HylaFAX The world's most advanced open source fax server

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [hylafax-users] Brooktrout versus Multitech



On 2004.08.11 10:10 Stephen Carville wrote:
I hope this isn't a holy war subject but does anyone know of a reason
to
prefer Brooktrout over Multitiech modem cards or vice versa?

I think it is a holy war subject for some. But, all the same, it is a very good question, and I for one am glad that you've brought it up.


Firstly, please realize that I am biased. I have done a lot of work to get HylaFAX working in sexy ways with usually mundane, cheap Class 1 equipment. I wouldn't have done all of that work if I truly didn't believe in open source software and open, standardized hardware interfaces.

So...

To put things in perspective, as far as hardware goes, a faxmodem is a faxmodem is a faxmodem. It either faxes properly or it doesn't fax properly. No matter how much propaganda BrookTrout or any other manufacturer may pump into the marketplace, their faxmodem still is just a device that, with the aid of software, performs T.30 to communicate images with the remote device. The hardware doesn't do any magical incantations to make faxing any better or necessarily save you any more money over other hardware with the same feature set.

You can use a MultiTech modem to fax or you can use a BrookTrout modem to fax or you can use some other hardware to fax. It really shouldn't matter as long as you're comparing hardware with the equivalent fax feature sets and as long as the hardware that you're comparing doesn't have problematic firmware flaws.

Lets assume that both MultiTech and BrookTrout don't have any problematic firmware flaws (I think that this is a fairly safe assumption to make). The differences in operation are these: the MultiTech can be operated in Class 1, 1.0, 2, 2.0, or 2.1; the BrookTrout must be operated with its proprietary API. In Class 1 and 1.0 most of the fax protocol is performed by HylaFAX. This means that the modem firmware does very little fax protocol work other than raising and lowering carriers and modulating and communicating data. The rest of the work is done by HylaFAX. This makes it very easy for us to add features, fix problems, and improve functionality as desired. In Class 2, 2.0, and 2.1 most of the fax protocol is performed by the modem itself, and very little is done by HylaFAX. This makes it very difficult (if not impossible) for us to do anything about features, problems, or functionality, as the hardware user will need to rely upon the hardware manufacturer for all of this. BrookTrout API is one step further than Class 2x: it requires the hardware user to access the modem only via the proprietary API. In this case the modem firmware, as in Class 2x, does virtually all of the fax protocol, but the interface is not standardized (open) across multiple manufacturers. As with Class 2x, BrookTrout must be relied upon for features, fixes, and improvements.

To me it's a matter of control. I like to be able to control the faxing. I don't want the modem doing it.

When you use the DTE (HylaFAX) to do most of the fax protocol you run the risk of the DTE messing up timing due to underlying issues (such as CPU, disk, or RAM load). So on a VERY high-stress server you could experience timing problems that are unable to be resolved. I've not yet seen any such timing problems that cannot be resolved, although some kinds of high-load timing problems do exist still in HylaFAX. (See Bug 566 for the work to improve the current ones of which I know.) Thus the differences in hardware is this: the BrookTrout probably has lots and lots of on-card RAM and thus will pretty much not run any risk of these kinds of timing problems. With Class 2x the risk is only slightly greater; the chance of there being such a timing problem is still extremely remote. With Class 1x the risk is most prominent, but I've only ever seen the problem surface on one server (and a test one at that), and the problems that I've seen actually do have fixes.

It's a matter of hardware configuration - when you're putting together a high-demand/high-usage/heavy-load system do you invest a lot of money into proprietary faxmodem hardware, or do you invest a lot of money into fast system hardware?

There's also a fairly significant price difference, in case you weren't aware of that. That extra money goes to help pay for lawyers in BrookTrout's lawsuits against their competitors.

Lee.

____________________ 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@xxxxxxxxx*




Project hosted by iFAX Solutions