If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 12:58:02 -0400, Paul wrote: The PortMon 3.02 has a menu to select the COM port to capture. You need to set that, before beginning the capture. As the "other" COM port will be silent. Paul I'll have to check that. I needed a break from damn thing this again. All the time I've spent trying to get this thing to work seems like a total waste at this point. Same **** I've dealt with using Win2000, and could never resolve during 5 years. In fact, after putting the XP machine away, I booted over to Win2000, and went online. During the first 3 minutes, I was able to open some web pages, it got slower and slower, and at about 20 min, I could not get anything. Even my newsreader said "winsock error", yet I was connected. Same **** that XP is doing! (Except using that internal PCTel modem, I can remain connected, but it's very slow.) I'm wondering if this Creative modem is just not suited to Win 2K and XP? Or, maybe none of those NT based OSs are suited to dialup ????? I'll send you that Portmon log, but I dont feel there is any solution anymore. I guess I'm just plain frustrated. I guess I can continue to use W98 for a few more years online, but will have less and less access to the web. I'm thinking more and more about buying an Apple computer. That would be mostly for the internet, while W98 will continue to run my other programs just fine. There dont seem to be many more options. Yea, I know, someone will suggest Linux again..... I dont expect much, I just want an OS that will run newer browsers, and connect at the same speed I get with W98 on dialup. High Speed internet would be nice, but for most uses, my dialup is fine on W98 for my needs. But waiting 20 minutes for one web page to load, and then completely failing is NOT acceptable on XP or W2K. Even if I could only use W2K, I'd be happy, since that allows newer browsers. After all, W2K is mostly the same as XP, minus some things and most of the bloat. I have the SP4 version installed. I have found XP to be a little more user friendly though, once all the bloat is removed. There is a utility shown here, called ModemChk. You don't need to click this (or buy the utility for that matter), because you can DIY. https://web.archive.org/web/20010208...K/modemchk.htm All it does, is issue command ATI11 to the modem. You can do the same thing by using HyperTerm (WinXP) or Putty (third party). You can talk to the modem and gather information. In Device Manager, the modem item, if you do Properties on it, has a Diagnostic tab. It runs various ATInn commands, but it doesn't use high enough values of "nn". If you run the diagnostic tab, and click the log button on the Device Manager modem dialog, you can see the output of the various calls to ATInn. But, you can also set up HyperTerm, to talk to the modem, type in an AT command and get answers back. You see, some of the modem functions, involve "memory". The modem remembers the "last session". It remembers it as long as the power doesn't go off. In this FAQ item, a Multitech modem dumps 26 lines of information. I suspect these lines could have used some editing. http://www.multitech.com/en_us/SUPPO...ns/res2078.asp Last Connection 56K V.90 Initial Transmit Carrier Rate 28800 28800 Initial Receive Carrier Rate 50000 49333 Final Transmit Carrier Rate 28800 28800 Final Receive Carrier Rate 50000 49333 Protocol Negotiation Result LAPM LAPM Data Compression Result V42bis V42bis Estimated Noise Level 152 152 Receive Signal Power Level (-dBm) 25 25 Transmit Signal Power Level (-dBm) 16 16 Round Trip Delay (msec) 4 4 Near Echo Level (-dBm) NA NA Far Echo Level (-dBm) NA NA Transmit Frame Count 3 3 Transmit Frame Error Count 0 0 Receive Frame Count 0 0 Receive Frame Error Count 0 0 Retrain by Local Modem 0 0 Retrain by Remote Modem 0 0 Rate Renegotiation by Local Modem 0 0 Rate Renegotiation by Remote Modem 0 0 Call Termination Cause 0 0 Robbed-Bit Signalling 00 00 Digital Loss (dB) 6 6 Remote Server ID 4342C3 NA Last PCM S PTR OK Now, I just ran this on HyperTerm (without dialing anything, dismiss the icon line and just use it to the respective COM port). And this is what my modem reports for ATI11. Not quite as much information. U.S. Robotics 56K FAX EXT Link Diagnostics... Modulation Unknown Speed Carrier Freq (Hz) Symbol Rate Trellis Code Nonlinear Encoding Precoding Shaping Preemphasis (-dB) Recv/Xmit Level (-dBm) Near Echo Loss (dB) Far Echo Loss (dB) Carrier Offset (Hz) Round Trip Delay (msec) Timing Offset (ppm) SNR (dB) Speed Shifts Up/Down 0/0 Status : OK My modem did not return any "numbers", because I haven't completed any calls :-) That's why the fields are empty. In