I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
  Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
hardware on a machine would be almost as good.

Phil, London

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:36:58 +0000, Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost>
wrote:

>I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
>and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
>driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
>expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
>  Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
>hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
>
>Phil, London

I think Sisoft's Sandra does this. Ther used to be a free version I
think, but it doesn't look to be around now.

However there seems to be a version that runs from a memory stick.
It's not free but it might well meet your needs as after the initial
payment you could use it on various machines.

I've not tried it, but there seems to be a trial version so it might
be worth a look.

Here's the link:

http://www.sisoftware.net/


Andy

On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:36:58 +0000
Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> wrote:

> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a
> computer and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These
> include driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little
> too expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes
> my way. Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed
> all the hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
> 
>

If you boot a recent Linux live CD and run "lspci -v" you get a pretty
comprehensive list of the hardware configuration.

Rob Morley wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:36:58 +0000
> Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> wrote:
> 
>> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a
>> computer and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These
>> include driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little
>> too expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes
>> my way. Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed
>> all the hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
>>
>>
> 
> If you boot a recent Linux live CD and run "lspci -v" you get a pretty
> comprehensive list of the hardware configuration.
> 

Thanks, I'll try that!

Phil

Andy wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 09:36:58 +0000, Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost>
> wrote:
> 
>> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
>> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
>> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
>> expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
>>  Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
>> hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
>>
>> Phil, London
> 
> I think Sisoft's Sandra does this. Ther used to be a free version I
> think, but it doesn't look to be around now.
> 
> However there seems to be a version that runs from a memory stick.
> It's not free but it might well meet your needs as after the initial
> payment you could use it on various machines.
> 
> I've not tried it, but there seems to be a trial version so it might
> be worth a look.
> 
> Here's the link:
> 
> http://www.sisoftware.net/
> 
> 
> Andy


Looks promising, but it's very expensive (almost £350). Wouldn't use it 
quite often enough to justify this (and the need to keep it up to date. 
  Thanks anyway - an interesting option.

Phil

In article <20091102125631.3bbadd4e@bluemoon>, Rob Morley
 writes

>If you boot a recent Linux live CD and run "lspci -v" you get a pretty
>comprehensive list of the hardware configuration.

Even more with lspci -vv.

-- 
Mike Tomlinson

The message <_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2>
from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:

> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
> expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
>   Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
> hardware on a machine would be almost as good.

> Phil, London

 Try googling for "UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe". This is a useful tool
for identifying and allowing you to search the internet for sources of
drivers for whatever you choose from its list of discovered hardware.

 Admittedly, it produces an overly detailed search term for its
submission to google but you can easily enough trim this to produce more
hits if need be. Most of such searches pick up hits on the likes of
driverguide.com et al but you're free to try the manufacturer's sites if
you're not happy with the likes of driverguide.

 It doesn't run directly. It needs to be installed but it only takes
moments to do so (and the same to uninstall when you've finished with
it). I don't use it often, only when I'm dealing with really obscure
hardware or else a problem arising with the automatic verification that
the system has the appropriate hardware to which the driver software
installer relates _is_ actually fitted (typically, Nvidia's driver
software installer).

 The last time I used UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe was to verify that the
hardware (a TNT2 adapter) was detectable in spite of the Nvidia
installer claiming otherwise and refusing to run as a result. In the end
I successfully forced an install via windows driver install, pointing it
to the unpacked driver files created by the Nvidia installer prior to
it's refusal to accept there actually was a TNT2 card in the system.

 In this case, I think the Nvidia driver 'leftovers' for a later, but
incompatable, card[1] that I'd had to pull were the source of confusion
to the Nvidia installer which usually "just gets it right".

[1] Well, I'm hoping it was simply an incompatability issue between the
MX440 SE AGP adapter and the SiS chipset used by the Elite K7S5A skt A
MoBo I had used to replace the burnt out Packard Bell 'special' skt 478
(also a SiS chipset) MoBo.

 Initially, after a successful repair install of winXP HE on the
repaired system, I was seeing rather peculiar behaviour on display
updating when opening folder windows, which after updating the SiS AGP
port driver software and applying the latest Nvidia update, upgraded
itself to random system crashes. Replacing the MX440 with the TNT2 card
totally resolved the problem.

