Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

WinDSL Coming? 162

Posted by Hemos from the what-a-dumb-idea dept.
A number of people have written in in the last day or so regarding Motorola's rollout of software-based DSL modems. Apparently, this wil reduce the cost of the modems by 30-40%, meaning that they can put DSL into the lower-end of machines. I stand corrected - they aren't modems, they are bridges/routers - and I must be blind, because Linux support was specified in the release. IMDUM.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WinDSL Coming? More

WinDSL Coming?

Comments Filter:
  • Granted, it is probably easier to write a driver for the Cisco 605 DSL modem but as far as I know there still isn't a driver for it for anything but Windows. If you get this internal modem as part of your DSL startup kit you have to order something like a 675 to use it with any other system.(the 675 is much better anyway - it has an operating system, NAT, DHCP, while the 605 only works with one computer.)
  • God I hope Motorola keeps the source closed, wraps it in onerous licensing, and sends assassins after anyone caught developing non-windows drivers.

    If they do make open source driver code, I think the Linux community should send death squads after anybody caught writing drivers.

    Do you have to do everything Billy is doing? If Billy jumps in front of a car, does the Penguin have too! Stop the suckage now!
  • How is it that software DSL modems will be able to be "put into the lower-end of machines". Software modems require more processor power. Currently I have a Performa 578 (68LC040 @ 33mhz) acting as my Web/FTP/Mail server on my DSL line. Sure, its more powerful than a 486, but can it get much lower end that this? (Even if the P578 had PCI slots how would a software modem be able to run in lower-end machines than a hardware modem?
  • Now that they've moved almost all the functionality into the "software" side, in the future they would just say like

    "Just live with that bugg..err.. slightly misfeatured driver. We are not going to fi.. improve that"
    "You dare to reverse-engineer and disclose the internet usage habit peeping(tm) functionality in the driver? Prepare to meet our lawyers from hell!"
    "Didn't you click 'I Agree' button in the driver software installation step? Now you may return only hardware portion of our product which consists only 2% of the cost you bought"

    Wondering whether this'll gonna be the next generation 'beowolf post'
  • Ethernet is not digital THROUGH the cable (to the best of my knowledge), but is digital after it has been converted at the NIC. Whether you call this a modem (probably not) or a CSU/DSU (maybe) is your choice.

    The thin (10BASE2) and thick coax (10BASE5) variants of 10 megabit Ethernet use digital baseband signaling. I'm not sure what 100BASE-T uses, I believe it is still baseband with a more complex encoding scheme. The only Ethernet modems that I have seen were for 10BASE36, a broadband version of Ethernet that was used on CATV systems.

  • Whenever you divide work between different boxes, you've got to think about what functions you need to perform, and what resources you'll consume performing them, and what resources you'll consume with the communciation, which is often the hard part unless you split the work at the right place.
    • Electrical functions obviously belong to the DSL board.
    • Raw CPU speed is cheap - put a DSP on the board and you can burn all the CPU cycles you need, as long as you don't need much interrupt handling or memory bandwidth. The low-level functions belong down on the DSL board.
    • The handoff between the DSL board and the PC should probably be Layer 2 frames (an AAL-5 frame looks about the same as an Ethernet packet or Frame Relay frame) (unless you really *want* to hand ATM cells to the PC for some reason.) If the DSL board is internal to the PC, this is clean and easy; if it's external, you either need some kind of Ethernet bridging (#insert risk-of-non-standardness) or maybe a USB interface. If the DSL board is internal, and you interface at some other functional level, you need to be careful to avoid interrupting the CPU to death, starving the DSL waiting for interrupts, and otherwise being a bad neighbor.
    • Routing, NAT, Firewalling, and IP in general take more memory and intelligence - you could implement them in the DSL box, which is convenient for users who don't like installing hardware or complex software, but moving them to the PC isn't a bad thing - it lets you do much more sophisticated router things, and really isn't that much more work for the PC - as long as the OS has a decent IP implementation, as opposed to some highly lame non-Unix-based products out there which will remain nameless due to professional courtesy.

    But DSL doesn't support the end-user's needs - it also supports the DSL carrier (Layers 1 and 2) and the ISP (Layer 3) during installation , long-term operations, and service failures.

    • Diagnostics for the DSL functions really need to run even if there's no working PC. Obviously an internal board needs electricity, but it's nice if some basic handshake functions can answer from a board-based controller - but it doesn't take much intelligence to do this. (On the other hand, you could also implement this in a "reboot your PC in MSDOS mode" boot floppy.) If you are running diagnostics on the PC, you either need some custom interface, or else you need to make them use the same Layer 2 packets you use for data transfer.
    • Diags for the IP vendor have similar issues, though you need to use them when the system is up and running. Good DHCP client support is your friend. Broadcasts and Bootp are also your friends. As long as the board allows promiscuous receiving (which may be an issue for some external devices) you can build the rest of the handshakes you need.
    • Diags are most critical during installation, but running a high-quality service means you need run-time support as well - things like SNMP or at least PING need to work, and periodic uploads of information like electrical line qualities can be really helpful in preventing failures.
  • Lets not even start with AOL :)

    Here's my [radiks.net] DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?

  • Having used the Zoom Telephonics 56Kx 2949L modem for about 18 months, I get 50666 to 53333 bps connect speeds most of the time. :-)

    The best thing about an external modem is you can see the status lights of the modem operation--like connect speeds, data transfer, error correction, etc. And being an external modem, it doesn't steal CPU cycles when operating, either.

    By the way, if you want to connect a digital camera or a Palm device, use a USB port instead--the transfer rate is FAR faster than a serial port.
  • Right, they're not that expensive compared to other high speed devices.

