 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Windows Forum / Windows 98 / Internet / June 2006Arrrgh! 98se not finding Modems
Win98SE absolutely refuses to detect internal modems. I tried nearly 12 different ones (I'm volunteering at a computer recycling nonprofit. There is no shortage of modem cards) I've tried installing different drivers. PNP OS is definately enabled in the BIOS. I do Not have a dead pci slot. No IRQ confilcts either. I cant try an ISA modem because this MoBo is inconvenienly not supplied with any ISA slots :) All other hardware is working just fine. The only thing unusual is that the detection process is only trying COM1 and Com2 before informing me that win98 did not find a modem at those locations. I'm more familiar with the NT based Kernels... is it normal 98 behavior not to check com3 and 4? and if not, then what are possible causes? And more importantly, remedies. Installing Win2k isn't an option, alas due to a shortage of licences. The external modem I tried worked just fine. > Win98SE absolutely refuses to detect internal modems. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > The external modem I tried worked just fine. Are these all soft modems ? Do you have the .INF files or software package for any of them? > > Win98SE absolutely refuses to detect internal modems. > > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > Are these all soft modems ? Do you have the .INF files or software package > for any of them? Several of them are winmodems. Not all. Then again its a bit hard to tell sometimes when you only have the card and no manual, box or other stuff. We have original drivers for none of them. But we usually find drivers via manufactures web site. (thank god the NIC works). We usually have good luck with US Robotics products. They usually autodetect and install flawlessly. Not on this box. Using 98se is unusual for us because we often dont get SE licences donated. We were lucky this round (kinda :) ) We also occasionally use AIDA32 to ID stuff plugged in. The computers and parts we receive are donations. It's rare to find a complete package. We do run across dead cards. But this is a little (well, a lot) extreme. On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 22:31:02 -0800, "Paul Dietrich" <PaulDietrich@discussions.microsoft.com> put finger to keyboard and composed: >> > Win98SE absolutely refuses to detect internal modems. >> > [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >Several of them are winmodems. Not all. Then again its a bit hard to tell >sometimes when you only have the card and no manual, box or other stuff. To identify a recent modem as "hard" or "soft", look for two chips, a flash PROM or EPROM (eg 29xxxx or 28xxxx or 27xxxx) and a static RAM (eg 61256, 62256). The former contains the modem firmware while the SRAM is required to buffer data in error correction and data compression modes. If either of these chips are missing, then you do not have a "hard" modem. >We have original drivers for none of them. But we usually find drivers via >manufactures web site. (thank god the NIC works). We usually have good luck >with US Robotics products. They usually autodetect and install flawlessly. >Not on this box. Using 98se is unusual for us because we often dont get SE >licences donated. We were lucky this round (kinda :) ) Who Manufactured My Modem? http://www.modemsite.com/56k/whomadeit.asp MODEM DRIVERS: http://www.modemsite.com/56k/drivers.asp Identifying Your Chipset: http://www.modemsite.com/56k/chipset.asp PCI Modem Installation & Troubles http://www.modemsite.com/56k/pci.asp Modem troubleshooting: http://www.modemsite.com/56k/trouble.asp >We also occasionally use AIDA32 to ID stuff plugged in. >The computers and parts we receive are donations. It's rare to find a >complete package. > >We do run across dead cards. But this is a little (well, a lot) extreme. - Franc Zabkar  SignaturePlease remove one 's' from my address when replying by email. Thank you for that tip. And here I was looking for the words winmodem or soft modem printed on the card. :) I did eventually get the modem working. Hurrah. We got some win2k licences at last. Amazing how much easier win2k can be sometimes. Mebbe it was just that the Win2K system is newer than 98 and therefore had the software/ info for that modem in the system. Nothing to do with the OS. > Thank you for that tip. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I did eventually get the modem working. Hurrah. We got some win2k > licences at last. Amazing how much easier win2k can be sometimes. >Mebbe it was just that the Win2K system is newer than 98 and therefore had >the software/ info for that modem in the system. >Nothing to do with the OS. Those two statements directly contradict. Besides, I went through a LOT of different modems. 3com, US robotics, conexant/rockwell, and more. Win98 ought to have seen one of them. Second, all of them are secondhand, many predate win98SE. >>Mebbe it was just that the Win2K system is newer than 98 and therefore >had [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Second, all of them are secondhand, many predate win98SE. I could be wrong, but I expect Win98 does not ship with drivers for soft or controllerless modems. Nevertheless Win98 should at least detect a new PCI device and ask you for a driver location. Did it not do that? - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 's' from my address when replying by email. That is correct....and others too. > >>Mebbe it was just that the Win2K system is newer than 98 and therefore > >had [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > - Franc Zabkar No, it never saw a new pci modem. > >Mebbe it was just that the Win2K system is newer than 98 and therefore > had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Those two statements directly contradict. What is the contradiction? Besides, I went through a LOT > of different modems. 