your case, you'd do a dialup session on the modem, then when the session is finished, open HyperTerm and "talk" to the modem. HyperTerm should be in Accessories/Communications menu portion of the Programs menu on WinXP. There's no guarantee what you'll find there, or even whether ATI11 on the modem is detailed enough. There is also some command, that dumps the information about the frequency bins used in the 4KHz telephony passband. And there used to be a web page, which explained how to interpret that (to come up with ammunition to convince the telco to fix the line). Both of those capabilities, ATI11 or the frequency bin thing, require that the modem complete a previous session, so some "history" is available. Paul |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 23:45:11 -0400, Paul wrote:
There is a utility shown here, called ModemChk. You don't need to click this (or buy the utility for that matter), because you can DIY. https://web.archive.org/web/20010208...K/modemchk.htm Thanks Paul, I'm busy with other stuff, so I dont hae time to mess with this now, but I thought I'd download that program while doing other stuff. It turns out the URL link on that page is worthless.... Maybe I can find it on oldapps.com or one of those type of sites, but I cant look now. Just letting you know. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 03:44:42 -0400, Paul wrote:
Well, I said not to bother with that page. As you can do this for yourself, using a copy of Hyperterm. You don't need the fancy dialog box. And you don't really know until you try the ATI11 command on the modem, how good the report is. The one on mine isn't much good, because it doesn't report the starting baud rate and the rate it had dropped to later. Paul PAUL, I really appreciate all you have dont to try and help me, but I'm finished with it. It's gotten way beyond just getting on my nerves. Like I said in another message, this is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. All the possible init strings, combined with all the other settings, that this could go on for the rest of my life and beyond.... There are probably billions of possibilities. The moden has no support and the drivers are outdated. I cant find much of anything about it and the company has no support anymore. I've spent damn near a full week on this, and I have other priorities in my life that are more important and much less stressful. I thought someone would suggest some software that could find the problem and fix it, or at least tell me what to do. But spending weeks trying all sorts of settings which I mostly dont even understand is not my cup of tea. So, I'm done with it. I'll get another modem, one that has support. If that dont work, there will be an Apple computer in my future. In the meantime I still have Win98. Again, I appreciate your help, but I hope you understand where I'm coming from. This sort of thing is exactly why I wont use linux. I'm no computer geek, and dont want to be. I can do the hardware part, because I used to work with electronic repair, and I can install an OS, but when it comes to all these settings, it's all greek to me, and I find it extremely stressful. Actually I think the drivers are just no good for 2K and XP. But there are no newer ones. Thanks again |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
Paul wrote:
wrote: Thanks again No problem :-) With your US Robotics modem on the way, you can try that one out and see if it helps. Paul It's really a pity that this issue has been so vexing, since if it weren't for this, he could be up and running well with XP. It's still surprising to me that this low bitrate problem with XP (but not 98) even occurs. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
Bill in Co wrote:
Paul wrote: wrote: Thanks again No problem :-) With your US Robotics modem on the way, you can try that one out and see if it helps. Paul It's really a pity that this issue has been so vexing, since if it weren't for this, he could be up and running well with XP. It's still surprising to me that this low bitrate problem with XP (but not 98) even occurs. Playing with modems is loads of fun, since they made it so difficult to make headway. In one case here, I ended up ripping out a wall jack and replacing it, and the data rate came back up. With my Macintosh, I ended up crafting my own INIT string, because the one provided just wasn't working right. And with the US Robotics one, I learned you can use Unimodem driver (part of WinXP installation, so the Unimodem driver is already onboard), and that one seemed to work. At least with the USR modem, the DSP portion isn't likely to be a variable, and then the INiT