    But, imagine that these companies are expecting DSL to become mass-consumer access technology to replace dial-up modems and when you reach that type of market volume, you start looking at ways to shave off as much cost as you can to maximize your operating margin. If these devices are going to be consumer-installable where a premises service truck roll isn't needed, they will be all the more attractive.
  • OK. How is this off-topic? The comment I was replying to mentioned that Slashdot was eating HTML tags and I agreed with it and asked if anyone else is having problems.

    I know, I'm probably throwing away more karma replying to your bad moderation and that I should just let you take the hit in metamoderation, but I really have to same this...

    It's not off-topic when a thread drifts away from the original topic. If it was, 95% of the comments on a thread that had more than 3 replies would be off-topic. But then again, I can't understand why you would want to waste a moderator point on this when there are all of the real OT posts about Natalie Portman, grits, pancake eating ninjas, free Kevin Mitnick, first posts and Columbine HS posts.

    That said, I'm probably going to loose more karma because I both insulted a moderator and because this is only on topic if you would read the post I'm replying to (which whoever moderated the last post down obviously didn't do). Well, have at the karma... Chances are I will still have more than you (and I don't have to worry about metamoderation either) and it's going to take quite a while for you to take away my +1 bonus.

    kwsNI

  • That's not what your penguin said yesterday!
  • We don't spend ridiculous amounts of money on faster processors and graphics accelerators just to have our fast connection take the benefits of these away from us. So for the high-end or just gamer group this is a bad idea. Look at the lower-end "just a guy trying to download stuff". Whats he gonna download? If its streaming video or anything that requires a decent processor (in other words the "good stuff" hehe) then he's screwed. People who would just download large files like a linux installation and BeOS are out of luck because getting drivers for these OSes is going to be a joke. So tell me who is this supposed to appeal to? Stupid people? I'm sorry but I just don't see the point. If you're going to spend more money for the faster processor (550+?!?) why not spend more money so you can get some good use out of it? Just me 1.5 cents.


    Apartment6 [apartment6.org]
  • I can't belive you dipshit moderators moved this up!

    damn!
  • PacBell is currently installing an external Ethernet DSL router under their 1 year contract special. At least I assume it's an external based on the equipment specification/system requirements [pacbell.com] that they give.
  • "I'm hijacking this thread... take me to Cuba!" On a serious note... I work for perhaps the most influential DSL provider in the world, and here is what I want to tell you. Nobody is paying any attention to Linux. Sure, some of us use it, but for sheer market reasons, we are coming out with lower-cost devices primarily for the PC marketplace. These devices are, in many cases, already dependent upon PPPoE software. And do you think we're taking the time to test/qualify/distribute the software for Linux? Not likely... Still, even the biggest DSL providers only have about 100,000 customers, so if there was a really strong desire from Linux users to get organized and get their DSL, then who would possibly want to refuse that many customers? Linux users can change things, but you will all have to get better organized. Here's how... Take a known quantity with lots of readers in the Linux world, such as Andover/Slashdot, and use them to start providing DSL services. Essentially, you'd make them an ISP in the same sense that bowie.net is an ISP... all the service and installation is outsourced. Once you have that, it would be a lot easier to have a company approach a major DSL player and say "We have 30,000 users who wants DSL... who wants to play with us?" I can't do it for you, but best of luck out there...!
  • CAP - Carrierless Amplitude/Phase Modulation I guess this is not about modulation at all ? And it has nothing to do with QAM ? ;) You are right that CAP and maybe rather DMT (Discrete Multitone Modulation) are more of line codes rather than modulations, but still - CAP does convert digital data to analog frequencies, even if it is done via digital processing ;) And then again - what about "digital modems" ? Those used in V.90 access servers, providing codec to convert analog signal in digital form back to pure digital ? Technology is digital to digital, but the function itself is demodulating... Just my 0.03 Euro =)
  • Just choose the "Plain Ol' Text" option instead of the Extrans - these two items have been switched in terms of what they do.

    I also agree that the moderator was in error there moderating it down.

  • Yes they are modems (Score:3)

    by Megane ( 129182 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @06:30AM (#1121807)
    They might not be able to talk with an old 212 modem, but they are modems. They just happen to operate in a higher frequency band than POTS modems. The higher the base frequency, the more bandwidth available per octave of frequency.

    In fact, even ISDN has to do analog modulation. It just uses a much simpler form of modulation which can easily be run through repeaters for longer distances from the CO. ISDL is DSL protocols over ISDN modulation, and using ATM instead of the PSTN to get out of the CO.
  • ... ehm.... forgot to type in the URL, or mozilla M15 is playing triks on me?

    Ciao, Rob!

  • I heard from one of my Mac freinds that the G4 can already do software DSL. Anybody have any more info on this?

  • It says they're comming out with Software modems. It doesn't say anything about them being specifically for windows. Motorolla is simply trying to get DSL to the crummier computers.

    I'm surprised how everyone jumps all over this, simply assuming that their beloved Linux will get left out. Motorolla is a good company.
  • this was bound to happen... hopfully cable service will be in my area this summer.
  • Read the Motorola press release. My biggest gripe with software modems is the processor time they use, platform compatibility aside. Hell, a Cisco 675 DSL-to-Ethernet modem isn't that expensive, my phone company gives 'em away with a 12-month ($39/month) contract (including ISP and half-T1 speed).

  • This is just another scrap of evidence in my argument that cheaper is not always better. Most of the time, cheaper is just cheap.
  • It seems like whenever there is a way to make DSL cheaper it excludes Linux users. FreeDSL.com, and now this. Grrr. Are there any projects that are trying to emulate the windows software modems? That would be something I would love to sink my teeth into.

  • ???? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I don't understand. You can get Linksys' EtherFast Cable/DSL Router [linksys.com] for roughly $150 on the net. Vastly superior solution. More flexible and includes a firewall. I'm not suggesting *we* use it -- I'm quite happy with my dual-nic Linux router firewall. But the masses might appreciate what it can offer.
  • You know, even 5-15% translates to a hell of a lot of money when you consider how large the computer market is...

