On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:06:34 +0100, jgxhs@... wrote:

> Hopefully the clicks are not anything to do with these guys.
>
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/06/400602.html
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1310985.stm

Hehe... It had crossed my mind, but I guess it must be pretty boring listening
in to conversations on our line :-).

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

Hopefully the clicks are not anything to do with these guys.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/06/400602.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1310985.stm

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 21:28:02 +0100, you wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:31:28 +0000, laurence_taylor2001 wrote:
>
>> --- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> . . .  Apparently, TalkTalk's Caller ID system is supposed to be
>>> identical to BT's, but there are some minor differences (not just the
>>> problem that I'm having).
>>>
>>> It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on average
>>> with the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset.  Probably
>>> everybody here knows the tell-tale "click...click"  that the Solo makes
>>> directly before the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to
>>> announce the phone number. With my BT line, this was always a fixed
>>> "click...click", but with TT sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a
>>> result picks up no Caller ID at all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still
>>> display the Caller ID most of the time when this happens). . . .
>>
>> A guess is that Solos click on BT lines because of either the line
>> reversal that heads the calling line identification presentation (CLIP)
>> signal or some other big change in line voltage. Often my Solo clicks
>> when I take my handset off hook; sometimes it clicks without any call
>> coming, perhaps when a neighbour takes their phone off hook. The CLIP data
>> stream after the line reversal should not cause the clicks.
>
>Yes, I get the clicks too when taking the handset off hook, most of the time.
>Happened when I was with BT and still now I'm with TT.  Regarding clicks
>without any call coming, it only seems to happen here if there are storms in
>the area or late at night (12am or so) which I had assumed was BT tests.
>
>> IIRC BT uses line reversals as part of the signalling to switch lines
>> from idle to loop states at the start of a call. This is part of the
>> prompt to our kit (e.g., Solos) to receive CLIP data. The CLIP data
>> arrive before the rings. Our kit must have programmed delays to pass the
>CLIP
>> data to our software between the first and second rings, when most comms
>> software expects. Call Waiting signals seem very similar, but there is no
>> line reversal or switching out of loop state.
>>
>> Maybe TalkTalk does without line reversals along its local loop unbundled
>> lines to signal an imminent CLIP, instead working rather like Call
>> Waiting: hence lack of clicks. TalkTalk may even send the CLIP between
>> the first and second rings, as happens over most of the world, even if
>> the CLIP otherwise follows BT protocols. This may make TalkTalk Caller ID
>unreliable
>> with a Solo, while other kit may be more tolerant, perhaps if it can also
>> receive Call Waiting signals.
>
>Maybe.  It seems inconsistent.  Sometimes it clicks, sometimes it doesn't.
>Likewise, with the BT Freestyle handsets, sometimes there display the Caller
>ID immediately, sometimes it doesn't show up until after 2-3 rings, or more
>rarely it doesn't show up at all.  It could just be a timing issue or
>something.  Then again, TT aren't exactly unknown for having Caller ID issues
>if their forums are anything to go by - earlier this year exchanges were
>given Caller ID updates.

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 16:31:28 +0000, laurence_taylor2001 wrote:

> --- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
>>
>> . . .  Apparently, TalkTalk's Caller ID system is supposed to be
>> identical to BT's, but there are some minor differences (not just the
>> problem that I'm having).
>>
>> It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on average
>> with the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset.  Probably
>> everybody here knows the tell-tale "click...click"  that the Solo makes
>> directly before the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to
>> announce the phone number. With my BT line, this was always a fixed
>> "click...click", but with TT sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a
>> result picks up no Caller ID at all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still
>> display the Caller ID most of the time when this happens). . . .
>
> A guess is that Solos click on BT lines because of either the line
> reversal that heads the calling line identification presentation (CLIP)
> signal or some other big change in line voltage. Often my Solo clicks
> when I take my handset off hook; sometimes it clicks without any call
> coming, perhaps when a neighbour takes their phone off hook. The CLIP data
> stream after the line reversal should not cause the clicks.

Yes, I get the clicks too when taking the handset off hook, most of the time.
Happened when I was with BT and still now I'm with TT.  Regarding clicks
without any call coming, it only seems to happen here if there are storms in
the area or late at night (12am or so) which I had assumed was BT tests.

