56Kbps modem options for MacBook Pros

On Aug 15, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Jolin M Warren wrote:
> -Would anyone suggest an alternative external hardware USB 56K modem?
>
> -Are there ExpressCard 56K modems?

I would say you should start with Apple's modem (I know, Apple has a
reputation for modems that do very badly on marginal lines, going
back 10 years or so).

If it works for you, then use it. It does work for me, although I
only use it for testing. When I do fire it up, I exercise it well
enough to believe it does about as well as modems do, on the phone
lines I have access to. It certainly does as well as the "built in"
modem in my early Mini.

I doubt you'll find a large number of possibilities, as the market
has shrunk considerably.

   --John

On Aug 15, 2007, at 4:09 AM, Jolin M Warren wrote:

> -Would anyone suggest an alternative external hardware USB 56K modem?

I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't purchase
a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.

So for now the only two other choices for a Macintosh-compatible
external USB V.92 modem, other than the horrible one from Apple, are
the Best Data V.92 USB external fax modem for Macintosh and the
MultiTech MultiModem ZB.

Best Data V.92 USB external fax modem for Macintosh
http://www.bestdata.com/index.php?file=c-allproddesc&iProductId=16161

$44 from here:
http://www.provantage.com/data-56usbpmac~7BESD02V.htm
$50
http://www.smalldog.com/product/35097


MultiTech MultiModem ZBA
http://multitech.com/PRODUCTS/Families/MultiModemZBA/

Mac driver
http://multitech.com/SUPPORT/Families/MultiModemZBA/drivers.asp

$129
http://buy.multitech.com/Retail/product.asp?
catalog_name=Products&product_id=MT5634ZBA-USB-V92


Randy B. Singer • Mac OS X Routine Maintenance • http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html

I was doubtful about using Apple's modem but wound up pleasantly surprised. Better connections than my G4. I use it for faxing and ZTerm.

Hutch

Thanks John, Randy, and Hutch for your replies about USB modems.
Randy, it's good to see that there is still a 'proper' external USB
modem available at an affordable price (the Best Data). In the end,
though, I've decided to go with the Apple USB modem. I only need a
modem very occasionally, and will have to travel with it. The Apple
modem looks a lot smaller than the Best Data, which is a big plus for
me, and I have a feeling it will integrate better with OS X than the
Best Data one. Given John and Hutch's positive experiences with the
Apple modem, I'm less worried than I was. I only need it for checking
email and light web browsing when staying with my grandmother so it
should more than suffice.

At 01:35 on 16-08-2007, Randy B. Singer wrote:
> I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't purchase
> a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
> for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
> work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.

I believe this is because most of the Windows modems aren't actually
modems. They are just a bit of hardware to allow you to hook a
telephone line up to the computer. The actual modem is implemented in
software as part of the OS. This is what Apple does with the Apple
USB modem, which is why I was worried about performance (software
modems have traditionally had a bad reputation). I guess that with
the speed of computers these days, software modems are a lot more
viable. Combined with less people using 56K modems, there's just not
the choice in the good old hardware modems that there used to be!

Thanks again for the feedback, as it gives me more confidence to buy
the Apple modem.

Cheers,
Jolin

_________________
=> Jolin

On Aug 18, 2007, at 5:37 AM, Jolin M Warren wrote:

> Randy, it's good to see that there is still a 'proper' external USB
> modem available at an affordable price (the Best Data). In the end,
> though, I've decided to go with the Apple USB modem. I only need a
> modem very occasionally, and will have to travel with it. The Apple
> modem looks a lot smaller than the Best Data, which is a big plus for
> me, and I have a feeling it will integrate better with OS X than the
> Best Data one. Given John and Hutch's positive experiences with the
> Apple modem, I'm less worried than I was. I only need it for checking
> email and light web browsing when staying with my grandmother so it
> should more than suffice.

The Apple USB modem is indeed very small. I have one sitting right
here, and it is smaller than a pack of chewing gum. So it is easy to
pack, you can even put it in your pocket. The Best Data modem is
much bigger, but it is smaller than the picture on the Web would lead
you to believe.