    Cheers,

    Tim
  • I myself am extremely skeptical of the idea of an ADSL modem that depends on CPU cycles for it to run properly.

    Even if you can get to run under Linux, stealing CPU cycles to run this thing might cause no end of system slowdowns even WITH a fast CPU.

    The fact we now have external ADSL modems from several vendors that connect to the USB port shows that the whole idea from Motorola is silly.

    By the way, I've played with PCI card analog modems and frankly, they steal too many CPU cycles and sometimes cause major system slowdowns. That's why my computer at home has an _external_ modem (a Zoom 56Kx Model 2949L).
  • Actually, my PacBell-provided 'DSL' modem is really an ATM NIC card -at least that's the binding and protocol that is loaded into WinNT (sorry) networking when the card is installed. The card is an Efficient Networks SpeedStream 3030. I can't wait until the Linux drivers are released and I can ditch my bluescreening NT server.

  • It was the GeoPort, actually. I had one on my old 6100/60, and when I was online, it slowed the entire computer down to about 50% responsiveness. While the idea of being able to "upgrade" your modem through software seemed appealing, I never got it to work faster than 14400 bps. The 2.0 update crashed my machine repeatedly. (No 28.8 for me...)

    ---

  • WinDSL is already here. Just look at the Efficient Networks [efficient.com] 3060 and 4060 modems that most ISPs have started installing. They MUST download firmware before they operate. Many users report they their computer is much slower after installation too. Yep, the WinDSLModem is already here......
  • So what happens when Windoze blue-screens?

    Will they have to scrape your brains off the wall?
  • Is there a definition of what digital is? Is serial digital? Dropping voltage levels between two states, is that digital?
    Is fiber optics digital? Light pulses = 0 or 1?
    Ethernet isn't digital?
    People use the word digital too freely, they usually mean the top layer, not what runs underneath which is analogue.
    BTW, I agree with you.
  • There going to windowize it again. When are people going to realize how much of the market is NOT windows. Oh well, there loss.
  • Actually, I've seen a grand total of three posts complaining about lack of alternate OS support as of 11:00 AM EST. One vageuly alluded to it, and the other was posted as AC 0 so it was hidden. I do admit that I missed one that was posted at around 8:30 this morning, because it was very far down the list. I can assure you if these modems were windows only, there would be a mad run of flames down this entire post. It is true that most don't care about the Linux drivers, and think this is crappy hardware; I never said otherwise. The first part of my post was just pointing out that this supported Linux, but not other OSs, and they should open the specs to allow other OSs to be supported. Related to that I would like to point out that this is not like closed spec video cards, which I support. There is really no point in keeping the specs to cheap DSL modems closed. I doubt people are going to shop around for which software modem can squeeze the most framerate out of Quake! Thus, giving competitors some insight into how your hardware works doesn't help them, because I doubt there is some incredible engineering pipeline behind this modem like there is with, say a GeForce.
  • Nope - you morph into a species frighteningly like species 8472 in STVOY, and you become M$'s evil servant. Over time, it will happen to you anyway if you use their software :-P

    ---------------------------------
  • They don't give a crap :)
  • I can see your point, but I'm not sure I agree. I do agree with you that given any even semi-decent processor, it will be pretty much unnoticable on its own, but that isn't what's going to happen: The fact is that the time when these things are going to be in use is the same time when the processor will be under the heaviest strain anyway; the whole point is that these are broadband internet devices - people will want to use them for watching movies online, and so on.

  • Bad idea (Score:3)

    by kwsNI ( 133721 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:34AM (#1121828) Homepage
    Ok, there are a few reasons I don't like this. Most companies (at least where I live) are providing the DSL modems for free when you sign up for a 1-year contract for DSL. This means they can give me a cheaper (and Win-ONLY) modem. If they are anything like Winmodems, I doubt that anytime during the lifetime of DSL will they remove all of the bugs. I work for a very large computer company and we still have a large amount of problems with Winmodems and some online services (*cough* AOL).

    kwsNI
  • regardless, that isn't motorola's problem. DSL is competing with cable internet access. There's no reason why they shouldn't try to make a low cost solution for those markets that demand them. God forbid we would have choices or flexibility.
  • First there was WinModems (thanks a LOT, 3scum)
    Then there was WinPrinters (thanks a LOT, HPee)
    now this. I've never bought Win-anything and I'm not about to start now.
    ---
  • First off, note that it's unlikely that full-fledged DSL routers will ever be discontinued -- you'll still need them for networks, etc.; no sane sysadmin is going to rely on a software-based router, when their servers have enough CPU utilization as it is. Second, this will help especially for poorer people - free DSL can now be that much closer to free (not that I'd use it, but the days of $20-$30 DSL are that much closer...) Third, gamers -- don't buy these and you can beat up on all the warez d00dz whose mommies bought them the el cheapo DSL router! You've got a tactical advantage here! Don't complain! :-) --bdj
  • Odds are against Micro$oft allowing Linux users anywhere near these modems. If luck is on the open source side, someone at these hardware vendors will also be on the open source side, and "reverse engineer" it to the same standards he wrote while at work, and release the software for everyone.

  • Re:Not a bad thing (Score:4)

    by (void*) ( 113680 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:52AM (#1121833)
    But from an engineering point of view, this is bad. The driver should be well-separated from the CPU, so that the OS does not get too complicated (read: stable, bug-free, predictable). The protocols would be cleaner, so that more OSes can use the peripheral. So that the modem is not tied needlessly to one OS, or certain types of functionality. From the users perspective, this is better. It is the users computer. He/she should *know* what he is in for when installing such a thing. Heshe should know that with such a modem, running Quake through the modem might not be such a good idea. Yet these design issues are just glossed over for something "cheap". Is this way way to treat a consumer, however clueless they may be?
  • No, you can't update the firmware on a software modem. You can update firmware on a hardware modem though. Software modems don't have firmwares. They do have drivers that control the modulation/demodulation of the signal, etc though. And the fact that you can update a winmodem's drivers, has absolutely nothing to do with anything when it comes to their performance. I used to work tech support at a large ISP, and yes, I know what unreliable beasts they are. But not because you can update them. Also, yes, getting an external modem will generally guarantee that it is not a software based one, but there are hardware based internal modems as well, that are cheaper and just as reliable. You just have to know what you're looking for.
  • This is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. PPPoE (some stupid ppp tunnel over eth) takes up 2-3% under linux on my 450A. That's just to push and pull 60K/s. Imagine doing what the dsl modem does in software. Are these people on crack? If so, I want some of it, it sure must be some strong ass crack.

