I have an old Hayes Accura faxmodem that is supposed to support caller ID.
It doesn't seem to do so.

I am appealing to readers here for help in verifying what DRIVER version I
have installed for this device. My inspection under "Device Manager" is
unconvincing. Though I have supposedly installed the latest driver,
provided currently on the Zoom website (Zoom bought Hayes years ago), I see
no change apparent. Of course, it is possible that I have had the latest
driver installed all along, which might explain why my "before and after"
conditions are unchanged.

Nevertheless, I am asking for ways to find out what DLLs, etc., are in
service for this faxmodem. Where might I inspect my file tree? How about
my registry?

I have the exploded installation kit for the latest driver, with some
telltale filenames. It would be great if I could see some semblance of
that, installed in my registry.

Thanks.

John



Below is the message I submitted to Zoom Tech Support. I am not optimistic
for much help on such an old faxmodem...
Please help me to get my old Hayes faxmodem to honor caller ID. It is
supposed to do this, and has the appropriate AT command (+VCID=1). Yet my
testing with HyperTerminal indicates no interpretation of incoming caller ID
information. I have a telephone which readily interprets the same
information, verifying that such information is coming into my residential
phone.

I went through the process of updating driver. H810 then H812 versions, as
directed, rebooting frequently. Yet my inspection of driver status under
Windows "Device Manager" yields no apparent change of driver. Still shows
"Microsoft 5.00.2195.6655" dating to 1999.

What salient identification might I expect to see, upon successful
installation of the 'H812 driver?

Any advice appreciated.

Hardware Devices

"John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Y%%nj.7611$v86.3206@trnddc08...
>I have an old Hayes Accura faxmodem that is supposed to support caller ID.
> It doesn't seem to do so.
>
> I am appealing to readers here for help in verifying what DRIVER version I
> have installed for this device. My inspection under "Device Manager" is
> unconvincing. Though I have supposedly installed the latest driver,
> provided currently on the Zoom website (Zoom bought Hayes years ago), I
> see
> no change apparent. Of course, it is possible that I have had the latest
> driver installed all along, which might explain why my "before and after"
> conditions are unchanged.
>
> Nevertheless, I am asking for ways to find out what DLLs, etc., are in
> service for this faxmodem. Where might I inspect my file tree? How about
> my registry?
>
> I have the exploded installation kit for the latest driver, with some
> telltale filenames. It would be great if I could see some semblance of
> that, installed in my registry.
>
> Thanks.
>
> John
>
>
>
> Below is the message I submitted to Zoom Tech Support. I am not
> optimistic
> for much help on such an old faxmodem...
> Please help me to get my old Hayes faxmodem to honor caller ID. It is
> supposed to do this, and has the appropriate AT command (+VCID=1). Yet my
> testing with HyperTerminal indicates no interpretation of incoming caller
> ID
> information. I have a telephone which readily interprets the same
> information, verifying that such information is coming into my residential
> phone.
>
> I went through the process of updating driver. H810 then H812 versions, as
> directed, rebooting frequently. Yet my inspection of driver status under
> Windows "Device Manager" yields no apparent change of driver. Still shows
> "Microsoft 5.00.2195.6655" dating to 1999.
>
> What salient identification might I expect to see, upon successful
> installation of the 'H812 driver?
>
> Any advice appreciated.
>
>

Where?
"DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
news:%23w%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hardware Devices

Control Panel>System>Hardware>Device Manger
Locate & select the device, rt click>Properties

Windows Help would have got you the same answer

"John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:_iaoj.7880$O9.764@trnddc01...
> Where?
> "DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
> news:%23w%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hardware Devices
>
>

Thanks, but that's the same "Device Manager" I cited, only attained by
different path.

"DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
news:uZGVXA$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Control Panel>System>Hardware>Device Manger
> Locate & select the device, rt click>Properties
>
> Windows Help would have got you the same answer
>
> "John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:_iaoj.7880$O9.764@trnddc01...
> > Where?
> > "DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
> > news:%23w%(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hardware Devices
> >
> >
>
>

I can now plainly see that the driver version is "Hayes 8.12.0.0" as it
should be. This is apparent on the "Driver" tab of the device's Device
Manager entry. I was looking beyond this, under the button "Driver
Details..." where other information is listed, lacking any mention of Hayes
whatsoever.

So I have the latest driver installed. I suppose I asked for help, when I
shouldn't have. But I thank you for responding.

The modem, meanwhile, doesn't work as it is supposed to. So I might look
around for a more modern replacement.


"DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
news:uZGVXA$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Control Panel>System>Hardware>Device Manger
> Locate & select the device, rt click>Properties
>
> Windows Help would have got you the same answer
>
> "John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:_iaoj.7880$O9.764@trnddc01...
> > Where?
> > "DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
> > news:%23w%(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Hardware Devices
> >
> >
>
>

That can be the problem with old modems on winnt based sys, sometimes they
do sometimes they dont
I bought a US Robotics card

"John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:sdkoj.22388$ar6.14253@trnddc07...
>I can now plainly see that the driver version is "Hayes 8.12.0.0" as it
> should be. This is apparent on the "Driver" tab of the device's Device
> Manager entry. I was looking beyond this, under the button "Driver
> Details..." where other information is listed, lacking any mention of
> Hayes
> whatsoever.
>
> So I have the latest driver installed. I suppose I asked for help, when I
> shouldn't have. But I thank you for responding.
>
> The modem, meanwhile, doesn't work as it is supposed to. So I might look
> around for a more modern replacement.
>
>
> "DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
> news:uZGVXA$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Control Panel>System>Hardware>Device Manger
>> Locate & select the device, rt click>Properties
>>
>> Windows Help would have got you the same answer
>>
>> "John B" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:_iaoj.7880$O9.764@trnddc01...
>> > Where?
>> > "DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
>> > news:%23w%(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> Hardware Devices
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>

Yeah. I see at NewEgg that the USB5699B can snag the caller ID information.
A happy buyer testified to this effect.

I have seen a "technical specifications" for plug-in PCI I/O cards, at
NewEgg, which don't necessarily prove to be true. Indeed, this was the case
for plug-in serial i/o cards that were supposed to operate at up to 1
megabit speeds. My testing proved this was invalid; I could't get past 230
kb with HyperTerminal. It didn't matter whether the card was expensive or
cheap; the same fault occurred. Turned out the chipset was the same, so the
surprise was no surprise!

The point is that user feedback, as found at NewEgg, is valuable. Though I
am slightly disgruntled by NewEgg's role as a mouthpiece for
sometimes-inflated technical claims by manufacturers, I consider NewEgg's
reader feedback to outweigh that slight by a wide margin.

Meanwhile, I have a long list of modems that supposedly honor caller ID. My
modem is on that list. In fact, I see an awful lot of modems there,
including some really old ones. This list may have been generated by
someone noticing which modems had the AT commands for caller ID. My modem
would thus be included.

But the mere presence of the AT+VCID=1 command didn't suffice. The thing
just doesn't work. And I have properly entered the "+VCID=1" command in my
Device Manager tab, for user-entered commands. Viewing the (boot) log
therein proves the command is entered without being negated, too. Still no
dice.

Interestingly, when I first entered this command I wrote "AT+VCID=1". The
boot log showed this "went in," but was immediately negated with the reverse
command, "AT+VCID=0" I was later advised (by the help info that came with
some software) to NOT ENTER the "AT" prefix. This was good advice.

Still, no dice.

Thanks for your consultation on this. I suppose that if I want to pursue
this thing further I should buy a USR5699B. I don't think so, though, at
this time.


"DL" <address@invalid> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> That can be the problem with old modems on winnt based sys, sometimes they
> do sometimes they dont
> I bought a US Robotics card
>