# scenario: ??M* on a V1_V7 controller (MC-500SCCM-D, 5v12.0-R22)
# Captured 2026-04-17 from /dev/ttyUSB0 (Prolific PL2303, 19200 baud).
#
# Critical finding: ??M* WORKS on 5v12 even though the Alicat Serial
# Primer's Quick Command Reference annotates it as `8v28+`. The dialect
# is byte-identical to the V8/V9 + V10 captures (M00..M09 codes, embedded
# `Model Number ` / `Serial Number ` / etc. labels).
#
# The 5v12.0-R22 has an `R22` revision suffix — same revision-suffix
# pattern as the 8v17.0-R23 that also surfaced ??M* support against
# the primer's documented minimum. Two possibilities:
#
#   (a) Every revisioned older device gets the ??M* back-port.
#   (b) ??M* was always available on every numeric-family device, and
#       the primer's `8v28+` annotation was wrong from the start.
#
# Either way: the factory's try-and-recover flow is the right behaviour.
# Don't trust the primer's pre-V10 firmware-introduction annotations.

> A??M*
< A  M00 ALICAT SCIENTIFIC
< A  M01 www.alicat.com
< A  M02 Ph   520-290-6060
< A  M03 Fax  520-290-0109
< A  M04 Model Number  MC-500SCCM-D
< A  M05 Serial Number 122161
< A  M06 Date Manufactured 09/24/2015
< A  M07 Date Calibrated   09/24/2015
< A  M08 Calibrated By     PD
< A  M09 Software Revision 5v12.0-R22