  • And BSD? And ____? (Score:3)

    by Booker ( 6173 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:53AM (#1121836) Homepage
    Ok, I run Linux, so I'm glad to see more things like this that will support it (even though I wouldn't be caught dead actually using one of these...) but still. Here's the obligatory "What about _other_ operating systems?"

    I really doubt that this will be anything but a binary driver. Yes, it's their product, and they can do what they want with it. But it does not give me a warm fuzzy feeling. :)

    ---

  • Re:Yeah, that whole 5-15% OOOOHHHHH!!!! (Score:3)

    by Rombuu ( 22914 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:55AM (#1121837)
    You know, even 5-15% translates to a hell of a lot of money when you consider how large the computer market is...

    Yeah, but you aren't dealing with the whole computer market, just PCs.

    Well, really you aren't dealing with the whole PC market, just home PCs (since its pretty damn rare to see a modem in an office)

    And then you are only dealing with home PCs with DSL access available.

    So now you think they really care about 5% of the home PC DSL enabled market?
  • But you must remember that you aren't updating the firmware. Software modems don't have firmware, they are a DSP on a card. You can update the software that runs the modem, and this software includes the job of what traditionally is in firmware. It is really just a software upgrade.

    What is even worse about the performance issue of these modems is that they are "low-end" so they will probably only be slipped into low-end systems, making performance of those low-end systems even worse. The high-end systems will retain hardware capabilities.

    This leads to cases like, "I don't know why your 400Mhz system is faster than my new 600Mhz system."

    Well, when I bought my 400Mhz system I loaded it up(this is hypothetical, I have about 4 400Mhz systems in this room, and I'm not talking about any of them). The 400Mhz system has 256MB of RAM, a really fast Graphics system(name your own), and a fast disk system(7200rpm, maybe scsi), hardware modem, postscript printer with lots of ram...

    Your poor 600Mhz system only has 64MB of ram, last years cheezy video card, and an old 5400rpm ATA33 disk in it, software modem, and a windows printer.

    So, my entire document is already spooled to my printer, while you are waiting for your system to process how to print it. You also hear the disk thrashing, its called swapping.

    I launch a game of quake3 or UT or another cpu/gfx intensive game and I play while I'm printing. You were able to lauch quake3 but your disk is still crunching. That substandard graphics chip doesn't play too well when it can't have all of that processor working for it...

    I could continue the scenario, but I digress...

    I did want to say however that linux 2.2.x is damn efficient. I have an EIDE cd burner on a ATA33 bus that I use with cdrecord. I can burn discs in the background while playing quake3. This is a wussy Celeron 400, not overclocked, still at the lame 66Mhz FSB. And this box only has 64MB of ram! I was most impressed by this. No buffer underruns, the disc was perfect.

    Bring on 2.4.x, cuz I failed to mention that it has 2 of those Celeron 400's, and the SMP should be even better in 2.4.

    --
    no catchy tagline
  • In fact the press release spoke glowingly of Linux specifically and open source in general. It spoke of companies using Linux enjoying lower hardware costs and avoiding software obsolescence, and users enjoying easier upgrades.
  • Seems Motorola is planning to support Linux because Linux is beginning to be used in the set top box market, where consumers demand low cost solutions, and having high bandwidth is a Good Thing (TM).
  • I still use Windows on one of my systems, but when presented with the option of external CPE (Cisco 675) for $50 over the free internal Cisco 605, I happily took it. For one, CBOS is much like IOS, which would be interesting on its own. Then there is the fact that NAT and firewalling capabilities are built into it, and accessible via telnet/web/console port. Try finding that functionality in Windows for less than $50! And of course, I must say that I think that as long as the cable networks get opened to competition, cable is going to rule "broadband" anyway, so the point is moot. Why are people unable to understand that fatter pipes carry more water?

    --
  • Why does **preview** clobber the HTML tags? That defeats the whole freakin' purpose of preview.

    Grr. To hell with it all. I'm gonna post my posts NAKED, without any previewing. :-)

    --bdj

  • Cisco (Score:3)

    by dragonfly_blue ( 101697 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @07:10AM (#1121844) Homepage
    I got a "free" Cisco 675 external DSL modem when I signed up for DSL with USWest. I've worked with a couple other types of DSL modems, and let me just say, this thing rocks.

    It is highly configurable, USWest sent about four different manuals with it (RTFM, indeed!). It's given me some exposure to Cisco hardware, good experience with Telnet, routing tables, ports, and the CBOS (Cisco Broadband Operating System.) Also, it works on anything you can connect to an Ethernet hub or switch, Linux, Mac, Windows, BeOS, you name it. I've had 6 machines hooked up to it at once, with nary a glitch.

    I'd be skeptical that a software modem could provide a very robust operating scheme. The 675 has never crashed, but a modem dependent on your WinBox to run just might.

  • If you need that much processing power for a DSL modem to be hardly noticible (which is what I suppose they mean, maybe less than 20-30% processor usage), then can you imagine playing Quake 3

    You're missing the point. The reason they say you need this minimum is because this is what you'll need to effectively use the rest of your computer normally. Now, it's debatable what they consider normal, but if, for-example, they considered a normal configuration to be a 350MHZ machine ( min you can find these days ), then they'd add their CPU worst-case load onto it.. Asumming these numbers, then their max load would require a 200MHZ CPU.

