Don't Panic, Please, It Is Quite Easy To Plug In A Modem
The Age
Monday October 4, 1993
EVERY week in Computer Age, I see reference to CompuServe, e-mail, MCI Mail, the Internet and Bulletin Board services of various descriptions. As a devotee (some may say addict) of CompuServe in particular and electronic communication in general, I take these references in my stride. Not so one of my clients last week.
His first question was pretty straightforward: ``What do I need to get started?" The answer to that, obviously enough, is a modem.
That choice used to be fraught with technical jargon and danger for the uninitiated. Who really knows what a V96Bis-compatible 14.4kbps modem with V.69 fax and constant-speed interface is, let alone whether they need one? And, to some extent, reading today's modem ads may suggest that these problems are still with us.
The base modem has moved so far up the technological totem pole that these days things are a lot simpler, and my advice to my client was basically to buy an Hayes-compatible external 9600-baud AusTel- approved fax-modem at whatever price he could negotiate.
He found one for well under $600, and it was pretty much top of the range. If cost was the main consideration, then a 2400 baud fax/modem may have been the option, and they are widely available for less than $300.
The first question he asked, though, was why he ought to buy an external modem (i.e., one that sits in a box to one side of your computer). He felt that an internal model, which is actually a PC card that sits inside the computer, was neater. As indeed it may be, but it's my experience that the ability, especially for a new user, to reach over and turn the modem off far outweighs any neatness benefits.
The next question concerned the AusTel approval, as he had discovered that unapproved modems were considerably cheaper than their approved cousins. It's true, but any piece of equipment attached to my expensive PC had better be approved.
Having obtained the modem, the question of making it work was next.
The first step was to connect the modem to the PC and, like most other users, he had a spare communications port. With his mouse attached to one serial port and his printer to his parallel port, the second serial port was free. So ... plug the modem in to the back of the PC and to the power point.
With the modem turned on, I suggested that he start up the lovely little communications program that comes free with Windows _ Terminal.
Though perhaps not the most full-featured of applications (a trait it shares with most other ``bundled" applications), it is reliable, easy to learn and free. And, best of all, it tries to communicate with the modem when you start it and gives a ``select another port" message if what is attached to the serial port it thinks should have a modem is not behaving correctly.
Like most users, my client had his mouse attached to COM1: (the first serial port), and so he got thismessage, immediately followed by a dialogue box headed Communication, on which all he could change was the connector. He selected COM2: from the list, and about half-a-dozen options became available.
At this point, panic was about to set in. He had no idea what baud rate, data bits, parity, stop bits and so forth were, let alone what settings they should be.
These settings relate to how the electronic communication is performed, and you must adjust your settings to match those of the computer you are calling. So he got out the specifications for the computer he wanted to dial, and they read 9600/7/E/1, which, from left to right, is baud rate, data bits, parity and stop bits.
Terminal defaults to a Hayes-type modem, so that was all there was to it. He tested whether or not Terminal was ``seeing" the modem by simple typing AT and hitting enter. The modem signalled it was OK. All he then had to do was set up the phone number he wanted to call, select dial, and he was on line to the world. Once he had established that all was working correctly, he selected the File Save menu option and saved this particular phone number and settings as a .TRM file, so that, in future, if he wants to dial work, he can simply open this file and select dial.
Numbers game ``It just doesn't get any easier than this ... " says advertising on the back of the Central Point Backup for Windows 2.0 box. Well, if this is as easy as it gets, I quit.
This new version 2.0, so the box tells me, supersedes version 7.2.
Coupled with a few of the other version jumps that have happened lately, manufacturers' version numbering is beginning to drive me to drink. I suppose that to someone, somewhere, it makes sense that version 2 follows version 7.2.
At any rate, a good backup program is a vital tool, and as Central Point supplied the backup in MS-DOS 6, the interface willl be at least familiar to many Windows users.
Central Point has a fine reputation for supplying reliable backup utilities.
Version 2.0 supports far more flexible network use of CP Backup, claims better compression, has a deserved reputation for speed and includes a (limited) scheduler, file viewers, SCSI and DAT tape support, data encryption and more.
In my limited testing, it seemed to hold up pretty well driving our old QIC tape drive using Windows for Workgroups, and it restored flawlessly.
But the interface ...
CP Backup uses a panel not unlike that in File Manager as the means of selecting which files to back up. Not unlike, but not like, either.
No Shift-Click or Ctrl-Click multiple-selection support, a clumsy method of viewing only files of a particular type and a weird interface where clicking on the file icon of a directory opens it, clicking on the name selects it for backup, and double clicking seems to work at random. What looks like a familiar File Manager interface works completely differently, which had me bamboozled for a few minutes.
I wish Central Point Software would do some serious work on it _ if it's going to look like File Manager, it ought to work that way as well. If that's not possible, then the interface ought to be changed completely. The current situation is positively misleading.
Another really fine piece of interface design comes in the restore process. It is quite possible to restore to a different directory or drive to that from which the data was backed up, but it is not easy.
You have no opportunity to browse for the directory you wish to restore to. It's the easy-to-implement but very unfriendly ``type in the full MS-DOS path name or else" approach.
Having said all that, a piece of software doesn't win inclusion in the many awards it has unless it has something going for it. And the actual process of backing up and restoring CP Backup is first class.
Speed and reliability are what's required, and CP Backup 2.0 delivers in those areas.
The fact that it allows me to store backup sets once I have struggled through the clunky interface means that I have to do battle with it only on rare occasions, so I may well continue to use it.
But the interface ...
Mark Trescowthick is the director of GUI Computing, a Windows development and consulting company.
© 1993 The Age