<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Ulf Schneider <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:uschneid@posteo.de" target="_blank">uschneid@posteo.de</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
If you see anything that says "Prolific", throw out that USB-to-Serial<br>
adapter, because it will cause you no end of headaches.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
This statement is complete nonesense.</blockquote></div><br>My post was specifically addressed to Mark (W4SVO), or anyone else who has a "Prolific" USB-to-Serial adapter that isn't working well.</div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">Chances are his device is a clone, so I stand by my recommendation that he should throw it out and replace it with an FTDI for the best chance of success, which is essentially what is recommended here:</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><a href="http://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/CableGuide" target="_blank" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">http://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/CableGuide</a><br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">and on many other web sites. I also understand that the Prolific drivers do not work well on 64-bit Windows systems, though I don't know if that's the same issue (clone vs. genuine hardware), or a real problem with the 64-bit Prolific device drivers.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I don't know how to buy a Prolific USB-to-Serial adapter that is guaranteed to be "genuine" and guaranteed to work well with Win-Test on all versions of Windows. There seem to be more fakes than real ones. I have probably wasted over 100 hours of my time trying to help dozens of people get something labeled "Prolific" to work reliably. Blame the cloners if you like, but that is what is behind my statements.</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">As for your issue with CW timing on FTDI chips, it could have been caused by other issues, such as NOSOUND not specified in Win-Test, or conflicts between device drivers, RFI, or even a Windows print spooler running in the background. I can't find a single complaint about CW timing in the Win-Test archives from anyone using FTDI, as long as they use NOSOUND. Can you?</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div>73,</div><div>Bob, N6TV</div>
</div></div>