    This is unlike a Software DVD player, which can assume that you won't be doing anything else while watching the DVD.

    Course, at the very least, you're going to increase your latency. Normally, you could pipeline the CPU operation, the xDSL encoding, and the transmission. Now the CPU can only pipeline against the transmission and must multiplex the CPU and encoding. This has the obvious effect of slowing down your applications ( Such as 3D shooters ), but has the added [inbound] ping time due to slower responsiveness from the context switching, etc.

    -Michael
  • I do not know about dsl, but a cable modem is actually a modem. The signal on the cable line is an analog signal, and has to be converted into digital information. Yes it is not converting an audio signal that you can hear, but it is modulating/demodulating so it is actually a modem.
  • Over the years, we've seen many attempts to do peripheral DSP work in the main CPU. Anybody remember the old TelePort modems for Macs that did processing in the main CPU? Intel's "Native Signal Processing"? Software-based audio synthesis boards? Early 56K Winmodem chipsets? All were quickly obsoleted by full-hardware solutions. The integration hassles cost you more time to market than you save waiting for the cost of the silicon to come down.

    I'm suprised to see Motorola pushing this; they make DSPs. Maybe it's a competitive move against TI.

  • All I have to say on this matter is that I'm glad I'm on cable modem :)
  • Will the availibility of the standard dsl modems suffer due to the plethora of software based dsl modems that will become availible in the near future. This is what happened to REAL modems once software modems became cheap and widely availible.
  • Even Better:

    An INTERNAL _ISA_ Modem, with jumpers and everything:

    USR 56k

    I need both external com ports for my Palm and my Digital Camera ;)
  • Given that I already HAVE a Zoom Telephonics 56Kx (Model 2949L) external V.90 modem, I often ask the computer dealer (I'm in the process of looking for a new computer) if I can delete the PCI V.90 modem they normally provide with the computer.

    So far, Dell and Micron PC have said yes; Gateway for some strange reason said no.

    I do agree that "Winmodems" are terrible. They steal CPU cycles and can cause system slowdowns, especially when accessing pages that take a fairly long time to download.

  • DSL modems do exist... (Score:4)

    by Cato ( 8296 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @07:31AM (#1121858)
    http://www.whatis.com/modem.htm disagrees with you - DSL modems are sometimes called by an obscure TLA, but since they take digital in on one side (i.e. ethernet or USB) and put analogue out on the other side (taking care not to disturb the analogue voice channel), it seems to me that 'DSL modem' is a fair term. Nortel' Shasta division make DSLAMs and agree too.

    The whole modem / non-modem distinction is somewhat arbitrary - after all, ultimately every digital networking device has to put signals on a wire or fibre, and those signals are ultimately analogue. The only difference is whether there is a simple encoding or a complex encoding, and whether there is an analogue-only mode for that channel, or if the link is expected to always interpret these analogue signals as digital.

    Let's just agree that small devices that connect you to phone-like wires are called modems (unless they're called ISDN TAs : )
  • They are not modems they are routers. Or if you prefer, bridges. They are all digital straight through, and no MOulation or DEModulation is required. Mine is a Cisco 675 that has to be put into transparent bridging mode to work. (Talk about a waste of power...) If we're going to follow the phone companies and call these "modems", I propose we also start calling our cases our "CPU's", 3.5 floppy disks "hard disks", and recognise Al Gore and Bill Gates as the creators of the internet.
  • Whoever came up with the concept of the Winmodem should be stripped of his degrees and sent back to college. Of course you won't be able to put these things on lower end machines because they'll suck so much of your CPU that it'll just suck. The average web browsing user might have CPU cycles to burn, but if you're going to get into any of the net games, you'll need every bit of CPU to keep that FPS count high.

    Of course, I suppose you could dedicate a machine to be your internet gateway, so you'll end up paying the cost of an entire machine to get good Quake 3 performance. Hmm. I wonder if Intel and Motorola are conspiring...

  • People in marketing do the math and go "Oooh! We can save $5 on 500,000 units," so they like it. Of course they're REALLY passing the cost on to the end user, who's going to need a faster processor for the same performance.

    I hope Motorola patents this. I'll keep getting my kit from Cisco...

  • In defense of this comment:

    Would you not take a schedule cut to 85% of your normal hours in exchange for a 30-40%/hr. pay raise?

    40h * $10 = $400/wk.

    ($10 * 1.3) * (40h * .85) = $442/wk.

    We have a winner!

    --

  • Y'all aren't paying attention!

    Most of us who have DSL were early adopters and have outboard dsl-to-ethernet bridges that are fully self-contained. I got my Cisco 675 for free, and it was the only way to connect to USWest DSL for a good long time.

    These days, the basic DSL hookup comes with either a Cisco or an Intel DSL PCI card.

    This card already doesn't have any support or planned support for Linux, BSD, etc.

    So, the news that there is going to be *another* DSL card without Linux support is simply, well, not news.

    Call me when there is at least one vendor of a DSL card that supports anything but Windows.

  • Recently (last few years), CPU speed has far outstripped software requirements. 600MHz machines are available in low end models now. In the past, mildly overpowered CPUs led to software bloat, programmers just upping the minimum CPU/memory requirements rather than bother to spend the company's $$$ optomizing code (try running Win2k on a 486 to see what I mean). Now CPU power has pulled way out in front, and software bloat is expanding into the hardware realm. The downside is that this makes hardware subject to the same restrictions as software, namely, that it's operation is confined to a particular OS environment. Extending compatibility to other platforms or even to updates of officially supported platforms is a lot of work. Thus, hardware will become rapidly obsoleted. Who will write a driver 10 years from now, even for windows, for a 1999 winmodem? The devide will be useless. And with hardware vendors being tight lipped on releasing hardware specs, 3rd party drivers are often not an option (just ask the Linux laptop developper).
  • Sorry!