 Since neither ATI or Nvidia actually make graphics adapters (just the
chipsets) and leave it to third parties to create product from the chips
and reference designs, you sometimes see 'broken implementations'
(usually by MoBo makers who "Don't Quite Get It").

 I'm thinking of an MX440 based card by,iirc, a MoBo maker calling
itself 'Mercury' which produced jumpy motion in OpenGL games. Obviously
an artifact because exactly the same MX440 graphics made by Jetway
(amongst others) did not suffer from this defect.

 Looking at the initial display when booting a VIA chipset MoBo from a
Knoppix Live CD to test the card, suggests it might be product from some
nameless and clueless manufacturer. I've yet to install a win2k test
setup to fully test this card to decide whether or not it's one for the
bin.

-- 
Regards, John.

 Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

Johnny B Good wrote:
> The message <_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2>
> from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:
> 
>> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
>> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
>> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
>> expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
>>   Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
>> hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
> 
>> Phil, London
> 
>  Try googling for "UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe". This is a useful tool
> for identifying and allowing you to search the internet for sources of
> drivers for whatever you choose from its list of discovered hardware.
> 
>  Admittedly, it produces an overly detailed search term for its
> submission to google but you can easily enough trim this to produce more
> hits if need be. Most of such searches pick up hits on the likes of
> driverguide.com et al but you're free to try the manufacturer's sites if
> you're not happy with the likes of driverguide.
> 
>  It doesn't run directly. It needs to be installed but it only takes
> moments to do so (and the same to uninstall when you've finished with
> it). I don't use it often, only when I'm dealing with really obscure
> hardware or else a problem arising with the automatic verification that
> the system has the appropriate hardware to which the driver software
> installer relates _is_ actually fitted (typically, Nvidia's driver
> software installer).
> 
>  The last time I used UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe was to verify that the
> hardware (a TNT2 adapter) was detectable in spite of the Nvidia
> installer claiming otherwise and refusing to run as a result. In the end
> I successfully forced an install via windows driver install, pointing it
> to the unpacked driver files created by the Nvidia installer prior to
> it's refusal to accept there actually was a TNT2 card in the system.
> 
>  In this case, I think the Nvidia driver 'leftovers' for a later, but
> incompatable, card[1] that I'd had to pull were the source of confusion
> to the Nvidia installer which usually "just gets it right".
> 
> [1] Well, I'm hoping it was simply an incompatability issue between the
> MX440 SE AGP adapter and the SiS chipset used by the Elite K7S5A skt A
> MoBo I had used to replace the burnt out Packard Bell 'special' skt 478
> (also a SiS chipset) MoBo.
> 
>  Initially, after a successful repair install of winXP HE on the
> repaired system, I was seeing rather peculiar behaviour on display
> updating when opening folder windows, which after updating the SiS AGP
> port driver software and applying the latest Nvidia update, upgraded
> itself to random system crashes. Replacing the MX440 with the TNT2 card
> totally resolved the problem.
> 
>  Since neither ATI or Nvidia actually make graphics adapters (just the
> chipsets) and leave it to third parties to create product from the chips
> and reference designs, you sometimes see 'broken implementations'
> (usually by MoBo makers who "Don't Quite Get It").
> 
>  I'm thinking of an MX440 based card by,iirc, a MoBo maker calling
> itself 'Mercury' which produced jumpy motion in OpenGL games. Obviously
> an artifact because exactly the same MX440 graphics made by Jetway
> (amongst others) did not suffer from this defect.
> 
>  Looking at the initial display when booting a VIA chipset MoBo from a
> Knoppix Live CD to test the card, suggests it might be product from some
> nameless and clueless manufacturer. I've yet to install a win2k test
> setup to fully test this card to decide whether or not it's one for the
> bin.
> 


Found it - http://www.zhangduo.com/udi.html

There appear to be versions of this around with trojan passengers.

Thanks - I'll study it carefully!

Phil

http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/System-Info/Everest-Home-Edition.shtml

I have not used the latest version as I find the old one very good and 
have stuck with that.

As for the latest drivers well the obvious and try the manufacturuers 
sites first.

http://www.driverguide.com/

http://driverscollection.com/

The message <LFDHm.39191$%%3.13878@newsfe23.ams2>
from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:

> Johnny B Good wrote:
> > The message <_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2>
> > from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:
> > 
> >> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
> >> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
> >> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
> >> expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
> >>   Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
> >> hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
> > 
> >> Phil, London
> > 
> >  Try googling for "UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe". This is a useful tool
> > for identifying and allowing you to search the internet for sources of
> > drivers for whatever you choose from its list of discovered hardware.