The Apple USB modem is fine if you have a clean phone line and you
aren't concerned about achieving the highest connection rate
possible. Problems arise if you have a phone line that isn't really
clean...you may only be able to achieve a very slow connection, or
none at all. Some folks have had conflicts with Apple's USB modem
and the MagSafe connector, and some have also found that the modem
will work in one USB port, but not another. See:
http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/modems/topic3978.html


>
> At 01:35 on 16-08-2007, Randy B. Singer wrote:
>> I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't
>> purchase
>> a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
>> for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
>> work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.
>
> I believe this is because most of the Windows modems aren't actually
> modems. They are just a bit of hardware to allow you to hook a
> telephone line up to the computer. The actual modem is implemented in
> software as part of the OS. This is what Apple does with the Apple
> USB modem, which is why I was worried about performance (software
> modems have traditionally had a bad reputation).

Yes, I know what a soft-modem is, and this is indeed part of the
reason why Apple's latest modem is problematic for a lot of folks.
(Of course, Apple has rarely offered a good modem of any description/
type.)

There are still plenty of full (non-software) modems available for
Windows, and these are what I was referring to. I've spoken with
friends who make a living creating Mac telephony applications and
they can't tell me exactly why these latest (V.92) modems can't be
used with a Mac, but so far no one has been able to get them to
work. In the past, getting a PC modem to work with a Mac was
trivial, and scripts to facilitate this were easy to find on the Web,
or were available from Apple.

Randy B. Singer • Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance • http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html

On 16-Aug-2007, at 02:35, Randy B. Singer wrote:
> I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't purchase
> a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
> for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
> work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.

This is because there are no modems anymore, there are only 'soft'
modems, which rely on the OS to not only do all the heavy lifting but
ALL the lifting. Since they rely on the OS, a 'windows' modem will
not work on a Mac.

Google Kreme wrote:
> On 16-Aug-2007, at 02:35, Randy B. Singer wrote:
>> I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't purchase
>> a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
>> for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
>> work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.
>
> This is because there are no modems anymore, there are only 'soft'
> modems, which rely on the OS to not only do all the heavy lifting but
> ALL the lifting. Since they rely on the OS, a 'windows' modem will
> not work on a Mac.
>
Just to make this clear. Most of the smarts in today's modems are in the software that runs on the host computer. The hardware is basically a digital to analog converter specific to the requirements of a POTS. (Plain old telephone service.)

David

On Aug 20, 2007, at 4:10 AM, Google Kreme wrote:

> On 16-Aug-2007, at 02:35, Randy B. Singer wrote:
>> I don't know the technical reasons, but apparently you can't purchase
>> a V.92 (currently the most advanced modem standard) USB modem meant
>> for a Windows computer, tweak the initialization string, and have it
>> work with your Macintosh, like you could with earlier modems.
>
> This is because there are no modems anymore, there are only 'soft'
> modems, which rely on the OS to not only do all the heavy lifting but
> ALL the lifting. Since they rely on the OS, a 'windows' modem will
> not work on a Mac.

I don't think that is entirely the case:

Diamond SupraMax External V.92 Modem
http://www.diamondmm.com/SM56USB.php

Zoom 3090AF USB V.92 Modem
http://www.zoom.com/graphics/datasheets/dial_up/3090_RoHS_1716.pdf

Conexant 56K V.92 Data/Fax External USB Modem
http://www.usbgear.com/computer_cable_details.cfm?
sku=USBG-56K&cats=124&catid=124

Hawking Technologies - HM92U - 56K V.92 Data/Fax USB Modem
http://www.electronicsoutfitter.com/store/147057/hm92u.html

Hiro V.92 56K External USB Modem
http://www.hiroinc.com/Product_info.jsp?ProId=214

Looking at the specs, I don't believe that any of these modems are
soft-modems. Though if you check out the manufacturer's Web sites,
almost all also offer a soft-modem. Not a single one of the above
modems is Macintosh compatible.

Randy B. Singer • Mac OS X Routine Maintenance • http://
www.macattorney.com/ts.html

At 04:10 on 20-08-2007, Randy B. Singer wrote:
> The Apple USB modem is fine if you have a clean phone line and you
> aren't concerned about achieving the highest connection rate
> possible. Problems arise if you have a phone line that isn't
> really clean...

I really appreciate the detailed feedback. I've decided to go for the
Apple USB modem because of its convenient size. Because I will only
use it for downloading some email every couple of months, it's a
reasonable tradeoff for the potentially lower performance. If,
however, it doesn't connect at all on my Grandmother's phone line
then I will return it as a faulty product!