    A DSL "modem" *is* a modem. DSL uses an analog AM frequency to broadcast its signal over telephone lines.

    To use a DSL modem, you need an R/F seperator that splits the DC telephone signal from the AM radio frequency sent to the DSL modem.

    It is also for this reason that DSL service gets slower the further you are from the central telephone office. (And they can't reasonably guarantee 384k download speeds over 18,000 feet, so they just don't service beyond that point)

    Digital to Digital? Naw. Same thing all over again, just faster.

    At least you don't get a busy signal when you are online!

    -Ben

    PS: it ROCKS! 1.5 Mb 24x7, static IP, 384k uploads. Downloaded NS 4.7 FULL RELEASE (18 MB) in under 5 minutes... my poor 6.4 GB HD just don't cut the mustard anymore...
  • In my geographical area we get screwed. I live in a city with both Cable and DSL access (which are at each other's throats for customers right now). There are two problems though, the city is fairly spread out and the CO is downtown which means all the slums have DSL access yet I can't get it at my house which is across town. Our cable is even worse, we don't have 2-way cable service. We download over the cable line but upload using our plain old dialup service. If I ever do get DSL it will be 384kbps downstream and 128kbps upstream, all for a measly 50$ per month. I'm stuck with cable for a while which is really hard to get working under Linux.

  • Re:Bad idea (Score:3)

    by pfcgibson ( 160931 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @04:13AM (#1121883) Homepage
    I wholeheartedly agree. I work for a helpline and winmodems cause a lot of stress. It's not a whole lot of fun trying to explain to someone that they just have a pretty crappy modem and should expect it to be a little flakey. I too got in on the free modem when you sign up and I would not have been able to let myself take part in that if they were using winDSL modems. Its another move towards cheaper, faster, crummy technology that we are expected to put up with. I'd much rather that the effort be put into making more expensive hardware better and less expensive than shooting for these drastic price drops.
  • I'd rather not have things route through the AltiVec unit: look what happened with Photoshop's first batch of AV plug-ins!

    Pope

  • Technical accuracy? (Score:5)

    by Dave Scherer ( 32353 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @04:52AM (#1121888)
    Okay everyone, repeat after me. There IS NO SUCH THING AS A DSL "MODEM". "D" in DSL is for digital.

    The following is quoted from this 3Com white paper [3com.com]

    For ADSL, the most talked-about xDSL technology, there are two competing modulation schemes: carrierless amplitude phase (CAP) modulation and discrete multitone (DMT) modulation. CAP and DMT use the same fundamental modulation technique--quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM)--but differ in the way they apply it.

    QAM, a bandwidth conservation process routinely used in modems, enables two digital carrier signals to occupy the same transmission bandwidth. With QAM, two independent message signals are used to modulate two carrier signals that have identical frequencies, but differ in amplitude and phase. QAM receivers are able to discern whether to use lower or higher numbers of amplitude and phase states to overcome noise and interference on the wire pair.

    Sounds like a MODEM to me!

  • As has been pointed out here many times, there is a lot of sharing between Linux, FreeBSD and HURD. There are some differences in goals and licenses, but there's a lot of common ground. And there are some efforts underway to create a common interface for drivers [slashdot.org]. (other URLs anyone?) If that pans out, a Linux driver will very likely be usable as a FreeBSD driver and a HURD driver. That gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.

    In case the /. HTML-eater is still awake, the link above to the article on drivers is:

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=00/03/31/1459 210&mode=thread

  • you are all missing the point (Score:3)

    by inquis ( 143542 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @05:01AM (#1121892)
    All the comments on this thread are all like "win-anything is going to suck processor cycles, so this software DSL modem is going to blow." The fact that everyone is missing is that Linux support was explicitly stated in the press release. Now, what does this mean? I put forth this hypothesis. Let's say Motorola wants to get a chunk of the forthcoming "internet appliance" market, and they see that the future is clearly broadband. They want to make a cheap broadband communications device that they can sell to every company that makes an "internet appliance". What is their target market? CERTAINLY NOT WINDOWS SYSTEMS!!! Honestly, who is ever going to create a win32 based embedded system?? Linux is the natural choice, and if Motorola does not realize this, then they are shooting themselves in the foot. In fact, I bet that they could care less if a wintel box would even boot with the thing in as long as the Linux boxes will work well with it in. My predictions: 1. Motorola is going to get a large pile of money. If (some would say when) this "internet appliance" paradigm gets off the ground, its rise will probably coincide with the rise of the cheap broadband that would be necessary for these devices to work. Since you are trying to keep costs low on these appliances, you are not going to want to by components that are at a premium. Instead you buy a bunch of cheaper things so you can keep your prices low. If Motorola is first out of the gate with this they will have people practically throwing cash at them from all sides. 2. Linux performance will not be as bad as everyone fears. I admit that winmodems suck badly, really really badly when compared to their hardware counterparts. ON A WINDOWS MACHINE. Seriously, I have not seen a win32 machine (except for a few tweaked out NT boxes) that ever have had enough spare resources AT ANY TIME to be able to handle the winmodem overhead satisfactorially, much less a home system. However, we are not talking home systems, we are talking IAPPLIANCES with dedicated tasks. Open your eyes people; they are not trying to sell this to you. The inquisitor has spoken.

  • Slashdot tip 'o the day (Score:3)

    by Anomalous Canard ( 137695 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @05:11AM (#1121896)
    When previewing, use the back button before repairing the damage or submitting rather than editing in the window on the preview page or submitting from there. The editing tool on the same page as the preview eats things when it shouldn't. It used to convert &lt; into < for example, but now that's fixed. Instead, it eats HTML tags.

    Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

  • Stop them before they get there (Score:3)

    by bfree ( 113420 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:36AM (#1121897)
    Lets us all tell them to fsck off. They are just helping AMD etc. sell more high speed processors ("with todays 550MHz+ processors blah blah blah"). Let's not suffer lower frame rates in online games for the sake of £50, and lets not suffer OS incompatible hardware devices for the sake of it. Please someone with the bandwidth begin a petition now to tell them to fsck off!

  • Read the motorola press release (Score:3)

    by Carnage4Life ( 106069 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:38AM (#1121899) Homepage Journal
    Here's the motorola press release and Yes, there'll be Linux support.

  • It's not that difficult, guys? (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward

    If you want to use DSL under Linux, don't buy these WinDSL modems. Buy a real DSL modem. If it has "Win" in front of it, don't buy it, and if you do, don't complain about it.

    Windows is the most popular platform in use, and it makes business sense for Motorola to do this. Don't complain because they're making money and the Linux companies are losing faster than ever.

  • Re:Windows-Tyize (Score:3)

    by DustyHodges ( 174738 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:38AM (#1121904)
    Unfortunatly, not that much of the market isn't windows. If you want to make a cheap piece of hardware by using software, you have to focus on the Win side to make any money... Software based isn't going to do it for anyone else anyway... Linux users are smart enough not to pay good money for software based modems. But eventually, someone on LinModems will post their drivers for it. It's bound to happen. I truly think that this is no big loss for any other community. As I can verify, being the owner of an LT Win modem, software based modems are pieces of shit. If I were a more informed geek at the time I had purchased my machine, I would have made sure to get a hardware based modem... When crap is being peddled to the masses, why be upset that they aren't marketing to you? Software based modems are, quite simply, the fast food of connectivity hardware. If you want something that is any good for you, you simply have to go with something else. Just my opinion, Dusty Hodges
  • I'm sure all of us tech support geeks have had our share of winmodem problems. My favorite is when the LT Winmodems decide to play the "IRQ Disco" as I like to call it :) The game is simple: put the modem in, and watch is hop around on different IRQs every time you boot, with no pattern, and never the one that is free... thus pissing off every other component in your computer! This is why you cannot ever trust software to manage your hardware resources. I want manual control, dammit!

    Here's my [radiks.net] DeCSS mirror. Where's yours?

  • And of course, I must say that I think that as long as the cable networks get opened to competition, cable is going to rule "broadband" anyway, so the point is moot. Why are people unable to understand that fatter pipes carry more water?

    Keep in mind that with cable you're sharing that fatter pipe rather than having a smaller, yet dedicated pipe. The cable companies can make the number of people sharing the pipe smaller and smaller but that takes time and money. In the meantime both the phone and cable companies (and in some cases the electric companies) are hanging a lot of fiber-optic cable. Once I have three choices of fiber to my door I'll be lovin' it. For now I'm dumping my crappy one-way cablemodem in favor of ADSL.

    numb
  • Actually... WinModems and that nice dual processor 600Mhz computer will have little effect on the performace, but if you take a 200Mhz, add a WinModem, and try to play Halflife (or some other CPU intensive game), you'll notice a very large hit in performace; before I switched to an external 56k modem, my pings were 300-400, and now are 150-250. Frame rates were also noticably better with the external modem.

    Cheap but good quality hardware is good. But to pass on something as basic as net connectivity to the CPU especially as bandwidth sizes increase, is a bad idea in the end. Furthermore, that's one less slot that you could have filled with a second video card or the like.

  • Re:Performance Hit (Score:3)

    by Thomas Charron ( 1485 ) <twaffle@gmai l . com> on Thursday April 20, 2000 @04:28AM (#1121921) Homepage
    The best example I can say is take these steps, and you can quite literally *WATCH* the software begin to fail simply becouse of CPU resources..

    1) Install a 56k Winmodem in a Celeron 300 Machine running Windows NT. (Windows NT is simply becouse of those lovely beeps it'll make to tell you bad things are happening.. Adds affect)

    2) Connect to the net, download RealVideo

    3) Play *ANY* RealVideo designed to run on a 56k connection (Usually encoded for 42 or 44 something)

    4) Listen top the beeps FLY! CRC errors off the chart. That's what happens with the software based drivers.. No resources, buffer overflows about, and CRC errors (Beeps) start playing a fast beat dance song for you..
  • Those Intel commercials advertising making the Internet faster with their new processors is finally starting to make sense...

  • You can be wrong, but don't be bitchy too.. (Score:5)

    by consume ( 96890 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @05:27AM (#1121925)
    Please take a second and read T1.413, which is the ANSI standard for ADSL.

    OR you could just read Newton's Telecom Dictionary, under Modem:
    "The term "modem" is also applied (and correctly so, in the purely technical sense) to ISDN TAs (terminal adapters), ADSL TUs(Terminating Units), line drivers and short-haul modems.

    Instead of using a shift-keying encoding (typically Quarternary Phase Shift Keying for 28.8kbps and higher) xDSL uses CAP (Carrierless Amplitude Phase) or DMT (discrete multi-tone) to MOdulate the digital signals onto an analog medium and DEModulate the analog signals back into ATM cells or Ethernet frames.

    Keep attempting to be technical. We'll all still be here when you get back...

  • 550 MHz? (Score:4)

    by jonnythan ( 79727 ) on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:39AM (#1121928)
    They claim that they should work in any system that's at least 550 MHz. If you need that much processing power for a DSL modem to be hardly noticible (which is what I suppose they mean, maybe less than 20-30% processor usage), then can you imagine playing Quake 3 or UT on the net? Just your modem would be pulling a large percentage of your FPS, which would not make these people very happy.

    56k WinModems are fine; even though they may be a little buggy, at least the data transfer rate doesn't require a dedicated Pentium II-class chip just to run.

