Modem with FAST redial...

198 views
Skip to first unread message

Steve Owen

unread,
Dec 17, 1993, 4:30:50 PM12/17/93
to

Hi,

I'm looking for suggestions on a good 14.4K Fax/data modem in the $150-$250
price range.

But what I _really_ want, is a modem which is cabable of _very quicly_
detecting a busy signal (or anything other than a ring), hanging up, and
re-dialing. The faster it can get through that cycle, the better.

No, I'm not doing anything sinister... I just like to use my modem to help me
land concert tickets.

Please e-mail me any info and I'll post a followup.

Thanks!
-Steve

*****************************************************************************
Steve Owen
ow...@conslt.enet.dec.com Don't squirt silly string into the wind...
*****************************************************************************

Sameer Manek:SysOp

unread,
Dec 19, 1993, 2:21:58 AM12/19/93
to
ow...@conslt.enet.dec.com (Steve Owen) writes:

>
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking for suggestions on a good 14.4K Fax/data modem in the $150-$250
> price range.
>
> But what I _really_ want, is a modem which is cabable of _very quicly_
> detecting a busy signal (or anything other than a ring), hanging up, and
> re-dialing. The faster it can get through that cycle, the better.
>
> No, I'm not doing anything sinister... I just like to use my modem to help me
> land concert tickets.
>

I have use a USR sportster 14.4 and it dials hella fast, the X-talk c
com program that comes with is pretty good because you can put one number
in a queue and it will keep dialing until you hit escape or it detects a
carrier.

The default settings aren't fast for this type of stuff. I use a setting
that is used on the old sportster to make it an HST. on the new modems
it makes dialing and detect alot faster..email me and I'll send you
a copy of the hack or if their is enough requests i'll post it.

Note: USR denies the existance of this hack, and because it is
undocumented it may blow up your modem..it worked for me but your
mileage may vary. so use it at your own risk.

-----
*********************************************************************
Sameer Manek Sea...@yesanext.thetech.com
-=SysOp of the Big Brother BBS=-
********************************************************************

Gary Breuckman

unread,
Dec 19, 1993, 10:45:05 PM12/19/93
to
>ow...@conslt.enet.dec.com (Steve Owen) writes:
>> I'm looking for suggestions on a good 14.4K Fax/data modem in the $150-$250
>> price range.
>>
>> But what I _really_ want, is a modem which is cabable of _very quicly_
>> detecting a busy signal (or anything other than a ring), hanging up, and
>> re-dialing. The faster it can get through that cycle, the better.
>>
>> No, I'm not doing anything sinister... I just like to use my modem to help me
>> land concert tickets.


Don't forget to set register S11 - this number controls the duration of the
touchtone digit and the interdigit time. It defaults usually to about 100
MS, and telco should be able to understand 50 MS or possibly less - you
can cut the actual dialing time in half (from 1.3 seconds to .65 seconds
for a seven digit number).

ATS11=50

You could try less if you like, until the system can't recognize the
digits.


--
---
pu...@netcom.com

Message has been deleted

Nick Kralevich

unread,
Jan 4, 1994, 6:35:11 AM1/4/94
to
In article <V1gVec...@yesanext.thetech.com>,
Sameer Manek:SysOp <sea...@yesanext.thetech.com> wrote:

>If you have a USRobotics Sportster FAX modem, Ver 4.1, you can issue
>the following commands to it to turn it into an HST 16.8K dual standard.
>In effect, you add HST 16.8K to its V32.bis 14.4k capability.
>

First question: How can you tell what kind of roms are in the
modem via the command line? I tried typing in ati0, and I got back
a number that didn't make any sense.

>ats11=40v1L3x4&h1&r2&b1e1b1&m4&a3&k3
This line worked. Returned: "OK"

>atgw03c6,22gw05cd,2f
This line gave an error message. Returned: "ERROR"

>ats14=1s24=150s26=1s32=8s34=0x7&w
This line was acceptable too. Returned: "OK"

Would anyone care to explain what register 24, 26, 32, and 34
are for. In my manual they are marked as reserved, except for
34, which has some reserved bits.

And would someone explain the second line. It appears to be
an "at" command, but makes absolutely no sense. The only
thing that even comes close is that atg# is ok, even though it
isn't documented in the manual.

Has anybody gotten this to work, or am I on the receiving end of
a cruel joke?

Take care,
-- Nick Kralevich
nick...@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu

--
Nick Kralevich nick...@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu
"A man sits with a pretty girl for an hour and it seems shorter than
a minute. But tell that same man to sit on a hot stove for a minute,
it is longer than any hour. That's relativity." -- Einstein

Robb Topolski KJ6YT

unread,
Jan 4, 1994, 5:08:48 PM1/4/94
to
Nick Kralevich (nick...@cory.EECS.Berkeley.EDU) wrote:
> >atgw03c6,22gw05cd,2f
> This line gave an error message. Returned: "ERROR"

> Has anybody gotten this to work, or am I on the receiving end of
> a cruel joke?