====snip====

> Found it - http://www.zhangduo.com/udi.html

> There appear to be versions of this around with trojan passengers.

> Thanks - I'll study it carefully!

> Phil

 You're right to be careful. FYI, the version I've been using seems to
be just over 5 years old (it was nearly a year old when I downloaded it
on 22Jul2005). File properties doesn't reveal a version number on this
download whereas it does for the version you found.

 The version I have is 836,464 bytes long and has an MD5 checksum value
of: 4d1f9458cd5b5d41fda864cb2cc3e12f. Submitting it to a clamwin scan
suggests it is free of malware ( and post install runs of Spybot S&D on
systems I've used it on backs up this finding).

 I've just downloaded the current version you found and scanned it with
clamwin which gave it a clean bill of health, as did submitting it to
the virustotal website. However, with recent files (say less than 6
months old), the fact that all 41 AV engines give a negative result is
no guarantee that it isn't infected with a cunning zero day threat :(

 The real test only comes _after_ you've installed it and you do another
SpBot scan and, (for the realy paranoid) re-run the ComboFix tool to
verify the lack (or otherwise) of a zero day threat this may have
introduced.

 Although this new version looks to be virus free, I'll not be entirely
confident until I've had a chance to install it on a test system and run
the SpyBot scans and the ComboFix tool. Since I need to create such a
test system to test that suspect MX440 graphics adapter anyway, I might
be able to confirm this in a day or two's time.

-- 
Regards, John.

 Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

Johnny B Good wrote:
> The message <LFDHm.39191$%%3.13878@newsfe23.ams2>
> from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:
> 
>> Johnny B Good wrote:
>>> The message <_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2>
>>> from Philip Herlihy <me@here.localhost> contains these words:
>>>
>>>> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
>>>> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
>>>> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too 
>>>> expensive for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. 
>>>>   Any recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the 
>>>> hardware on a machine would be almost as good.
>>>> Phil, London
>>>  Try googling for "UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe". This is a useful tool
>>> for identifying and allowing you to search the internet for sources of
>>> drivers for whatever you choose from its list of discovered hardware.
> 
> ====snip====
> 
>> Found it - http://www.zhangduo.com/udi.html
> 
>> There appear to be versions of this around with trojan passengers.
> 
>> Thanks - I'll study it carefully!
> 
>> Phil
> 
>  You're right to be careful. FYI, the version I've been using seems to
> be just over 5 years old (it was nearly a year old when I downloaded it
> on 22Jul2005). File properties doesn't reveal a version number on this
> download whereas it does for the version you found.
> 
>  The version I have is 836,464 bytes long and has an MD5 checksum value
> of: 4d1f9458cd5b5d41fda864cb2cc3e12f. Submitting it to a clamwin scan
> suggests it is free of malware ( and post install runs of Spybot S&D on
> systems I've used it on backs up this finding).
> 
>  I've just downloaded the current version you found and scanned it with
> clamwin which gave it a clean bill of health, as did submitting it to
> the virustotal website. However, with recent files (say less than 6
> months old), the fact that all 41 AV engines give a negative result is
> no guarantee that it isn't infected with a cunning zero day threat :(
> 
>  The real test only comes _after_ you've installed it and you do another
> SpBot scan and, (for the realy paranoid) re-run the ComboFix tool to
> verify the lack (or otherwise) of a zero day threat this may have
> introduced.
> 
>  Although this new version looks to be virus free, I'll not be entirely
> confident until I've had a chance to install it on a test system and run
> the SpyBot scans and the ComboFix tool. Since I need to create such a
> test system to test that suspect MX440 graphics adapter anyway, I might
> be able to confirm this in a day or two's time.
> 

Much appreciated!

Phil

citizen142 wrote:
> http://www.softpedia.com/get/System/System-Info/Everest-Home-Edition.shtml
> 
> I have not used the latest version as I find the old one very good and 
> have stuck with that.
> 
> As for the latest drivers well the obvious and try the manufacturuers 
> sites first.
> 
> http://www.driverguide.com/
> 
> http://driverscollection.com/ 
> 
> 

Thanks - driverscollection.com looks promising.  I've used driverguide 
before, but it was very hit and miss, and I didn't feel it was worth it 
when they started charging.  Driverscollection seems to be funded by 
advertising.