    Give me my hardware DSL modem, or the lovely ethernet-based cable modem i'm going to get in a few months.
  • The best thing about Winmodems is you can update the firmware. The worst thing about Winmodems is you can update the firmware. Winmodems tend to be buggy, CPU-hungry beasts whose firmware is updated frequently because of it. They tend to be very unreliable. (Don't believe me? Call up your favorite ISP and ask THEIR opinion of Winmodems.) The article says it'll run fine in a 550MHz system. And they're targeting it at under-$1500 computers? Can you get a Coppermine system for that price, WITH the DSL modem? (Think Gateway, Dell, etc., not parts-from-eBay.) Besides, DSL devices are fairly cheap for the bandwidth you're getting. You have a couple of choices: avoid the issue altogether by getting an EXTERNAL device, like the Cisco 675, or write software drivers for your favorite OS. Will Motorola allow this to be done? Who knows.
    ---
  • There's a lady who knows
    All the systems and nodes
    And she's DSLing a Modem to Heaven
    She telnets there, she knows
    All the ports have been closed
    With a nerd she can get
    Files she came for

    Woohoohoo
    Woo Hoo Hoo HooHoo
    And she's DSLing a Modem to Heaven
    There's a first post to get
    But she wants to be sure
    Cos she knows sometimes DSL has
    Two meanings
    In a path by the NIC
    There's a burdvax that pings
    Sometimes all of our flames
    are cross-posted

    Woohoohoo
    Woo Hoo Hoo HooHoo
    And she's DSLing a Modem to Heaven
    And it's processed by root
    Unix Labs will reboot
    Slashdot will then listen to reason
    And a prompt will reload
    For those yet to logon
    And the networks will echo much faster

    Woohoohoo
    Woo Hoo Hoo HooHoo
    And she's DSLing a Modem to Heaven
    If there's a lookup in your netstat
    don't be .alarmed now
    it's just a flaming from the link queen
    Yes there are two routes you can type in
    but in the long run
    there's still time to change the net you're on

    And as we find stuff to download
    We ftp and we chmod
    There was a sysadm we know
    Who changed the server to her own
    She had root privs and she used chown
    She hacked out on the DDN
    And if you tail her stdin
    Then you will find the karma you had lost
    And get it back with cpio
    To be a hack and not a troll...

    And she's DSLing a Modem to Heaven. . .

  • Performance Hit (Score:5)

    by NMerriam ( 15122 ) <NMerriam@artboy.org> on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:41AM (#1121933) Homepage
    Unfortunately the side-effect of this is that people won't realize they're taking a big performance hit.

    Software modems, for the driver problems, aren't that big of a deal on windows because the Modem isn't using much processor time anyways.

    But this thing sounds like a real hog -- they couldn't implement it until now because anything below a P3-550 couldn't run it? This sounds like a great way for Intel to sell more processors.

    The folks who really appreciate high-speed access (other than Warez d00ds and Pr0n Kings) are gamers, and this is really gonna suck for folks who think they're getting a great deal, only to boot up and wonder why their new P3-1000 is slower playing Diablo 2 than their old P2-233 on a dial-up.

    And then of course the driver issues, when Loki comes out with Diablo 2/Linux (maybe?)...
  • Codecs convert one form of digital data data to another form.

    No, that is incorrect. A CODEC [whatis.com] (coder/decoder) is typically used to transform analog signals to/from the digital domain. The integrated circuit that the telephone company uses to convert analog voice on subscriber loops to/from 64 KBPS digital data streams is a CODEC.

  • These DSL Modems cannot be that expensive. GTE gave me one free for signing up for a year of service. Not free rental for the contract life but free as in you now own the modem. They used to charge about $200 dollars but even that doesn't seem too bad since now I can just hook any ole NIC up to it. I can run any type of machine that speaks TCP/IP on their DSL line. I even got my ISP to give me a static IP address so I don't even need a DHCP Client.
  • I do agree with most postings here that I don't want such a modem on my main computer. But I do think this opens up an opportunity for the Linux-based embedded system market.

    Why not integrate the modem with a standalone firewall/proxy/mailserver/... box like e.g. the cobalt cube ? That could be a nice application for such softmodems.

    /ol
  • Don't forget that every PCI card effectively cuts the bus bandwidth to all of the cards by a larger amount. 2 cards gives up to 66MB/s each, but 4 cards get only 33MB/s. That's why AGP is such a good idea, at least you have dedicated bandwidth to the video card.
  • Well, you're half-right. There is such a thing as a DSL modem - however - the term modem is incorrect for it. It's kind of like saying that Seahorses are not horses. Technically, you are right but the name is still there to stay.

    kwsNI
  • http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ti cker=mot&script=410&layout=7&item_id=865 82 For some reason the ahref didn't show up???

  • The problem, as another poster pointed out, is that most DSL vendors give you a DSL modem to use for the duration of your contract/subscription. With these, they'll continue to charge the same price, but you get a shitty modem. Someone said there would be Linux support, but I doubt that. So those who want DSL for Linux will have to buy their own modem and still pay for the Winmodem.

  • Exactly. We have ONE DSL provider here, (NB, Canada), and it's the Telco. They provide DSL modem as part of their monthly service charge. When I stop getting DSL service, they reclaim the modem. Simple as that.

    The modem brings in copper from the wall jack on the 2 OTHER wires (yellow and black), and outputs Ethernet. As far as any machine I hook up knows, it's plugged directly into a hub or router. This is great for any OS I use. I can pop in a $40 Ethernet card, and if that card is supported, then DSL works.

    There are no unsupported modem drivers to worry about, and almost any usable OS has SOME kind of ethernet support.

  • Re:PROPER LINK HERE.... (Score:4)

    by IO ERROR ( 128968 ) <errorNO@SPAMioerror.us> on Thursday April 20, 2000 @03:44AM (#1121950) Homepage Journal
    /. is eating HTML tags for breakfast this morning. Let's try it without previewing first:

    http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ti cker=mot&script=410&layout=7&i tem_id=86582 [corporate-ir.net]
    ---

Slashdot Top Deals

I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato

Close