Nope, it works. You have to have the correct supervisor version. Mine is
4.1 with a date of 3/18/92. Shortly after word of this hack got out, USR
disabled the magic atgw command and issued Rom 4.2 ... then USR got cuter
and started issuing Rom 4.1 leaving you to guess whether or not yours
worked with the hack.

I wonder what the latest 4.1 Rom date is?
--
Robert M. Topolski <topo...@kaiwan.com>

Mark Topham

unread,
Jan 4, 1994, 10:44:11 PM1/4/94
to

Nope, not a cruel joke. Just guessing based on the above information you
included, but the guess is that you have a USR Sportster 14,400v.32bis
with v.17 (14,400) Fax capability. This means that when you type ATI7 you
will have a version 4.1 ROM and the dates will all be 93. Sorry the
command won't work for you.
On the other hand, if you type ATI7 and it tells you you have a 4.1 ROM
dated '92 the command should have worked.
If your like me,you type ATI7 and see that you have a 4.2 ROM dated '92.
Aftering seeing the difference in the 4.1 '93 and the 4.(1/2) '92 I'm not
suprised the command doesn't work, the board was completly redesigned.
('92 sportsters look like USR Courier Dual Standards, '93 version is only
a single card)

Try out ATG= you'll get a hex dump, if you know anything about
programming you should be able to find the ROM bios code easy enough...
ATG= has worked on every USR modem I have tried it on, but I can't say
that it works on every USR modem.


The DS patch only works on 4.1 ROMS dated 1992. These are 4.1 ROMs that do
NOT support 14,400 FAX. (USR confused things greatly when they went back
to 4.1 ROM version number)

--
---------------------------------------------------------
Mark Topham
Email: top...@access.mbnet.mb.ca

Mickey Henniger

unread,
Jan 5, 1994, 12:36:51 AM1/5/94
to
>> Nope, not a cruel joke. Just guessing based on the above information you
> included, but the guess is that you have a USR Sportster 14,400v.32bis
> with v.17 (14,400) Fax capability. This means that when you type ATI7 you
>


Would someone please upload the .hex file for the 4.1 1992 rom?
I would like to try it out.

Mick
--
---------------------------------
| Mick henn...@metaphor.com |
| (wb5von) |
---------------------------------

James Inch

unread,
Jan 5, 1994, 12:16:56 AM1/5/94
to

Ahhh, so its the ol' switcheroo is it? ;-). The 4.1 then 4.2 then 4.1 again.
Here's my version and date:
Configuration Profile...

Product type US/Canada External
Options V32
Fax Options Class 1
Clock Freq 16.0Mhz
Eprom 128k
Ram 32k

Supervisor date 04/22/93
DSP date 03/23/93

Supervisor rev 4.1
DSP rev 10

Not wanting to give up, I thought the init string was wrong, as Nick did. So I guess I have the right ROM but wrong date. Is this so and I'm at loss for use
of this hack?
Just want to get it straight once and for all...
John

Sameer Manek:SysOp

unread,
Jan 6, 1994, 1:13:08 PM1/6/94
to
in...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca (James Inch) writes:
> Configuration Profile...
>
> Product type US/Canada External
> Options V32
> Fax Options Class 1
> Clock Freq 16.0Mhz
> Eprom 128k
> Ram 32k
>
> Supervisor date 04/22/93
> DSP date 03/23/93
>
> Supervisor rev 4.1
> DSP rev 10
>
> Not wanting to give up, I thought the init string was wrong, as Nick did. So
> of this hack?
> Just want to get it straight once and for all...
> John

Well, your not the only one confused, what happened is that there
are *TWO* sets of 4.1 roms. The first has a '92 supervisor date, the
second set has a '93 date. Unfortuantly you and I both have the second
of roms..so we are out of luck, but read on.

In the second set of roms USR "fixed" this hack, so you can't hack
a 4/93 rom to turn into an hst or dual. All this hack does is speed
up connect time and dial speed. Which was the reason I posted the hack
in the first place.

If you still want a faster modem you gotta find someone with the old
roms that is satisfied with a 14.4 and then trade them modems, or
buy a faster modem.

But since this topic has moved out of the domain of these newsgroups
I'm redirecting followups to comp.dcom.modem, where this thread belongs
now.

Robb Topolski KJ6YT

unread,
Jan 6, 1994, 6:03:50 PM1/6/94
to
James Inch (in...@newton.ccs.tuns.ca) wrote:
> Ahhh, so its the ol' switcheroo is it? ;-). The 4.1 then 4.2 then 4.1 again.
> Here's my version and date:
> Configuration Profile...

