Re: [hylafax-users] Brooktrout versus Multitech

[Lee Howard <faxguy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2004.08.11 10:10 Stephen Carville wrote:
> I hope this isn't a holy war subject but does anyone know of a reason
> to
> prefer Brooktrout over Multitiech modem cards or vice versa?

I think it is a holy war subject for some.  But, all the same, it is a 
very good question, and I for one am glad that you've brought it up.

Firstly, please realize that I am biased.  I have done a lot of work to 
get HylaFAX working in sexy ways with usually mundane, cheap Class 1 
equipment.  I wouldn't have done all of that work if I truly didn't 
believe in open source software and open, standardized hardware 
interfaces.

So...

To put things in perspective, as far as hardware goes, a faxmodem is a 
faxmodem is a faxmodem.  It either faxes properly or it doesn't fax 
properly.  No matter how much propaganda BrookTrout or any other 
manufacturer may pump into the marketplace, their faxmodem still is 
just a device that, with the aid of software, performs T.30 to 
communicate images with the remote device.  The hardware doesn't do any 
magical incantations to make faxing any better or necessarily save you 
any more money over other hardware with the same feature set.

You can use a MultiTech modem to fax or you can use a BrookTrout modem 
to fax or you can use some other hardware to fax.  It really shouldn't 
matter as long as you're comparing hardware with the equivalent fax 
feature sets and as long as the hardware that you're comparing doesn't 
have problematic firmware flaws.

Lets assume that both MultiTech and BrookTrout don't have any 
problematic firmware flaws (I think that this is a fairly safe 
assumption to make).  The differences in operation are these:  the 
MultiTech can be operated in Class 1, 1.0, 2, 2.0, or 2.1; the 
BrookTrout must be operated with its proprietary API.  In Class 1 and 
1.0 most of the fax protocol is performed by HylaFAX.  This means that 
the modem firmware does very little fax protocol work other than 
raising and lowering carriers and modulating and communicating data.  
The rest of the work is done by HylaFAX.  This makes it very easy for 
us to add features, fix problems, and improve functionality as 
desired.  In Class 2, 2.0, and 2.1 most of the fax protocol is 
performed by the modem itself, and very little is done by HylaFAX.  
This makes it very difficult (if not impossible) for us to do anything 
about features, problems, or functionality, as the hardware user will 
need to rely upon the hardware manufacturer for all of this.  
BrookTrout API is one step further than Class 2x: it requires the 
hardware user to access the modem only via the proprietary API.  In 
this case the modem firmware, as in Class 2x, does virtually all of the 
fax protocol, but the interface is not standardized (open) across 
multiple manufacturers.  As with Class 2x, BrookTrout must be relied 
upon for features, fixes, and improvements.

To me it's a matter of control.  I like to be able to control the 
faxing.  I don't want the modem doing it.

When you use the DTE (HylaFAX) to do most of the fax protocol you run 
the risk of the DTE messing up timing due to underlying issues (such as 
CPU, disk, or RAM load).  So on a VERY high-stress server you could 
experience timing problems that are unable to be resolved.  I've not 
yet seen any such timing problems that cannot be resolved, although 
some kinds of high-load timing problems do exist still in HylaFAX.  
(See Bug 566 for the work to improve the current ones of which I 
know.)  Thus the differences in hardware is this:  the BrookTrout 
probably has lots and lots of on-card RAM and thus will pretty much not 
run any risk of these kinds of timing problems.  With Class 2x the risk 
is only slightly greater; the chance of there being such a timing 
problem is still extremely remote.  With Class 1x the risk is most 
prominent, but I've only ever seen the problem surface on one server 
(and a test one at that), and the problems that I've seen actually do 
have fixes.

It's a matter of hardware configuration - when you're putting together 
a high-demand/high-usage/heavy-load system do you invest a lot of money 
into proprietary faxmodem hardware, or do you invest a lot of money 
into fast system hardware?

There's also a fairly significant price difference, in case you weren't 
aware of that.  That extra money goes to help pay for lawyers in 
BrookTrout's lawsuits against their competitors.

Lee.

____________________ HylaFAX(tm) Users Mailing List _______________________
 To subscribe/unsubscribe, click http://lists.hylafax.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
On UNIX: mail -s unsubscribe hylafax-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxx < /dev/null
 *To learn about commercial HylaFAX(tm) support, mail sales@xxxxxxxxx*