Re: (PMOD) Emachines/Etowers

Ed Schulz (edschulz@lucent.com)
Fri, 25 Jun 1999 08:36:01 -0400

I don't work for Lucent RABU wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 Jun 1999, Bullit wrote:
>
> >
> > Daniel
> > I understand the false UART to be caused by the use of WinModems. To the
> > best of my knowledge, WinModems do not use a serial port, therefore no UART
> > is even being used, so it doesn't really matter what the UART says.
>
> *BEEP* Unfortunately, winblowz does care what it sees as a UART.
>
> Look at Compaqs! When 8250 is listed the modem is total crap. When you
> do the fix... posted in archives or portmaster-users I believe, then it's
> only semi-crap ;)

You're using faulty logic here. Just becuase driver1 shows 8250 and driver1
is crap does not imply that the crap is caused by the display of 8250.
Especially when there's an example of a Windows modem driver (ours) that
also displays 8250 but is not crap.

I believe that there are far more important issues to chase than this one.
(And perhaps we could be somewhat more precise in our problem description
than "crap.")

-- 
Ed Schulz
edschulz@lucent.com
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-modems' in the body of the message.