I don't mind paying for a utility - it's just a question of perceived value!

Phil

The old free Everest I use is here - it works well.

http://www.oldversion.com/download_Everest_Home_Edition_1.51.html

citizen142 wrote:
> The old free Everest I use is here - it works well.
> 
> http://www.oldversion.com/download_Everest_Home_Edition_1.51.html 
> 
> 

Discovered that I have a licensed copy of Everest - I'll have to dig it 
out and try it again!

Phil

"Philip Herlihy" <me@here.localhost> wrote in message 
news:_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2...
> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too expensive 
> for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. Any 
> recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the hardware 
> on a machine would be almost as good.
>
> Phil, London

To list all your hard and software I find SIW (System Info Wizard) is very 
good.
Just type siw in your searchbox and download the .exe version (free), 
install and open, it
gives a pretty detailed list in a folder tree like Windows Explorer does.

I tried a driver update service thing and it does identify lots of drivers 
which need updating,
but you then have to register it and pay 29.99 to update them.

Free membership of Driverguide.com is a good way but you have to search the 
site by
manufacturer and model numbers. Alternatively you can pay a subsciption for 
full membership.
I believe they also have their own search and update tool which is 
reasonably cheap.

Mike. Lincoln, UK

Mike the Brewer wrote:
> "Philip Herlihy" <me@here.localhost> wrote in message 
> news:_KxHm.17910$Ro6.668@newsfe10.ams2...
>> I've used a couple of services which identify the hardware on a computer 
>> and provide updated drivers where they are available.  These include 
>> driveragent.com, and driver genius.  Both are just a little too expensive 
>> for me to want to use them on every machine that comes my way. Any 
>> recommendations for alternatives?  A utility which listed all the hardware 
>> on a machine would be almost as good.
>>
>> Phil, London
> 
> To list all your hard and software I find SIW (System Info Wizard) is very 
> good.
> Just type siw in your searchbox and download the .exe version (free), 
> install and open, it
> gives a pretty detailed list in a folder tree like Windows Explorer does.
> 
> I tried a driver update service thing and it does identify lots of drivers 
> which need updating,
> but you then have to register it and pay 29.99 to update them.
> 
> Free membership of Driverguide.com is a good way but you have to search the 
> site by
> manufacturer and model numbers. Alternatively you can pay a subsciption for 
> full membership.
> I believe they also have their own search and update tool which is 
> reasonably cheap.
> 
> Mike. Lincoln, UK
> 
> 
> 

Thanks, Mike - there's a free version (non-commercial use) and a 
commercial version which isn't too expensive.  I'll try it out next time 
I need to audit a machine.

Phil

The message <ojUHm.30615$7Y2.92@newsfe27.ams2>
from "Mike the Brewer"  contains these words:

====snip====

> Free membership of Driverguide.com is a good way but you have to search the 
> site by
> manufacturer and model numbers. Alternatively you can pay a subsciption for 
> full membership.
> I believe they also have their own search and update tool which is 
> reasonably cheap.

 Or use UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe instead. ;-)

 I used to have a free membership account with driverguide.com many
years ago. Actually, I've had two (they invalidated all existing
accounts when they made some changes, offering free membership signup on
their revamped service). The second account _might_ still be valid but I
can't recall what password I'd used and I now can't be bothered to sign
up yet again.

 As I recall, the most problematical piece of hardware I had to track
down drivers for were dial up modems. The driverguide site always
produced the goods in this regard except for one particular modem. The
one exception being a host controllerless PCI modem card I'd sold to a
friend about a year or two before.

 He kindly donated it back to me when his need had become redundent.
Unfortunately, he'd never thought to hang onto the all important driver
floppy disk  so all I got off him was the bare card. "No problem!" I
thought, "Driverguide to the rescue!".

 Little did I know that finding a driver for this particular modem was a
quest doomed to utter failure (and, believe me, I tried off and on over
the next 12 to 18 months before I finally gave it up as a bad job).

 I'm not decrying driverguide.com (well, not as it was when I _did_ have
a need to use its services - it might be a different case now with all
the rampant commercialism that has poisened most internet resources
today).

 TBH. I'm reluctant to sign up to any such "Free Service" since I feel
as though I'm selling my soul to the Devil whenever I've done so in the
past. Knowing that the internet is awash with scumware merchants and
scamware operations, you need to be very circumspect when considering
such "Free Services".