3com, US robotics, conexant/rockwell, and more. > Win98 ought to have seen one of them. Were they software modems ? When MS comes out with a new OS or mebbe some updates, hardware mfgrs are asked to send drivers/inf files, etc which are compliant wth the new OS and that stuff is then included in the the new OS. Devices wich come out after the cut off date will not be directly supported and the user has to use the floppy which came with the device of download the files from device mfgr. > Second, all of them are secondhand, many predate win98SE. The contradiiction is in simultaneously saying that the reason 2000 worked and not 98 has nothing to do with the operating system. Drivers supplied with the OS ARE part of the operating system. Those drivers are additionally tested by microsoft. Which isn't always the case for third party drivers. They are NOT seperate. The other isue that even when I HAD the proper drivers (Yes, I do know how to download from the manufactucer). 98 STILL wouldn't regognive the modem. Although it would sometimes pretend (modems failed to work... got no further then ATH1). . I should have at least gotten to the "Windows has found new hardware and is searching far the proper drivers" drill. On the Hard/soft modem debate... The hardware on the modem card that implements the PNP standard is seperate. Win 98 wouldn't even acknowledge the fact that a new plug and play modem was installed. 98 DID, however see other new PNP devices, such as a new video card. The whole thing was just so damn screwy. Incedently The modem that win2k found on the first try was a 56k HCF. Which was also on the list of drivers supplied with win98. Which is another thing that bugs me about the whole thing. I admit I'm a bit prejudiced against 98 after having used 2000 on my own computer. I'd never switch back. I searched througd the knowlege base a bit, on this issue, and found a few things that made me shake my head. Such as: only 2 of the 4 com ports are supplied by deafult. If you want 98 to even SEE com 3 or 4. You either have to (A) go into the BIOS and muck with the serial port settings. Which will still only leaves you with 2 of the 4. Just a different 2. I tried that one. It didn't work. (B) Add a new serial port (and you have to do THAT in safe mode (AARGH)) That didn't work either. (C) Manually add new keys to the registry. I didn't try that one. The thing is that virtually all IBM compatable Motherboards have all 4 of the com ports. IRQs 3 and 4 Memory addresses 2E8, 2F8, 3E8 and 3F8. Since the days of DOS -- more than 20 years ago. Pretty Basic Stuff here. It shouldn't be too much to ask for win98 to see all 4 by default. Forgive me if I've been just a bit testy. But the whole expeirence definately soured my opinion of win98. >The contradiiction is in simultaneously saying that the reason 2000 >worked and not 98 has nothing to do with the operating system. Drivers [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >"Windows has found new hardware and is searching far the proper >drivers" drill. A soft or controllerless modem will not respond to AT commands until its drivers are loaded. This is because the controller parses AT commands, and the controller is emulated in the driver. >On the Hard/soft modem debate... The hardware on the modem card that >implements the PNP standard is seperate. Win 98 wouldn't even [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Incedently The modem that win2k found on the first try was a 56k HCF. >Which was also on the list of drivers supplied with win98. FWIW, that's a controllerless Conexant modem. > Which is >another thing that bugs me about the whole thing. I admit I'm a bit [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >(A) go into the BIOS and muck with the serial port settings. Which will >still only leaves you with 2 of the 4. Just a different 2. That's the way it should work. The two BIOS COM ports are the two physical COM ports on the motherboard. You can select any two of four I/O addresses, not all four. Once you do this, Windows 98 will detect these *real* COM ports and add them to the COM and LPT ports selection in Device Manager. You can also see these real COM and LPT ports using the Debug command at the DOS prompt as follows: C:\WIN98SE>debug -d 0:400 40f 0000:0400 F8 03 F8 02 E8 02 00 00-78 03 78 02 00 00 17 02 ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^^^ COM1 COM2 COM3 LPT1 LPT2 3F8 2F8 2E8 378 278 -q Note that Windows assigns numbers to the COM ports according to their I/O address, whereas DOS assigns numbers on a sequential basis. So DOS sees my ports as COM 1,2,3 and Windows sees them as COM 1,2,4. COM4 is the onboard COM port of my internal "hard" ISA modem. COM 1&2 are part of the multi-IO chip on my motherboard. >I tried that one. It didn't work. > >(B) Add a new serial port (and you have to do THAT in safe mode >(AARGH)) In my case I tell Windows to search for new devices using Control Panel -> Add New Hardware. >That didn't work either. > >(C) Manually add new keys to the registry. > >I didn't try that one. I can't see how that would work for a soft or controllerless modem. >The thing is that virtually all IBM compatable Motherboards have all 4 >of the com ports. IRQs 3 and 4 Memory addresses 2E8, 2F8, 3E8 and 3F8. No they don't. They nearly all have one or two, but you can choose the COM port number and IRQ. >Since the days of DOS -- more than 20 years ago. Pretty Basic Stuff >here. It shouldn't be too much to ask for win98 to see all 4 by >default. Windows can't see 4 if 4 do not exist. >Forgive me if I've been just a bit testy. But the whole expeirence >definately soured my opinion of win98. You are confusing *real* COM ports with virtual, emulated ones. A soft or controllerless modem's COM port and UART are implemented in software. Unless DOS support is enabled with special drivers, these kinds of modems will be invisible in a DOS box. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 's' from my address when replying by email. Some snippage to reduce the length of this kinda long post. (besides, Google mail makes me quote manually, which is tedious) First, thanks for the kindly and needed detanglement. (which has been mostly snipped, though not forgotten) >>The other isue that even when I HAD the proper drivers (Yes, I do know >>how to download from the manufactucer). 98 STILL wouldn't regognive the >>modem. Although it would sometimes pretend (modems failed to work... >>got no further then ATH1). . I should have at least gotten to the >>"Windows has found new hardware and is searching far the proper >>drivers" drill. >A soft or controllerless modem will not respond to AT commands until >its drivers are loaded. This is because the controller parses AT >commands, and the controller is emulated in the driver. Well, at this point I DID have drivers installed when I tried the AT commands. >>Incedently The modem that win2k found on the first try was a 56k HCF. >>Which was also on the list of drivers supplied with win98. >FWIW, that's a controllerless Conexant modem. *Sigh* It figures. But 98SE had those drivers pre-installed. It should have detected the modem. <Bigsnip of needed detanglement> >>(B) Add a new serial port (and you have to do THAT in safe mode >>(AARGH)) >In my case I tell Windows to search for new devices using Control >Panel -> Add New Hardware. Which I also tried.... The device manager then stated that i now had a com3. But 98 still wouldn't try to look for a modem there when i reran the modem detection routine. >>(C) Manually add new keys to the registry. >>I didn't try that one. >I can't see how that would work for a soft or controllerless modem. Part of the reason i didn't try... the knowlede base article was on something obscure and probably (well almost certianly) unrelated-- it was interesting, though. http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;134424 <snip> Next time, I'll try to find a hard modem when the going gets tough. But they're at a premium, and the linux folks get dibs. (Apparently linux has just a big of a big of a problem with "winmodems" as Windows does. It could be the reason no one calls them winmodems anymore :) ) Thank you, pd >>In my case I tell Windows to search for new devices using Control >>Panel -> Add New Hardware. > >Which I also tried.... The device manager then stated that i now had a >com3. But 98 still wouldn't try to look for a modem there when i reran >the modem detection routine. I suspect COM3 would have been one of the real motherboard COM ports whose number and IRQ had been reassigned by you in the BIOS setup. If so, then it would not have been available to any soft or controllerless modem. >Next time, I'll try to find a hard modem when the going gets tough. But >they're at a premium, and the linux folks get dibs. PCI hard modems are rare. USR's 5610 is one, Multitech's ZPX is another. If possible, I would go for an ISA modem, as these are mostly "hard". They autodetect as a standard *real* COM port, and their performance is no different to that of a hard PCI modem. This is because the limiting factor for both is the tiny 5KBps pipeline to the Net. There are no driver issues, only an INF file is required. > (Apparently linux >has just a big of a big of a problem with "winmodems" as Windows does. >It could be the reason no one calls them winmodems anymore :) ) AFAIK, "Winmodem" is a USR/3Com trademark. Linux people call them "linmodems". FYI, there are three types of internal modem, "soft", controllerless, and "hard" (controller based). Softmodems have a DAA (telephone line interface), controllerless modems have a DAA and DSP (digital signal processor), and "hard" modems have a DAA, DSP, and controller. Among other things, a modem's controller handles AT command parsing, UART emulation, data compression and error correction. These functions do not impact significantly on the host CPU. OTOH, the functions of a DSP are highly CPU intensive, so a softmodem (which emulates the DSP in software) may impact noticeably on CPU performance. Examples of softmodem chipsets are PCtel HSP, Motorola SM56, Smartlink, and Conexant HSF. Controllerless examples include Conexant HCF, Intel HaM, Lucent Win Modem, and USR Winmodem. - Franc Zabkar SignaturePlease remove one 's' from my address when replying by email. My sister was having issues with her system not saving documents and reformatting at will. I had her reformat her drive and reinstall Windows 98SE, and she's having the same issue. She even has a US Robotics disc that came with it and when entered it pops up an error window that says it has performed an "illegal operation" and must shut down. Bad news is, the modem worked before reinstallation, and now I cannot for my life figure out what to tell her to do. I'm not a pro at this by any stretch. How did you finally get it to work without internet access to load drivers or a disc that is working? She uses a 56K USR V.92 internal modem. Any advise would be great! >> > Win98SE absolutely refuses to detect internal modems. >> > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >We do run across dead cards. But this is a little (well, a lot) extreme. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.