> IIRC BT uses line reversals as part of the signalling to switch lines
> from idle to loop states at the start of a call. This is part of the
> prompt to our kit (e.g., Solos) to receive CLIP data. The CLIP data
> arrive before the rings. Our kit must have programmed delays to pass the
CLIP
> data to our software between the first and second rings, when most comms
> software expects. Call Waiting signals seem very similar, but there is no
> line reversal or switching out of loop state.
>
> Maybe TalkTalk does without line reversals along its local loop unbundled
> lines to signal an imminent CLIP, instead working rather like Call
> Waiting: hence lack of clicks. TalkTalk may even send the CLIP between
> the first and second rings, as happens over most of the world, even if
> the CLIP otherwise follows BT protocols. This may make TalkTalk Caller ID
unreliable
> with a Solo, while other kit may be more tolerant, perhaps if it can also
> receive Call Waiting signals.

Maybe.  It seems inconsistent.  Sometimes it clicks, sometimes it doesn't.
Likewise, with the BT Freestyle handsets, sometimes there display the Caller
ID immediately, sometimes it doesn't show up until after 2-3 rings, or more
rarely it doesn't show up at all.  It could just be a timing issue or
something.  Then again, TT aren't exactly unknown for having Caller ID issues
if their forums are anything to go by - earlier this year exchanges were
given Caller ID updates.

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 19:08:37 +0000, Paul Murphy wrote:

> This may be of some help:
> http://www.ainslie.org.uk/callerid/cli_faq.htm#Q_6
> <http://www.ainslie.org.uk/callerid/cli_faq.htm#Q_6>  it's a bit old but
> there's allot of good stuff there.

Have already been there :)

>> It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on
> average with
>> the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset. Probably
> everybody
>> here knows the tell-tale "click...click" that the Solo makes directly
> before
>> the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to announce the phone
> number.
>> With my BT line, this was always a fixed "click...click", but with TT
>> sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a result picks up no Caller
> ID at
>> all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still display the Caller ID most of
> the time
>> when this happens).
>
> Sounds like there is indeed some sort of different standard (or improper
> configuration of their system to work to that standard). Maybe the CID
> data isn't being sent through on a strong enough signal - hence
> sometimes it's doesn't pass the threshold to activate the old Solo but
> it's enough to activate a 'lighter weight' CID box? Does unplugging all
> other devices/loads from the line make it more likely that the Solo will
> talk to you again?  :-)

Nope.  Have tried all that.

> If they don't fix it, as Caller ID clearly isn't functioning as it
> should, I think you should have grounds to get out of any contract and
> go to another telco. Have you been able to test the Solo on another
> line, just to make sure it's not the culprit?

Trouble is, I left BT because I'd had enough of their stealth price increases,
and although I viewed switching to TT a risk at first, I have been very
surprised with how good they are generally.  I've no complaints with
broadband or the voice line in general - it's just Caller ID, and I can maybe
live with the Solo not working always as I'm saving a lot of money being with
TalkTalk :-).  I've not been able to test the Solo on another TT line as I
don't know anybody else who is with TT, but I have tried my spare Solo on my
line and that has the same trouble.

> By the way, I'm now using Classic PhoneTools 9 retail with the Terminal
> app add-in, in conjunction with Avanquests special revised tab file (to
> fix the purple bar on the GUI) and my inf that's listed under files
> in this group and it's all working together very well. Multi-page faxes
> even get through to machines where my setup previously had problems
> after the first page. It's definitely worth the £10 or so it cost me
> to upgrade to this latest version! The only problem I'm now experiencing
> is it's very slow to start up now there are more voicemails and faxes
> stored in the history - it was lightning fast by comparison when I first
> installed it.

Glad to hear my Solo isn't the only one still in active use.

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
>
> . . .  Apparently, TalkTalk's Caller ID system is supposed to be
> identical to BT's, but there are some minor differences (not just the problem
> that I'm having).
>
> It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on average with
> the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset.  Probably everybody
> here knows the tell-tale "click...click"  that the Solo makes directly before
> the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to announce the phone number.
> With my BT line, this was always a fixed "click...click", but with TT
> sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a result picks up no Caller ID at
> all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still display the Caller ID most of the time
> when this happens). . . .

A guess is that Solos click on BT lines because of either the line reversal that
heads the
calling line identification presentation (CLIP) signal or some other big change
in line
voltage. Often my Solo clicks when I take my handset off hook; sometimes it
clicks
without any call coming, perhaps when a neighbour takes their phone off hook.
The CLIP
data stream after the line reversal should not cause the clicks.

