>We have problems with the PM3 and older modems too. One customer was using
>an older USR Sportster 28.8 and can connect only 1 out of 12 times (but
>"ALWAYS" connects to MSN -- I can't tell you how many times he has told us
>that :-). Some people have problems connecting the first try (it usually
>works if they try again). The most stable modems with the PM3 tend to be
>based on Rockwell chipsets (don't have many lucent chipset modems
>available..but they may be better :-), but only the newer versions (with
the
>correct v.90 code). We did notice an improvement in customer complaints
>when we switched to ComOs 3.8.2, but problem reports still keep coming in.
>I think that maybe we should find the best modem (v.90) and bulk-order a
>case of them and give them away to our customers when they complain.
Humm..
>but then there is the installation support calls that you would have to
>take... any guesses on when 3.9 is due out? <gr>
>
>Jason A. Cox
>Family Net, Inc. - jason@familynet.net
>(918) 663-7134 - FAX (918) 663-7136
>7935 East 57th Street - Tulsa, OK 74145
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Troy Harris <tharris@digitaldune.net>
>To: <portmaster-users@livingston.com>
>Sent: Thursday, April 08, 1999 11:58 AM
>Subject: Re: (PM) Modem Code
>
>
>> I disagree. From my point of view, something is seriously wrong with the
>PM3
>> modem code. I'm sure it works fine for MOST people, but in our town it is
>a
>> different story. We see massive modem problems with our PM3s. You say it
>> might be that we just have bad copper? Well, we recently moved our
offices
>> to a new part of town and our PRIs go through a totally different CO
>now...
>> Still the same problems.
>>
>> Our competitor just recently switched over to PM3s and they lost a ton of
>> business because of so many people not being able to connect with the new
>> modems. Of course when they tried to signup with us, they had the same
>> problems. Our other competitors running Total Control or Accend NASes
have
>a
>> much higher success of working with various modems.
>>
>> I guess I might have made that out to sound worst than it really is. For
>> most of our users, everything is fine and we get better connect speeds
>than
>> our non-PM3 competitors. But I would say we lose about 10% of new
sign-ups
>> because of modem problems and another 10% have them, but stick with us
for
>> one reason or another.
>>
>> I'm not saying that the modem code is totally useless, but I just don't
>> think it can handle bad phone lines or bad modems as well as the
>> competitors. It is no secret that the PM3s have flakey code, lots of
>people
>> at ISPF were joking about it, so I would suggest that Lucent start
working
>> on this problem if only for PRs sake.
>>
>> Troy Harris
>> Digitaldune Networks
>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
>'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
>Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>