-- 
Regards, John.

 Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:14:50 GMT, Johnny B Good
 wrote:

> As I recall, the most problematical piece of hardware I had to track
>down drivers for were dial up modems. 

Yup. I took up binning them and replacing them instead - they were
under £15, so there's no sense spending more than 20 minutes on the
job.

	Cheers - Jaimie
-- 
I like my coffee how I like my women...
but I can't get coffee that's independent, intelligent and has a
career of its own.                            - Eric Jarvis, urs

In article , Johnny B Good 
wrote:
> As I recall, the most problematical piece of hardware I had to track
> down drivers for were dial up modems.

Ah, winmodems. The work of the devil.

A modem /should/ be as simple to drive as a serial port, there /should/ 
be nothing more to it than firing bytes down the wire ... what the 
makers of winmodems have done in the name of shaving a few pennies off 
the cost of the hardware has cost the rest of the industry a very great 
number of pennies over the years.

Cheers,
 Daniel.

The message <VA.0000002b.00c159bd@me.invalid>
from Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> contains these words:

> In article , Johnny B Good 
> wrote:
> > As I recall, the most problematical piece of hardware I had to track
> > down drivers for were dial up modems.

> Ah, winmodems. The work of the devil.

> A modem /should/ be as simple to drive as a serial port, there /should/ 
> be nothing more to it than firing bytes down the wire ... what the 
> makers of winmodems have done in the name of shaving a few pennies off 
> the cost of the hardware has cost the rest of the industry a very great 
> number of pennies over the years.

 I totally agree, however, I wasn't referring to what you call a
winmodem (which, properly speaking. is actually a softmodem) but a host
controllerless modem (a completely different animal to the much despised
softmodem).

 A softmodem is essentially a glorified soundcard with a phoneline
interface and absofuckinglutely no DSP capabilities whatsoever which
leaves not only the (trivial) overhead of supervisory control to the
main CPU but also the strain of DSP to be handled in software.

 The host controllerless modem _does_ have DSP built in, it merely
leaves the higher level supervisory functions to software. The
difference is that whilst you needed a minimum of a Pentium MX 166 to
support a soft modem, you could fit a host controllerless one into a
486DX66 powered system and not spot any performance issues compared to
using a traditional external rs232 connected modem.

 What annoyed me the most about softmodems was the marketing bullshit
regarding the 'benefit' of the softmodem being that you'd be able to
upgrade the transmission speed in software to meet any future speed
hikes that, in the past, had required you to buy yet another model to
take advantage of such. Yeah, right! That _might_ have been useful if it
had been introduced ten years sooner rather than when the max possible
line speeds had already been reached.

-- 
Regards, John.

 Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.

Johnny B Good wrote:
> The message <ojUHm.30615$7Y2.92@newsfe27.ams2>
> from "Mike the Brewer"  contains these words:
> 
> ====snip====
> 
>> Free membership of Driverguide.com is a good way but you have to search the 
>> site by
>> manufacturer and model numbers. Alternatively you can pay a subsciption for 
>> full membership.
>> I believe they also have their own search and update tool which is 
>> reasonably cheap.
> 
>  Or use UnknownDeviceIdentifier.exe instead. ;-)
> 
>  I used to have a free membership account with driverguide.com many
> years ago. Actually, I've had two (they invalidated all existing
> accounts when they made some changes, offering free membership signup on
> their revamped service). The second account _might_ still be valid but I
> can't recall what password I'd used and I now can't be bothered to sign
> up yet again.
> 
>  As I recall, the most problematical piece of hardware I had to track
> down drivers for were dial up modems. The driverguide site always
> produced the goods in this regard except for one particular modem. The
> one exception being a host controllerless PCI modem card I'd sold to a
> friend about a year or two before.
> 
>  He kindly donated it back to me when his need had become redundent.
> Unfortunately, he'd never thought to hang onto the all important driver
> floppy disk  so all I got off him was the bare card. "No problem!" I
> thought, "Driverguide to the rescue!".
> 
>  Little did I know that finding a driver for this particular modem was a
> quest doomed to utter failure (and, believe me, I tried off and on over
> the next 12 to 18 months before I finally gave it up as a bad job).
> 
>  I'm not decrying driverguide.com (well, not as it was when I _did_ have
> a need to use its services - it might be a different case now with all
> the rampant commercialism that has poisened most internet resources
> today).
> 
>  TBH. I'm reluctant to sign up to any such "Free Service" since I feel
> as though I'm selling my soul to the Devil whenever I've done so in the
> past. Knowing that the internet is awash with scumware merchants and
> scamware operations, you need to be very circumspect when considering
> such "Free Services".
> 