IIRC BT uses line reversals as part of the signalling to switch lines from idle
to loop states
at the start of a call. This is part of the prompt to our kit (e.g., Solos) to
receive CLIP data.
The CLIP data arrive before the rings. Our kit must have programmed delays to
pass the
CLIP data to our software between the first and second rings, when most comms
software
expects. Call Waiting signals seem very similar, but there is no line reversal
or switching
out of loop state.

Maybe TalkTalk does without line reversals along its local loop unbundled lines
to signal
an imminent CLIP, instead working rather like Call Waiting: hence lack of
clicks. TalkTalk
may even send the CLIP between the first and second rings, as happens over most
of the
world, even if the CLIP otherwise follows BT protocols. This may make TalkTalk
Caller ID
unreliable with a Solo, while other kit may be more tolerant, perhaps if it can
also receive
Call Waiting signals.

Sources:

Caller ID FAQ
<http://www.ainslie.org.uk/callerid/cli_faq.htm>

Wikipedia
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caller_ID>

BT Supplier Information Notes 227 and 242 (PDFs, each 34 pp., available via
search)
<http://www.sinet.bt.com/>

£0.02

--

Laurence Taylor

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:34:54 +0000, Paul Murphy wrote:
>
> > --- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts oliver@ wrote:
> >> Does anyone have their phone line with TalkTalk, instead of BT?
> >
> > As no body with Talktalk has replied (yet), my line is with Plusnet
> > and it's performing the same as when it was with BT in terms of CID on
> > my Solo (works almost all the time apart from some internatioal
> > calls). What do Talktalk have to say about it?
>
> I guess I should really have said TalkTalk LLU - i.e. they've completely taken
> over the line, unlike Plusnet (IIRC) where your line is probably still
> connected to BT's hardware at the exchange.

That's exactly the case with my Plusnet homephone line. Recently my broadband connection started playing up (it was slow and intermittently going out of sync) and they needed to get BT to fix it. Now I'm back to 7616 Kbps downstream and 448 Kbps upstream.

> I am in contact with TalkTalk about it, who are looking into it - it's not a
> line issue, since they've done a line test. I figured that if I knew
> somebody else had no problems with the Solo on TalkTalk LLU, that'd give me a
> bit more ammunition to tell them it must be a fault on their equipment and
> not the Solo :). Apparently, TalkTalk's Caller ID system is supposed to be
> identical to BT's, but there are some minor differences (not just the problem
> that I'm having).

This may be of some help: http://www.ainslie.org.uk/callerid/cli_faq.htm#Q_6 it's a bit old but there's allot of good stuff there.

> It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on average with
> the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset. Probably everybody
> here knows the tell-tale "click...click" that the Solo makes directly before
> the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to announce the phone number.
> With my BT line, this was always a fixed "click...click", but with TT
> sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a result picks up no Caller ID at
> all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still display the Caller ID most of the time
> when this happens).

Sounds like there is indeed some sort of different standard (or improper configuration of their system to work to that standard). Maybe the CID data isn't being sent through on a strong enough signal - hence sometimes it's doesn't pass the threshold to activate the old Solo but it's enough to activate a 'lighter weight' CID box? Does unplugging all other devices/loads from the line make it more likely that the Solo will talk to you again?  :-)

If they don't fix it, as Caller ID clearly isn't functioning as it should, I think you should have grounds to get out of any contract and go to another telco. Have you been able to test the Solo on another line, just to make sure it's not the culprit?

By the way, I'm now using Classic PhoneTools 9 retail with the Terminal app add-in, in conjunction with Avanquests special revised tab file (to fix the purple bar on the GUI) and my inf that's listed under files in this group and it's all working together very well. Multi-page faxes even get through to machines where my setup previously had problems after the first page. It's definitely worth the £10 or so it cost me to upgrade to this latest version! The only problem I'm now experiencing is it's very slow to start up now there are more voicemails and faxes stored in the history - it was lightning fast by comparison when I first installed it.

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:12:59 +0100, Gerald wrote:

> I'll chip in and state that Caller ID works with BT and Tescos Homephone
> but not with Virgin Cable.

