> worst Class 2.0 firmware from USR.

I have.  From USR, from the aforementioned Multitech modems, and from
several others brands (Zyxel, Zoom and UDS come to mind immediately - 
and that's not the complete list!)

I have a CARTON full of "faxmodems" that are no longer useful for anything,
as they lack the "today protocols" for data use and are unreliable for fax
use.

My applications for this software is NOT faxing to a few friends and family,
or even some commercial accounts where I can control what's on the other
end, even with gentle discussion.

My PRIMARY application for this package over the last four years has been
in the area of public advocacy - that is, faxing to and from LAWMAKERS both 
in Washington DC and around the nation in the various state legislatures.

I have a LOT of experience with these issues, and had even more when I ran
my own company, in which we used a large bank of faxmodems to handle customer
communication.

In EVERY case where some 2.whatever modem has failed to talk to a given 
machine on a given line, I have been able to complete the transmission 
or reception using nothing more complicated than an HP "All In One" product. 

Every single time.

> It is a completely common 
> thing for me to see 1000 faxes received or sent these days with no 
> reproducible errors.  If you're seeing 10% failure rates then you 
> really need to take a serious look at fixing your own setup, and you 
> only have the license to blame yourself, not "all fax modems", for your 
> situation.
> 
> Granted, I mostly use Class 1 for everything these days which shifts 
> most of the responsibility of fax protocol onto HylaFAX

Ding ding ding ding!

You use Class 1 because Class 2(.whatever) doesn't work reliably!

Why else would you shove off the overhead into the software?  

You wouldn't unless you HAD TO.

Well, I have HAD TO.  So have a lot of other people.  In fact, it appears
that YOU have HAD TO.

I don't see 10% error rates now, using Class 1.  In fact, I see very, very
few problems.  But that's not the point, is it, since in Class 1 the modem
does little more than forward raw data frames around and Hylafax does ALL
of the interpretation.

The entire point of Class 2 is to unload that requirement from the procesor
and into the modem.  Unfortunately, it simply isn't realistic to expect
that such will work reliably; it has NEVER been the case that relying on
Class 2.whatever is a good idea to actually USE, as ALL the implementations
I've seen are buggier than a roach motel. 

I've yet to find an example where it is AT LEAST as reliable as using 
Class 1.  And as I and the other user noted, this has even been true for
modems that the Hylafax FAQ listed as "recommended without reservation."

> some Class 2/2.0/2.1 firmwares, including MultiTech's current firmware 
> on their MT5634 line, do virtually as well.  

If you trusted it personally, you'd use it.  You have said you don't.

'Nuff said on that matter - you agree with me, you just won't stand up and
say it, nor will you publish it in the FAQ.  The result is that lots of
people buy particular "recommended" modems, spending more than they need
to in search of something "recommended", and then get a "surprise".  

I've had a LOT of surprises over the years on this issue.  

Since giving up and running Class 1, all the "surprises" went away.  

> Granted, all Class 2 
> firmwares are not created equal, and with enough time anyone will 
> likely bump into a modem with Class 2 firmware bugs.  It's at that 
> point that you would need to either switch to Class 1, get the firmware 
> fixed, or switch modems.  

I believe that CUSTOMERS have an ABSOLUTE right to expect that when someone
advertises a product as implementing a given standard, that it ACTUALLY
DOES do so WTIHOUT EXCEPTIION, and that if it does not, it will be fixed 
OR EATEN by that manufacturer, irrespective of whether that customer 
bought the newest model in the line or an older one.

I've yet, however, to find a SINGLE manufacturer that will do this in the
computer industry unless they are FORCED, often by threat of lawsuit or
extreme and public disclosure (e.g. showing up at a trade show with a "XXX
Sucks" T-shirt on), to actually DO SO.

> If your modem does not support Class 1 and 
> Class 2 then buying it risks wasting the purchase if you ever need to 
> switch Classes.  

If you expect a fax modem to operate in Class 2 mode, then IMO you're 
believing in Santa Claus.  Ignore the claims of such and just buy something 
for Class 1, configure your system hardware appropriately to be able to 
handle the load attendant with running in Class 1 mode, and forget about 
it.

Your system will be reliable.  And if there is a bug in the Class 1 code,
its in the open where you can see, touch, feel and patch it.

> If your modem does not come from a manufacturer which 
> actively supports it and has actual fax developers on staff, then 
> purchasing it risks wasting it if you ever need firmware fixed.  

Such a risk is unreasonable - that is my point - and firmware shouldn't
need to be "fixed" if its written correctly in the first place.

> MultiTech is one of a VERY few number of analog modem manufacturers 
> that actually have fax developers on staff which actively support their 
> current modem line.  You won't see their kind of fax support with 
> 3Com-USR, that's for sure.  When was the last time anyone from 3Com-USR 
> mailed this list?  (Hint: never)

True.  My opinion of USR/3Com is not printable in polite company, and their
main offices were located just a few miles from my former company when I
ran it.  But that is a discussion for another time and list.

> I applaud Steve for caring enough about customer support to actually 
> watch this mailing list.  Shame on you for trying to abuse that.
> 
> Lee.

I don't think there is anything abusive about pointing out that Class
2.whatever (whether suffixed or not) is simply not reliable enough from 
ANY fax modem manufacturer today for production use, and never has been
in my experience.

I welcome the opportunity to be proven wrong on this point, but I'm no
longer willing to do it on my dime <UNLESS> I have an absolute, 100% return
policy within a reasonable period of time (say, six months) with no garfing
and no second chances on "firmware upgrades" that might materialize and
might not, nor any "play with this S-register" hacks offered, if it fails.

As I have said, I have a CARTON of so-called Class 2 fax modems here,
with a number of different makes, models and manufacturers represented,
and in my opinion none of them are reliable enough for production use
in Class 2 mode.  

I only picked on Multitech because I own a few of those (and a couple of
OTHER Multitech models!) and IMHO as Class 2 faxmodems they are ALL as 
useful as bricks.  They are among good company in that regard; Multitech
is NOT the only manufacturer I'm pointing this out about.

The cheapest Zoom is just fine in Class 1 mode - but of course, so is
virtually everything else, as the modem does little more than answer 
the phone in that mode.

So why would one buy a more expensive product when you can't use the 
more expensive features you spent the money on in the first place as 
they are too buggy to be reliable?

IMO the "correct move" is to buy a nice cheap faxmodem with a Class 1 mode,
set it up that way, size your system to handle the load and go about your
business.  It will work.  My experience of many years with Hylafax says 
that DOES work.

Anything else is equivalent to inserting three quarters and pulling the
arm down in the hope of a progressive jackpot.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net	Tired of spam at your company?  LOOK HERE!
http://childrens-justice.org	Working for family and children's rights
http://diversunion.org		LOG IN AND GET YOUR TANK STICKERS TODAY!

____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
  To subscribe/unsubscribe, click http://lists.hylafax.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
 On UNIX: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx < /dev/null
  *To learn about commercial HylaFAX(tm) support, mail sales@xxxxxxxxxxxx*