> There are still plenty of full (non-software) modems available for
> Windows, and these are what I was referring to.

That's interesting. It is bizarre as modems have always been such
generic devices (assuming one had the right text-based script).
Presumably it's not just the extra "modem-on-hold" type features that
aren't working on the Mac but the actual basic modem functionality.
What a shame to see such a long-time generic device become
platform-specific.

Cheers,
Jolin

_________________
=> Jolin

On Aug 20, 2007, at 7:10 AM, Randy B. Singer wrote:

> The Apple USB modem is fine if you have a clean phone line and you
> aren't concerned about achieving the highest connection rate
> possible. Problems arise if you have a phone line that isn't really
> clean...you may only be able to achieve a very slow connection, or
> none at all.

my father had a horrible time with the soft modem built in to his
Mini. it would take several attempts to make a connection, and then
it would be a very slow one which more often than not would end up
dropped. he had the phone company check his line and they said it
should be ok for 56k. i brought my old G3 Powerbook over and it would
consistently connect at 48k on the same line. Applecare suggested an
archive and install but that didn't help.

the bright side is that i was finally able to talk him into going
with DSL...

In my search to fix the disconnects with my Mac Mini I found this website and forum (quite frankly one of the best I've encountered for a computer novice like myself).

Up until a few months ago my Apple External USB Modem would connect at full dial up speed but then it started disconnecting after only a minute or two online. I use AOL and reinstalled AOL but the problem continued. I blamed the Apple External Modem. I searched for a modem from another manufacturer without success. I eventually decided to get an Apple Airport Extreme with Modem (as at least I would have Apple Support if there was a problem)to see if I could get a better connection. Now I couldn't even connect to the internet!

So I contacted Apple Support. They reviewed my network connections and my AOL settings but eventually felt it was an AOL problem. I contacted AOL Help and after attempting several corrections to the AOL software without success the AOL Tech person said it was an Apple problem. So I contacted Apple again and this time they found the correct settings and I was on line. Unfortunately I was still losing my connection after just a few minutes. So I was informed about line noise and spliters and the like and my modem was reset to a slower speed. Finally I was staying on line.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) the disconnect problem came back the very next day. This time when I called Apple Support I was bumped up to an expert on these types of problems. After a review of the Apple settings and connections it was eventually decided that the problem was not due to the modem but was the AOL software after all. I was advised that trashing the AOL programing and reinstalling it does not necessarily correct the problem and was taught how to remove other AOL files that remain even after the program is uninstalled. After doing this and reinstalling AOL I was finally able to connect to the internet at maximum dial up speed and stay on line. While I havn't gone back to my USB modem to see how it now performs I suspect that it would now perform equally well.

So bottom line, I think the Apple Modems will work if everything is set right and there are no corrupt files messing things up. If you get an Apple Modem and have problems, be persistant. I was pleased that Apple Support went above and beyond to satisfy me as a customer. Eventually the solution was found!

On Aug 26, 2007, at 3:39 AM, Ward Clem wrote:

> So bottom line, I think the Apple Modems will work if everything is
> set right and there are no corrupt files messing things up.

I don't think that the problem that you experienced was one of
corrupted files.

I am very thankful that I don't have to deal with an analog modem
anymore. I used to be quite an expert at it, out of necessity, as
modem/line noise/connection script problems were quite common in the
old days. In fact, I even posted plans for a line noise killer that
used to work wonders for many folks. The Web site is still up
(though terribly out of date, except for the device itself):
http://www.macattorney.com/mnk.html

AOL has always been a particular problem for folks trying to connect
with an analog modem.

When you have noisy lines your modem has to be set up to be able to
re-train to get the most stable connection that the conditions will
allow. AOL's modem scripts have never been good at allowing this to
happen. Fine tuning AOL's scripts to allow for better connections
isn't hard, but it takes someone who is willing to futz with them.
Back in AOL's heyday, we used to suggest that folks move to the "real
Internet" and get a "real ISP" and move away from AOL, with all its
problems. I think that is still good advice.

As an aside, I just sent out my newsletter to my 6,500-plus
subscribers a couple of weeks ago. Everyone got it, except for those
with AOL as their ISP. After all these years (about 20) AOL still
has a huge problem with common types of file attachment encoding.
Pitiful.

Randy B. Singer • Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance • http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html