Yeah, I had virtually no problems with it when I had a BT line.  I remember
people's comments here regarding Virgin Cable, or NTL as it was back then (or
maybe it was even back in the C&W days) - IIRC, they use a different Caller
ID standard - can't remember which, but probably a more widespread
implementation (not BT's own custom "standard").

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

  Amiga Formula One site  ==>  http://www.amigaf1.co.uk/

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 11:34:54 +0000, Paul Murphy wrote:

> --- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
>> Does anyone have their phone line with TalkTalk, instead of BT?
>
> As no body with Talktalk has replied (yet), my line is with Plusnet
> and it's performing the same as when it was with BT in terms of CID on
> my Solo (works almost all the time apart from some internatioal
> calls). What do Talktalk have to say about it?

I guess I should really have said TalkTalk LLU - i.e. they've completely taken
over the line, unlike Plusnet (IIRC) where your line is probably still
connected to BT's hardware at the exchange.

I am in contact with TalkTalk about it, who are looking into it - it's not a
line issue, since they've done a line test.  I figured that if I knew
somebody else had no problems with the Solo on TalkTalk LLU, that'd give me a
bit more ammunition to tell them it must be a fault on their equipment and
not the Solo :).  Apparently, TalkTalk's Caller ID system is supposed to be
identical to BT's, but there are some minor differences (not just the problem
that I'm having).

It's a strange problem because it works about 50% of the time on average with
the Solo, and 90% of the time on a BT Freestyle handset.  Probably everybody
here knows the tell-tale "click...click"  that the Solo makes directly before
the phone starts to ring, and before it starts to announce the phone number.
With my BT line, this was always a fixed "click...click", but with TT
sometimes it doesn't click at all and as a result picks up no Caller ID at
all (yet, the BT Freestyle does still display the Caller ID most of the time
when this happens).

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

  Amiga Formula One site  ==>  http://www.amigaf1.co.uk/

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, Oliver Roberts <oliver@...> wrote:
> Does anyone have their phone line with TalkTalk, instead of BT?

As no body with Talktalk has replied (yet), my line is with Plusnet
and it's performing the same as when it was with BT in terms of CID on
my Solo (works almost all the time apart from some internatioal
calls). What do Talktalk have to say about it?

Hi,

Does anyone have their phone line with TalkTalk, instead of BT?  Just
wondering how well the 56 Solo performs for others using TalkTalk, because
here the caller id function doesn't work most of the time :-(.  Was fine when
the line was with BT.

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

  Amiga Formula One site  ==>  http://www.amigaf1.co.uk/

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, adrian@... wrote:
>
> Paul Murphy wrote:
> > As well as the latest mdmsolo.inf (which is zipped), there's now
also
> > a Windows XP compatible version of PhoneTools which works only
> > with 'newer' Pace 56 k modems (including the Solo - but I haven't
> > tested others) at the Infoserve drivers website (on the bottom of
the
> > page) http://www.infoserve.com/drivers/ Complete with instructions.
>
> This is going to be _very_ useful for me. Thanks.
> ___
> Ade

Let me know if you encounter any problems with it. Its' been working
perfectly fine for me under XP but it's nice to receive feedback. It
was good of Infoserve to add it to their downloadable files for Pace
products.

Paul

Paul Murphy wrote:
> As well as the latest mdmsolo.inf (which is zipped), there's now also
> a Windows XP compatible version of PhoneTools which works only
> with 'newer' Pace 56 k modems (including the Solo - but I haven't
> tested others) at the Infoserve drivers website (on the bottom of the
> page) http://www.infoserve.com/drivers/ Complete with instructions.

This is going to be _very_ useful for me. Thanks.
___
Ade

As well as the latest mdmsolo.inf (which is zipped), there's now also
a Windows XP compatible version of PhoneTools which works only
with 'newer' Pace 56 k modems (including the Solo - but I haven't
tested others) at the Infoserve drivers website (on the bottom of the
page) http://www.infoserve.com/drivers/ Complete with instructions.

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "John Kane" <jk2@...> wrote:
>
> Also, no reply to my email from that BVRP PhoneTools lot. Anybody got
> a spare copy lying around?

