Drew Boillot

Thanks for the info.


"freddy" <fkirschen@tidalwave.net> wrote in message
news:3C17EC7C-427B-443F-8222-8F20432FF123@microsoft.com...
> Drew,
>
> If you're talking about a dial-up modem, then a fully hardware based
> (on-board controller and DSP chips) don't need drivers. You just plug it
> in
> and windows, including Vista, will install everything you need to make it
> work properly. One of the best fully hardware based modems is the U.S
> Robotics Performance Pro. It costs full retail about $70, or so,
> depending
> what kind of deal you find. These type modems cost more because they are
> worth more.
>
> Don't be fooled by a partially configured hardware modem. Some
> manufacturers include the DSP (Digital Signal Processor) on board, but
> perform the controller function by software. They will market this type
> modem as a hardware modem. However, now you need software compatible with
> the operating system, because the controller function is performed by
> software. These type name brand modems typically sell for from $20-$30,
> give
> or take a few.
>
> If you need a FAX, Windows includes a FAX function. Just install it and
> you
> don't have to worry about finding a Vista compatible FAX.
>
> You can find software based modems, which are modems where both the
> controller and the DSP functions are performed by software. Now you
> really
> need something that is Vista Compatible. These modems are referred to as
> "Soft" modems. They are little more than a device to enable a connection
> to
> be made between the telephone line and the computer. Everything else is
> done
> by software. These sometimes can work very well, but sometimes not. Such
> modems can be found for as little as $5-$30, depending on the deal you
> find
> and the name of the brand. This is probably more than you ever wanted to
> know.
> --
> freddy
>
>
> "Drew Boillot" wrote:
>
>> Im looking for modems that work with Vista, but i can't seen to find any.
>> can anyone help me out, or point me to a website? (i found the microsoft
>> one
>> but all it lists was chipsets and not actual modem models)
>>
>>