From: Richard Town To: B J Thread: Class1.0 (1/8) Date: 15-Jul-97, 4:20pm (Ref# 5555) Hi B J Did you ever find out what the differences were between Class1 and Class1.0? It's been mentioned elsewhere (SUPRA) that there's an amendment out on the ITU site. But I don't have a subscription rgdZ Richard --- FMail/386 1.02 * Origin: Another message via PackLink +44(0)1812972486 (2:254/235)
From: Simon Slater To: Richard Town Thread: Class1.0 (2/8) Date: 18-Jul-97, 9:15am (Ref# 5556) Hi Richard! How are you? 15-Jul-97 16:20:01, Richard Town wrote to B J Subject: Class1.0 RT> Did you ever find out what the differences were between Class1 and RT> Class1.0? It's been mentioned elsewhere (SUPRA) that there's an RT> amendment out on the ITU site. At the moment I do think he has. I did ask him last week about FAX 1.0 and 2.1 but he's not found anything yet. AFAIK there is very lettle difference between 1 and 1.0 but I'll keep pestering Dan Moore for a real answer:) Regards, Simon... [coole@compura.com] [http://www.compura.com/coole/] --- Terminate 4.10g07/Pro*at [Terminate *UK* Support] * Origin: The Coole BBS, [#01232-364684#] 33k6 VFC/V34 (2:443/777)
From: Richard Town To: Simon Slater Thread: Class1.0 (3/8) Date: 19-Jul-97, 8:30pm (Ref# 5557) -=> Quoting Simon Slater to Richard Town <=- RT> Did you ever find out what the differences were between Class1 and RT> Class1.0? It's been mentioned elsewhere (SUPRA) that there's an SS> At the moment I do think he has. I did ask him last week about FAX 1.0 SS> and 2.1 ^^^ Oh no, not another? SS> difference between 1 and 1.0 but I'll keep pestering Dan Moore for a SS> real answer:) Thanx. It's there alright on itu.ch.doc (or something) Mebe only avoiding the need to lock back port speed to 19k2 rgdZ Richard --- FMail/386 1.02 * Origin: Another message via PackLink +44(0)1812972486 (2:254/235)
From: B.J. Guillot To: Richard Town Thread: Class1.0 (4/8) Date: 29-Jul-97, 11:51pm (Ref# 5564) > Did you ever find out what the differences were between Class1 > and Class1.0? It's been mentioned elsewhere (SUPRA) that there's > an amendment out on the ITU site. > But I don't have a subscription I don't have a subscription either. I can't afford it. I spent nearly $300 or so on fax documents back in 1994 or 1995, and what I got for that price did not have much bang-for-the-buck. If anyone has a modem that reports it has Class 1.0, then let me know, and I can send you a test copy of BGFAX to see if simply using AT+FCLASS=1.0 mode works identically to AT+FCLASS=1 mode. I wasn't clear from your message whether you actually had one of these modems or not. Regards, bgfax author
From: B.J. Guillot To: Richard Town Thread: Class1.0 (5/8) Date: 29-Jul-97, 11:54pm (Ref# 5565) > SS> and 2.1 > ^^^ > Oh no, not another? Regarding Class 2.1, .. That was my same response. Modem makers haven't even adopted 2.0 yet, after several years, and now they want to make changes to that. Class 2.0 is just a joke. There is barely any software that supports it (I think BGFAX was the first program to do so), only a small amount of modem makers support it. And those that do have either Class 2.0 implementations that are so buggy as to make them nearly unusable (USR), or the modems are so expensive that no one buys them (ZyXEL). Rockwell, which had a very good Class 2 implementation, has had many of its chipset makers drop the Class 2 support from their K56 modems because they are running out of ROM space, so it's very unlikely that Rockwell will ever support Class 2.0. So, in my opinion, Class 2.0 is dead, and will always be dead. Software companies don't want to support it because they know they if they do, they'll get complaints from customers when they can't get faxes to go through when using it with buggy modems. I'd like to know of any modems besides USR and ZyXEL that support Class 2.0. I'd heard there are others, but I don't know if any of them are available in the USA or not. I'd really like to find one for testing. Did Multitech ever start supporting Class 2.0? In my opinion, there were two things in Class 2.0 that are good. Everything else in Class 2.0 is not much better than Class 2. The first thing is the ability to work at any DTE speed. (Most Rockwell-based designs require a DTE speed of 19200.) The second thing is the AT+FLO= command to select either software or hardware flow control. With other modems, there is no standard way with Class 2 of picking the flow control. Regards, bgfax author
From: Richard Town To: B.J. Guillot Thread: Class1.0 (6/8) Date: 06-Aug-97, 9:56am (Ref# 5603) -=> Quoting B.J. Guillot to Richard Town <=- BG> Did you ever find out what the differences were between Class1 > and Class1.0? It's been mentioned elsewhere (SUPRA) that there's > an amendment out on the ITU site. But I don't have a subscription * BG> If anyone has a modem that reports it has Class 1.0, then let me know, * BG> and I can send you a test copy of BGFAX to see if simply using * BG> AT+FCLASS=1.0 mode works identically to AT+FCLASS=1 mode. BG> I wasn't clear from your message whether you actually had one of these BG> modems or not. Nope. Unless the linspeed goes up, or there's more grey scales which means Group III compatibility questions, don't see the point either. Not being in nowadays on the regs gravy train :) rgdZ Richard --- FMail/386 1.02 * Origin: Another message via PackLink +44(0)1812972486 (2:254/235)
From: Simon Slater To: B.J. Guillot Thread: Class1.0 (7/8) Date: 09-Aug-97, 11:12pm (Ref# 5607) Hi B.J.! How are you? 29-Jul-97 23:51:00, B.J. Guillot wrote to Richard Town Subject: Class1.0 BG> If anyone has a modem that reports it has Class 1.0, then let me BG> know, and I can send you a test copy of BGFAX to see if simply using BG> AT+FCLASS=1.0 mode works identically to AT+FCLASS=1 mode. anyone with a SupraExpress 56e will be able to do that for ya. I have one here at the mo online. 44-1232-364684 I have BGFAX setup for FAX Class 1 Regards, Simon... [coole@compura.com] [http://www.compura.com/coole/] --- Terminate 5.00/Pro*at [Terminate *UK* Support] * Origin: The Coole BBS, [#01232-364684#] 33k6 VFC/V34 (2:443/777)
From: B.J. Guillot To: Simon Slater Thread: Class1.0 (8/8) Date: 18-Aug-97, 4:14pm (Ref# 5629) > anyone with a SupraExpress 56e will be able to do that for ya. I have one > here at the mo online. 44-1232-364684 > I have BGFAX setup for FAX Class 1 Let me know what happens when you try to send a fax, i.e., just bgfax /send bgfax.cnf 555-1212 (bgfax.cnf just being the name of an ASCII file that is probably in your directory to send) I'm curious to see the BGFAX.LOG clip from the attempt, to see if BGFAX can actually send a fax or if it requires that I patch up BGFAX to handle it. Regards, bgfax author