It's not for me to give you a copy of their software but if you contact them through the PhoneTools OEM support forum here: http://support.bvrp.com/phpbb2/viewforum.php?f=14&sid=e8d5b3f18877924a7f1aac33831acb1b (watch the line wrap) there are plenty of cases where they've been providing updated versions for those who've updated their operating systems. If you only have PhoneTools 2 that came on floppy disk with the Pace Solo then it wont work under XP. I've purchased Classic PhoneTools 6 but I actually use PhoneTools 4.21 with Pace Solo specific internal drivers (part of their software). Make sure they get you a version with full support for the Pace Solo as they have many versions which dont properly support it and for example wont show caller id details. The setup I have works fine in that regard.

They will reply during the week if you post to that forum this weekend.

Also, no reply to my email from that BVRP PhoneTools lot.  Anybody got
a spare copy lying around?

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "John Kane" <jk2@...> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks
>
> John
>

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "John Kane" <jk2@...> wrote:
<snip>

> Paul, I queried the modem and it has 2.03 on it. So do I just need
> ME, W98 or other for the flash operation and then can use it in XP

Yes, that's exactly the case. I'm using my Solo with my inf on this site
on a Win XP Pro machine. I wouldn't risk flashing it using aVMware
machine, better to find the genuine artical. If a flashing operation is
interupted or goes wrong you may end up with a trashed modem. There's no
hurry so you can use the modem with 2.03 until the opportunity to borrow
a Windows 9.x machine comes along (my inf should still work with it).

Paul, I queried the modem and it has 2.03 on it.


> > 2nd question - how do I flash the modem?
>

> You'll need to have a Win ME or older machine to do that, the firmware
> either on this group or at Infoserves website wont work under XP or
> Windows 2000 machines.  Before you attempt to flash the firmware, how do
> you know you haven't already got the latest version?
> >
Paul, I queried the modem and it has 2.03 on it.  So do I just need
ME, W98 or other for the flash operation and then can use it in XP or
does XP rule out ever using 2.04?  If the former, I might try it from
a virtual machine using the Microsoft VM software downloaded and
installed the other day.

Thanks

John

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "John Kane" <jk2@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Paul. Some follow-ups below.
>
> --- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Murphy" dualathlonuser@ wrote:
> >
> > Before you attempt to flash the firmware, how do
> > you know you haven't already got the latest version?
>
> Good question! How do I know? or find out?

The easiest way, since you have Windows XP is to query the modem through
control panel (classic look)/phone and modem options/modems
tab/properties/diagnostics tab/query button. After a few seconds the
pane above will show some AT Commands and the modems responses to those
commands. If you scroll down the list beside ATI4 you should see:  Pace
56 Solo - V2.04. Another way is to follow the instructions in your
manual for the Solo and get it to tell you the firmware date and time by
pressing the ANS and ANN buttons together- mine announces Fri 12th March
1999,  4.34 pm.

>
> > > > install faxing across a home network?
>
> > but if you want an updated XP compatible version, an email to BVRP
> > should yield results!
>
> So, returning to the original question, is it possible for another
> user on my home network to use the fax device with Phone Tools?

You know, although I have a home network I've not tried this but I can't
see why fax sharing shouldn't work. If you get stuck, you'd need to
liase with BVRP about that too but you could simply try sharing the
Capture fax BVRP printer (under Settings/Printers and faxes). Once
PhoneTools is fully installed, right clicking on this icon and selecting
sharing should allow you to share the fax capabilities of the software
with different PC's, although if this does work, it wont permit other
control of the modem such as independent mode message retreival or
speakerphone use. This could just be used to print and send files as
faxes through the remote Pace Solo coupled to a networked PC.

Thanks Paul.  Some follow-ups below.

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Murphy" <dualathlonuser@...> wrote:
>
> Before you attempt to flash the firmware, how do
> you know you haven't already got the latest version?

Good question! How do I know? or find out?

> > > install faxing across a home network?

> but if you want an updated XP compatible version, an email to BVRP
> should yield results!

So, returning to the original question, is it possible for another
user on my home network to use the fax device with Phone Tools?

I will certainly let you know how I get on.

> Paul
>
Thanks
  John

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "John Kane" <jk2@...> wrote:
>
> Hi there, folks.
>
> I have just joined this group and am now attempting to get my Solo
> working. I have managed to power it up okay with an old adapter. I
> installed the driver file (thanks) in my default Windows\inf file and
> then got Device Manager to scan for hardware changes. It found the
> modem and installed it as expected. Now I'm not sure if it picked up
> the XP native driver or the one downloaded from here. So what I've
> done is gone to the device Properties, Update Driver, and pointed it
> towards the usual INF folder. It found three separate options
> -standard modem, Microsoft and PACE(PCM) - I chose the last - is that
> okay?

