>Does anyone know if anyone at Lucent/Rockwell/USR is working to get all
>three methods to be interoperable until the standard is agreed upon?
>Wouldn't this be a win-win situation for everyone. Don't they remember all
>the damn problems with v.fc, v.fast etc...why do they repeat the same
>problems over and over.
>From what I understand, USR does not want to join forces and interoperate with Lucent/Rockwell. I guess they see it as a competitive advantage. ;-)
>
>Too bad more of the big name players didn't use ascend and livingston type
>equipment and don't have total control stuff sitting around that usr will
>be giving the upgrades away for. I'd like to see them pull off this
>proprietay crap then.
>>
Regardless of who uses what, USR is only compatible with USR and any client with a rockwell/lucent-based modem who dials into a USR central site modem will wind up contacting the ISP with a support call when they cannot connect at 56K (they surely won't be calling USR - the ones who created this mess).
>
>That's the problem. In this competative business, that will be way to far
>in the future. We'll probably have to bring some type of usr equipment in
>to support x2 because to many of our customers own sportsters and are going
>to be bitten by the hype.
>
>
You make the call (no pun intended). From the marketing data I've seen Rockwell/Lucent claim about 70% market share of client-based modems. That leaves 30% for USR and others like Telebit, Penril, etc. who are neither Rockwell/Lucent or USR-based.
--Marty
****************************************************************
Marty Likier Livingston Worldwide Headquarters
Product Marketing Mgr. 4464 Willow Road
(800) 458-9966 Pleasanton, CA 94588 USA
(510) 737-2164 (510) 244-1903 (FAX)
marty@livingston.com Web:
<color><param>0000,0000,ffff</param>http://www.livingston.com
</color>****************************************************************