I had a similar situation with Driveragent.com.  Paid for a lifetime 
subscription (about £25 ISTR) which was fine until they introduced a 
limit to 10 machines, and then only for a number of years.  Didn't like 
them changing the terms unilaterally and haven't used them since.

Phil

In article , Johnny B Good 
wrote:
> I totally agree, however, I wasn't referring to what you call a
> winmodem (which, properly speaking. is actually a softmodem) but a
> host controllerless modem (a completely different animal to the much
> despised softmodem).

[Sorry to nitpick ... but that should be "different from" (a 'pet peeve' 
of mine.]

I agree ... and I'd forgotten about controllerless modems. Strange 
beasts, all the disadvantages of soft modems with none of the 
advantages.

> What annoyed me the most about softmodems was the marketing bullshit
> regarding the 'benefit' of the softmodem being that you'd be able to
> upgrade the transmission speed in software ... _might_ have been
> useful if it had been introduced [before] the max possible
> line speeds had already been reached.

Oh, OK. Just the disadvantages of the softmodem without the advantage of 
cheapness, then.

Cheers,
 Daniel.

The message <VA.0000002d.00daf529@me.invalid>
from Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> contains these words:

> In article , Johnny B Good 
> wrote:
> > I totally agree, however, I wasn't referring to what you call a
> > winmodem (which, properly speaking. is actually a softmodem) but a
> > host controllerless modem (a completely different animal to the much
> > despised softmodem).

> [Sorry to nitpick ... but that should be "different from" (a 'pet peeve' 
> of mine.]

 No need to apologise, you're quite correct. :-)

> I agree ... and I'd forgotten about controllerless modems. Strange 
> beasts, all the disadvantages of soft modems with none of the 
> advantages.

 I don't see how you come to that conclusion. I'd estimate the
controllerless bit in the soft modem represents no more than 10% the
total software overhead involved in making the main CPU "Do the Voices
as well". The host controllerless at least deals with the donkey work of
"Doing the voices" with its built in DSP.

 Since these cards were only available in PCI form, we'll never be able
to demonstrate the superiority of a real modem card over a host
controllerles modem in something like an 8MHz clocked 80286 powered AT.

 By the time PCI slots appeared, the oldest technology MoBos that were
so blessed would have been 80486 powered which could comfortably afford
the processor overhead required by the host controllerles type.

 The softmodems required a minimum of the much later 166MHz clocked MMX
pentium in order to function and leave just enough cpu resources free to
service the needs of a web browser or whatever comms app that was in
need of a dial up connection.

 The big hint that you had bought a softmodem, if the packaging hadn't
made that fact immediately obvious, was the "Recommended minimum system
requirements" (usually a P166mmx or higher cpu). If no such minimum
requirements were stated, you'd either bought a 'real modem' or (more
probably) its braindead cousin, the host controllerles type.

 Quite simply, the manufacturers knew there was no need to spell out a
minimum cpu requirement since this would most likely have been "a
386DX33" or lower cpu and, to my knowledge, no PCI slotted MoBos for
such a cpu were ever manufactured. In short the PCI interface

> > What annoyed me the most about softmodems was the marketing bullshit
> > regarding the 'benefit' of the softmodem being that you'd be able to
> > upgrade the transmission speed in software ... _might_ have been
> > useful if it had been introduced [before] the max possible
> > line speeds had already been reached.

> Oh, OK. Just the disadvantages of the softmodem without the advantage of 
> cheapness, then.

 Wrong again. There was very little difference in price between the two
and, quite often, no price difference or even a negative difference in
favour of the host controllerles over the soft modem.

 Remember, the major cost of such adapters comes down to the cost of the
PCB the chips are mounted on. In the case of discrete memory chips a
decade or so before, it wasn't the complexity of the silicon chip, but
the number of pins on the DiL package that decided production costs.

HTH

-- 
Regards, John.

 Please remove the "ohggcyht" before replying.
The address has been munged to reject Spam-bots.