Hi John. I'm glad to see some new life in a group devoted to such an old
product! The native Win XP file with broken Caller ID  is called
mdmpace.inf and it's in the Windows/inf folder by default. You'll need
to configure Win Explorer to show hidden files and folders to be able to
see it. I suggest you make a backup of it if wanted (perhaps onto a CDRW
or removable media and then delete both the mdmpace.inf and mdmpace.pnf.
Then you can have another go at reinstalling the downloaded mdmsolo.inf.
Windows will complain about it being unsigned and should show its new
version and date details under the driver properties of device manager.


> 2nd question - how do I flash the modem?

You'll need to have a Win ME or older machine to do that, the firmware
either on this group or at Infoserves website wont work under XP or
Windows 2000 machines.  Before you attempt to flash the firmware, how do
you know you haven't already got the latest version?
>
> 3rd and last - I have a copy of Winfax - is this the best way to
> install faxing across a home network? Or does this Phone Tools package
> do that?

I have the latest Winfax Pro but I still use PhoneTools 4.21 with my
Pace Solo because Winfax Pro doesn't work with the Pace Solo's
independent mode function. PhoneTools is quite basic and only offers
Class 1 faxing (rather than the superior Class 2 the modem is capable
of) but at least once correctly configured PhoneTools works with all the
modems other functions. Note that the version 2 which came with the Solo
originally isn't Win XP compatible but if you want an updated XP
compatible version, an email to BVRP should yield results! Let us know
how you get on if you go down that path.

Paul

Hi there, folks.

I have just joined this group and am now attempting to get my Solo
working.  I have managed to power it up okay with an old adapter.  I
installed the driver file (thanks) in my default Windows\inf file and
then got Device Manager to scan for hardware changes. It found the
modem and installed it as expected.  Now I'm not sure if it picked up
the XP native driver or the one downloaded from here.  So what I've
done is gone to the device Properties, Update Driver, and pointed it
towards the usual INF folder. It found three separate options
-standard modem, Microsoft and PACE(PCM) - I chose the last - is that
okay?

2nd question - how do I flash the modem?

3rd and last - I have a copy of Winfax - is this the best way to
install faxing across a home network? Or does this Phone Tools package
do that?

Thanks for listening.

John

I've been trying to get to the bottom of a problem when using my Pace
Solo to send faxes to certain Samsung fax machines.  The problem I get
is that the first page of the fax is received ok at the other end but my
Pace Solo then fails to send the second page or even to confirm the
first page has been sent ok. This results in PhoneTools attempting to
resend the first page unless I manually stop it. Receiving faxes works
fine, even from these same machines with multipage faxes. The machine at
the other end which exhibits this problem 100% repeatably is a Samsung
SF-340. I've spoken with Samsung and tried it both with and without ECM
working on the fax machine with no difference.

I've captured the buffer/modem exchange from Phonetools and the problem
area seems to be shown in the T4 elapsed part of this example:

23:54:22,44  <-- CONNECT
23:54:22,44  --> DCS :
23:54:22,44      00 44 14
23:54:23,53  <-- OK
23:54:23,53  --> AT+FTS=8
23:54:23,66  <-- OK
23:54:23,66  --> AT+FTM=145
23:54:23,70  <-- CONNECT
23:54:23,71  --> TCF  14400
23:54:26,83  <-- OK
23:54:26,83  --> AT+FRH=3
23:54:27,02  <-- CONNECT
23:54:28,19  <-- CFR
23:54:28,20  <-- OK
23:54:28,35  --> AT+FTM=146
23:54:28,47  <-- CONNECT
23:54:28,48  --> Facsimile message...
23:54:49,45  <-- OK
23:54:49,45  --> AT+FTS=8
23:54:49,58  <-- OK
23:54:49,58  --> AT+FTH=3
23:54:50,49  <-- CONNECT
23:54:51,33  --> EOP
23:54:51,68  <-- OK
23:54:51,68  --> AT+FRH=3
23:54:55,05  T4 elapsed
23:54:55,11  DLE.03h
23:54:55,12  <-- OK
23:54:56,21  --> AT+FTH=3
23:54:57,12  <-- CONNECT
23:54:57,92  --> EOP
23:54:58,28  <-- OK
23:54:58,29  --> AT+FRH=3
23:54:58,49  <-- CONNECT
23:54:59,60  <-- RTN
23:54:59,60  <-- OK
23:54:59,61  --> AT+FTH=3
23:55:00,57  <-- CONNECT
23:55:01,38  --> TSI :

I'm not sure whats going on here and BVRP has been little help other
than to say it's a compatibility issue between my hardware and the fax
machine. As the Solo always seems to send any faxes fine at 9,600 bps (I
suspect this would even be successful to the SF-340), I asked them if
there was a way of controlling PhoneTools maximum send speed but there
appears not to be and only the receive speed can be restricted.

Has anyone experienced such compatibility problems and how was it
solved? I've tried using Windows XPs built in fax services and this
results in a "fatal error" when sending to the SF-340 (but it's fine to
other fax machines) so as I suspected it's not a software bug causing
the problem.

My ideal solution would be if there's a way to make PhoneTools use the
modems Class 2 fax capability or to somehow limit the modem to 9,600 fax
transmission speed (perhaps with an AT command to reset the default fax
profile). I dont mind if all faxes go out at 9600 as the SF-340 is the
one I most often fax to.

Is there any way to get to the bottom of this further, perhaps using the
modems own reporting capability?

On 25-Jan-07 19:17:44, pankajsudheer wrote:

> one more question! Can I increase the modem memory? How?

Yes and no.  There is a memory expansion slot, and I believe Pace
did used to sell upgrades.  However, I've always found the built-in
ram to be enough, so never did buy one of the memory modules, so
I'm afraid I can't tell you what to look for :(

--
  Oliver Roberts  -  http://www.futaura.co.uk/  -  ICQ: 34640231

  [ PGP public key available on request ]        Team *AMIGA*

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "pankajsudheer" <pankajsudheer@...>
wrote:
>
> one more question! Can I increase the modem memory? How?
>
> Regards
> Pankaj

2 MB Memory modules to suit the Pace Solo and Kortex Kaptix were
available from Kortex's offshoot company in France a couple of years
ago when I enquired but they were horrendously expensive at about £38
each so I gave them a wide berth. As they're proprietary modules, I
don't know where else they can be sourced. Have you got your Solo up
and running yet with a power supply and compatible software?

one more question! Can I increase the modem memory? How?

Regards
Pankaj

Dear Paul.
Many thanks.

Your informations are definatly usefull to me.
Will let you know if require any other help.

Thanks again.

Regards
Pankaj

--- In 56solo@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Murphy" <dualathlonuser@...>
wrote [please excuse heavy edits]:
>
> . . . It's good that Apple Mac options are avail to. . . .  [BVRP's
> Classic PhoneTools version 6 for Windows in exclusive mode will
> not read Pace Solo's unconventional Caller ID output]
> because they use the Kortex's internal driver within the
> program rather than using the correct seperate driver.
> My version 4.21 combination works in this regard in both
> exclusive and TAPI modes and in live and independant states.
>
> . . . freebie utility . . . Solo Messenger which manages the Solos
> independant mode functionality under Windows but
> fax software would be needed additional to this if used.

Hi Paul and Pankaj

Here are some places for Pankaj to look for files, beginning with
Web pages that belong to this Pace 56 Solo Yahoo Group.

Windows utilities (top of list because this page most useful):
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/56solo/files/PC/>

Main files page (this includes a file listing country codes):
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/56solo/files/>

The Mac page is empty, so Web address left out.

For form's sake I list the Amiga utilities page:
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/56solo/files/Amiga/>

Solo Messenger (beta) for Windows page:
<http://www.seraph.demon.co.uk/starwise/pace_solo.htm>

Starwise Software home page:
<http://www.seraph.demon.co.uk/starwise/>

While it may be good that there are Apple Mac options, IMO they
are not particularly good. Windows and Amiga users can get
much more from their Pace Solo.

BTW: apologies for vile line breaks in my previous posts.
The web interface seems to let lines run far too long.

--

Laurence Taylor

Dear Laurence
Thanks a lot.
I mostly use it on windows XP. Sometimes use it with mac too.
Your message will help me a lot.
Thanks again.

Regards
Pankaj

Dear Paul.
Many thanks.

Your informations are definatly usefull to me.
Will let you know if require any other help.

Thanks again.

Regards
Pankaj