> Product type US/Canada External
> Options V32
> Fax Options Class 1
> Clock Freq 16.0Mhz
> Eprom 128k
> Ram 32k

> Supervisor date 04/22/93
> DSP date 03/23/93

> Supervisor rev 4.1
> DSP rev 10

> Not wanting to give up, I thought the init string was wrong, as Nick did. So I guess I have the right ROM but wrong date. Is this so and I'm at loss for use
> of this hack?
> Just want to get it straight once and for all...
> John

Nope, you can't use it. Your ROM is too new. Sorry ...

Curtis Coleman

unread,
Jan 8, 1994, 6:23:13 AM1/8/94
to

>Ahhh, so its the ol' switcheroo is it? ;-). The 4.1 then 4.2 then 4.1 again.
>Here's my version and date:
>Configuration Profile...

>Product type US/Canada External
>Options V32
>Fax Options Class 1
>Clock Freq 16.0Mhz
>Eprom 128k
>Ram 32k

>Supervisor date 04/22/93
>DSP date 03/23/93

>Supervisor rev 4.1
>DSP rev 10

>Not wanting to give up, I thought the init string was wrong, as Nick did. So I guess I have the right ROM but wrong date. Is this so and I'm at loss for use
>of this hack?

Unfortunately, the "hack" will not work on your version of the modem. I
have one sportster 4.1 with the atgw command, and I have a 4.2. Note that
the "hack" is only only on the DOUBLE-BOARD sportsters, not the new
single-board slimmer ones. You can tell the difference on the externals,
by the number of LED's it has, the double-board has 9 of them. The
internals have two boards. If you have one of these double-board
sportsters, and your ROM revision is 4.1, you CAN us the "hack".

>Just want to get it straight once and for all...

Hope this helps.

sitruC

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Coleman #include <std_disclaimer.h>
cur...@access.mbnet.mb.ca OS/2 - I don't use it because I have to

Andreas Greulich

unread,
Jan 11, 1994, 11:40:20 AM1/11/94
to
Hmm, besides the story with the magic atgw command, I'm still looking
for a description of it an dteh other related atg-something commands.
Are those just unknown, secret, or what? If somebody knows them and
doesn't want to publish, is there a possibility to emulate the
atgw command with other commands? There seem to be several undocumented
commands, but it's hard to figure out, what they all do. Please post
or send me email (greu...@math-stat.unibe.ch). Thanks!

Andy

der Mouse

unread,
Jan 11, 1994, 4:53:54 PM1/11/94
to
In article <1994Jan11.1...@aragorn.unibe.ch>, greu...@math-stat.unibe.ch (Andreas Greulich) writes:
> Hmm, besides the story with the magic atgw command, I'm still looking
> for a description of it an dteh other related atg-something commands.
> Are those just unknown, secret, or what?

Yes. Undocumented commands are usually things the manufacturer would
rather you not know about.

> If somebody knows them and doesn't want to publish, is there a
> possibility to emulate the atgw command with other commands? There
> seem to be several undocumented commands, but it's hard to figure
> out, what they all do.

Since the atg= cat is out of the bag now, why not just dump the whole
ROM and see what's *really* there?

Right. I don't have the time either. :-) You could always ping
USRobotics, though I suspect you'd get an official line denying the
whole thing.

Actually, since the ROMs are socketed (at least in *my* USR modem), you
don't need atg= to dump them....

der Mouse

mo...@mcrcim.mcgill.edu

Sameer Manek:SysOp

unread,
Jan 11, 1994, 7:26:34 PM1/11/94
to
[FOLLOW UPS TO COMP.DCOM.MODEMS]

greu...@math-stat.unibe.ch (Andreas Greulich) writes:

Well, most of the commands are undefined as far as the public
is conserned. Only the engineers and such of USRobotics know
what the undocumented commands.

I suspect that the hack was leaked out to the public by someone
who got fired or was upset at USR. So the only way to find
out about the hack is to get someone at USR to tell you. But nobody
wants to go on the record about this subject, all they say is "We don't
know of any hack/patch for our modems. Should you find one, and it
ruins your modem it won't be covered under warranty." {In other words
the standard denial}

I suppose that this is because they could be fired and suited for
releaseing company trade secrets and/or loss of profits.
So unless you have a friend or reliative that works for them good luck,

Unless you can find someone the original authors of the hack, which
you won't find either, because they don't want their real identity,
known...since they are part of the underground "hackers/crackers" or
had some private grudge against USR which they wanted to solve
anonymously

More then likely they were college students majoring in telecom,
or computer/electrical engineering.

[follow-ups to comp.dcom.modems]

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages