|>most likely the same way they flashed a TI chipset to a rockwell v.fc
|>or an AT&T/Lucnent v.terbo etc. USR sucks at a lot of things, but
|>modem code isn't one of them. Now, I want to see Livingston go get an
|>"Independent tester" to do some performance figures between the NAS
|>vendors. I bet that tester can get more than 17calls ;)
|
|
|We are in the final process of getting results done from the NSTL lab which
|recently published its original test results in Network World (I think)
|magazine. These results did not include Livingston but had everyone else. I
|will get those posted as soon as they are complete.
Great! I look forward to the results! I have my own theories on
performance, but no _real_ lab tests to prove it.
|I'll reiterate that 1._real world_ is the most important environment to
|test in.
|2. The PM3 is designed with absolutely no system bottlenecks that would
|cause the product to suffer degradation of performance by adding more
|calls. I only wish that a company (USR) cared more about its credibility
|than to allow something of such FUD to be posted publically when it surely
|has people in the organization that are smart enough to not risk losing
|credibility for the sake of competing unfairly.
In real world the performance is stellar. USR is changing for the
better. Their support has gotten better, and they _finally_ have an
ISP only division. Every NAS vendor we use has its pluses and
minuses.
Jonah
Jonah Barron Yokubaitis | Texas' First X2 and K56flex
President | Internet Provider
Texas.Net | Austin|San Antonio|Houston
http://www.texas.net | Dallas|Fort Worth|Boerne
Making 56K affordable | Georgetown|Dripping Springs