string is what counts. Other than that, it could be an electrical problem, like some difference in chassis noise between the WinXP machine and the Win98 one. As far as I know, the DAA on the modem, should provide isolation of anything dangerous, but I don't know if every possible chassis noise problem is properly handled. All it might take, is running one computer off a two-prong power cable, instead of a three-pronged one, to put some hum on the modem end. It should ignore the hum, but if the noise component had any harmonic content, that could be an issue (as then it would extend up into the voiceband). Every experience with a dialup modem, is a learning experience. Paul |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 02:25:24 -0400, Paul wrote:
Playing with modems is loads of fun, since they made it so difficult to make headway. In one case here, I ended up ripping out a wall jack and replacing it, and the data rate came back up. With my Macintosh, I ended up crafting my own INIT string, because the one provided just wasn't working right. And with the US Robotics one, I learned you can use Unimodem driver (part of WinXP installation, so the Unimodem driver is already onboard), and that one seemed to work. At least with the USR modem, the DSP portion isn't likely to be a variable, and then the INiT string is what counts. Other than that, it could be an electrical problem, like some difference in chassis noise between the WinXP machine and the Win98 one. As far as I know, the DAA on the modem, should provide isolation of anything dangerous, but I don't know if every possible chassis noise problem is properly handled. All it might take, is running one computer off a two-prong power cable, instead of a three-pronged one, to put some hum on the modem end. It should ignore the hum, but if the noise component had any harmonic content, that could be an issue (as then it would extend up into the voiceband). Every experience with a dialup modem, is a learning experience. Paul While I would have given more thought to this elctrical problem, you know that I have the same problem with Win2K as I do with XP. And Win2K is on the same computer (dual booted), as Win98. Same modem, same phone line, same serial cable and port, etc. Hell, even the same harddrive but 2K is on partition D:. I really think the drivers just dont work on NT Windows. And I'm running all Fat32 partitions, even though I doubt that matters. Getting better performance using the generic driver (part of XP), that comes with XP, and using the one for 33K, rather than the 56K one, and not the one with v.90 or v.92, worked MUCH better yesterday. I stayed online for 11 hours, downloaded about 50 megs of programs, and went to many websites. After that 11 hours, I began getting errors such as "page not found" (for google). Either way, this was a huge improvenment over the failure to transfer data after 3 minutes, and disconnect at around 15 to 20 min I was getting with the driver MADE for the modem (the same one I use in Win98). That pretty much tells me that the driver is not compatible with the Windows NT types (2K and XP). If it was just Init strings, I could experiment, but there are so damn many settings that it seems just like a needle in a haystack. I dont even know what half the stuff means, but there's 8-N-1, TCP/IP, Carrier, Hardware and/or software flow control. compression on/off, some network settings that effect the modem too, and the speed such as 56K or 33K, and on topd of that is the v.90 v.92, and that's just a drop in the bucket compared to all the other settings. Then I have to make sure I am using the right port, and adjust the port speed, etc..... It never ends.... If I knew all this other stuff was set correctly, and knew the driver was cooperating with XP or 2K, I might experiment with Init strings some more. But there are just too many possibilities. Like I said before, probably billions of possibilities. On top of that it almost seems one would have to take a 4 year college course to understand all these terms and what they do. Yes, I can look at an Init string chart, but WHICH ones does my computer and modem need? This is way beyond the average computer user, and I consider myself much more advanced than most people, since I have always built my own computers and stuff. I enjoy putting a computer together, and I learned from this newsgroup a few tricks to install XP and transfer it to another hard drive, and more. But this modem **** is nerve wracking, and the more I read about it, the more I get confused. In the last week, I spent way too much time with this, to the point it was driving me bonkers. It felt like the confusion just got