> Don Lashier wrote:
> >
> > It *does* matter what the UART is reported as. All internal modems
> > (winmodems or not) use a "virtual" UART. There is simply no reason
> > to convert to serial and back to communicate with a card on the
> > computer bus. But it does matter that the UART reports itself as
> > an 8250 or 16550 because if it reports itself as an 8250 the OS
> > will think that there is no FIFO buffer present and performance
> > will suffer.
>
> To a DOS application running on Windows, our Lucent Win Modem appears as a
> 16550 UART. It's only in some Windows OS configurations that the Modems |
> Diagnostics | More Info display shows 8250. (We recently fixed this for
> ACPI systems.) I challenge anyone to demonstrate that performance suffers
> because of the "8250" display. Windows applications do not interact with
> the modem driver (or serial driver, for that matter) at the UART level.
Ed, I won't say that the LT winmodems suffer this. BUT look in the
archives regarding the fix for Compaqs that report 8250 uarts.
I have had to do this twice as posted earlier. Previous to the fix, modem
would dial and intermittently connect. Then almost immediately
disconnect. I didn't bother doing much debugging since 1) it's a Compaq
2) I upgraded the firmware 3) it's a Compaq 4) there is a techfix from
Compaq 5) it's a POS Compaq...
8) Funniest thing was one system would connect to us and be crappy, but
trying AOL and it wouldn't connect at all. So that was pretty funny to
me...
-- Aloha from Paradise,Sherwood Got Clue? If so: ISPF! The Forum for ISPs by ISPs, <http://www.ispf.com>
- To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with 'unsubscribe portmaster-modems' in the body of the message.