deeper and deeper. And of course every change I made made me worry that I did something wrong that may not be fixable, becuse I forgot exactly what I did and where.... This is why the modem on Win2K has not worked for 5 years since I installed 2K as dual boot. Seems several times each year, I'd fight with it for a day or two, and get frustrated with it and quit. I learned to just reboot to Win98 to go online. But months later, I'd try it again.... Besides a lack of a decent driver, and I do question why others have not released a better one (I'm sure other people have these same modems). But what REALLY is puzzling, is why there is no software programs that can actually analyze and fix the problem. They make software for everything else, why not modem problems. Ok, there are a few that spit out a bunch of data. There's "Modem Doctor", which was abandoned, but what does it really tell? It spits out a bunch of numbers and letters and gives a few error messages, but does NOT fix the errors, or at least explain in detail what to do. And that Portmon is something else. After looking at that HUGE amount of data it spews out, in just a couple minutes, the amount of data is overwhelming. Ok, I could see the init strings in use, and a "no carrier", when it did not connect, but everything else is total Greek..... Does all that stuff happen, (over 1000 entries), in jsut 2 minutes???? Oh well, I only hope I can make the USR modem work better. I recall having similar problems back in the early 90's trying to connect a Cardinal modem to Win3.x. I finally got a USR, and was able to connect. I never could get that Cardinal to work properly. Maybe the modem itself was bad????? But this time, I know the modem works fine, but only on Win98. If nothing else, USR is still around, and still has support and (probably) driver updates. While modems are not used real much anymore, I know some people do still use them. I'd imagine that Win7 and Win8 need different drivers than XP, so someone has to make drivers for them. Once I get the USR, I'll install it on XP, and then will have to try it on Win2K also. --- I didn't like hearing that there are modem problems on Macintosh computers too. I thought all Mac computers are completely plug and play.... |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 00:06:20 -0600, "Bill in Co"
wrote: Paul wrote: wrote: Thanks again No problem :-) With your US Robotics modem on the way, you can try that one out and see if it helps. Paul It's really a pity that this issue has been so vexing, since if it weren't for this, he could be up and running well with XP. It's still surprising to me that this low bitrate problem with XP (but not 98) even occurs. The rest of the computer works fine, and I've been trying out some software that wont work on Win98. I even got ti setup so it looks like W98, and dont intimidate me with weirdness. But the whole purpose of installing XP was for internet use. Win98 works fine for all my other needs, which is mostly just music editing, photo editing, and a few basic office apps. Plus storing videos and photos and software. 98 does all that fine. I am planning to play around with that "Movie Maker" that I think comes with XP. There is no such thing for Win98. I've been wanting to locate that if it exists in XP, and play with it, but so far, all I've doen is fight with modems. By the way, on a 46K connection in Win98, I have downloaded at just under 8kb/sec. That's damn good for dialup! But I dont usually get quite that good. Much depends on time of day, phone line conditions, and other unexplained things. For example, I can download one video from youtube using Firefox with the ""Download Helper" extension, which saves videos to my drive. Anyhow, I can download 3 videos at 5.6 to 6.8kb/sec, then another one wont go any faster than 3.5kb/sec. WTF? I always wonder if these slow ones are located on some really slow computer at Youtube, or what????? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Portmon log for Paul - WIN98 (Part1)
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 00:06:20 -0600, "Bill in Co"
wrote: Paul wrote: wrote: Thanks again No problem :-) With your US Robotics modem on the way, you can try that one out and see if it helps. Paul It's really a pity that this issue has been so vexing, since if it weren't for this, he could be up and running well with XP. It's still surprising to me that this low bitrate problem with XP (but not 98) even occurs. I am not surprised. Windows (non-NT) really flies and NT is just super huge and requires a much beefier machine. -- Bill iRulu Android v4.4 1.2Ghz 512MB |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|