Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 3, 2010, at 1:30 AM, Constance Warner wrote: Hey, weren't YOU one of the people arguing FOR universal broadband access, as an essential qualification for participating in our modern economy? I still do. I'm just excluding gun owners. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 3, 2010, at 1:23 AM, Constance Warner wrote: I'm mainly concerned for people who can't live in Montgomery County, but who must live in places where service is much poorer, is nonexistent, or is beyond the financial means of most inhabitants. So if I decide I want to wire my outhouse for broadband, Eric should be compelled to haul a cable or go to jail? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 3, 2010, at 2:47 AM, Eric S. Sande wrote: Guys, don't freak out. Local wired telephony is regulated at the state level. It's a utility. Regardless of what I WANT to do with the network, you all vote for the politicians that make the rules. Not exactly true. You could sell off that part of the business to an undercapitalized company that you know will fail terribly. Heck, you could even spin off a company of your own to sell it to. Or spin out your profitable bits to a new company. Or you could become the equivalent of a slum lord and starve that part of the network. You could blame it on terrorists. Ultimately there is no way to force you to do something that you don't want to do. And that is not necessarily a bad thing. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
He'll go after the other basic freedoms later... On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 10:35 AM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: On Jan 3, 2010, at 1:30 AM, Constance Warner wrote: Hey, weren't YOU one of the people arguing FOR universal broadband access, as an essential qualification for participating in our modern economy? I still do. I'm just excluding gun owners. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
So if I decide I want to wire my outhouse for broadband, Eric should be compelled to haul a cable or go to jail? If you've got the casheesh to cover my costs, and you're in my territory, I'll wire that joint like George Jetson. But I'm not going to do it at a loss. I'm not a charity, I'm a for profit business accountable to my stockholders. Who are happy with my dividend but not exactly pleased with the stock performance. I think there's a lot of stress here that is based on ideology and self-interest. Folks, I CAN put a chicken in every pot as far as broadband. I'm working on it. The problem is that my pockets, while deep, aren't deep enough to do it as fast as certain people would prefer. Take rate is an issue. If I wire fifty houses for FIOS and only ten subscibe, I'm losing money. The reality is that a lot of people don't actually give a rat's ass about broadband. Those that want it the most tend to live further away from my POPs, which drives up the cost of the buildout. We'll get to them, but this is all a capital investment balancing act. But we don't need no stinkin' government handouts. We'll do this on our own, unless the American people get fed up and vote for more bread and circuses. If that happens I'll deploy faster. But I will not compromise the quality of my build or the financial basis of my company under any circumstances. And you can take that to the bank. (Obviously not a feel-good message, and of course I don't speak for anyone other than myself, certainly not that telephone company that I allegedly work for,) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
You could blame it on terrorists. That's not fair. We lost people in the 9/11 attacks. Maybe you didn't know that. They were on their jobs. I'm not forgetting that, ever. We're somewhat of an extended family. What can I say about those we lost? Probably not enough. I have nightmares about little Asia Cottom on her first plane ride. Donna Bowen burned to death in the Pentagon. The guys in the WTC. But we won that day. Yes our people did do their jobs. Yes we got the network up and running after a major hit. I'm proud to say that everyone around me did their job, just as they were trained. And our training is the best in the world. Don't make any mistake. We don't forget this. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Constance Warner wrote: Well, if this is a nonstory, I'll be happy. Killing landlines would be a nuisance for most of us, a real hardship for some of us, and a bonanza for the phone companies. But while we're at it, we might ask why the cellphone service in this country mostly sucks, why you can't use iPhones with any carrier, and why there are more sophisticated cellphone services (like cellphone banking) in the third world, than we have here in the U.S. Computer Inquiry II, Divestiture, and Equal Accesss, for starters. ConstanceOn one hand you want the telcos to have to maintain old non profitable services and on the other, new innovative services that all work the same and have interchangeable terminal gear? I didn't realize that our phone service was so far behind the rest of the world.Lighten up. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 2, 2010, at 11:06 AM, Constance Warner wrote: This whole thing looks like the replacement of light rail with cars and GM-built buses in the 30's and 40's. Right now, municipalities are trying to rebuild what was destroyed in the name of corporate profits. Destroying low-cost public transit wasn't a good idea, and abolishing landlines isn't either. You have the right to live almost anywhere you like, but that does not give you the right to a subsidy from the rest of us. You get many benefits from living in the outback, both psychic and financial. It is not right for you happily take all the good and then demand that others pay to ameliorate the negative aspects. You need to decide what you value more, beautiful Internet or beautiful view. If you demand both, then you need to pony up the dough to get it. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:57 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: Well there, you have said it yourself. An orderly plan. That is most assuredly what will be missing from the equation. When, as you say, the time comes, there will have been many vague promises and assurances made by the telcos about ensuring coverage and service to all that will not be met...guaranteed. When we deny the inevitable and keep running with an unsupportable old technology it greatly increases the likelihood that when it finally goes it will go suddenly. Much better to face reality now and establish a long term plan. It took 10 years for TV to go digital and, while not perfect, it transitioned pretty well. Need to do the same for telephony. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:57 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: My position is that they must FIRST be made to provide an alternative and reliable telephone system to every customer who would lose landline service BEFORE the wires are cut. No promises. They MUST do that FIRST. Why such rampant Socialism? If you live in a place that can be economically served you need to move. Do it now before property values crater. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:09 PM, Constance Warner wrote: It helps everyone if there isn't an underclass that's excluded from basic participation in society, because something that's essential-- like in this case a telephone--is no longer available. Access to basic services with only modest means is particularly important in a period of turmoil (like right now), when no one can be sure of any kind of economic security. Except that you have disadvantaged yourself by your own personal choice and action. I would be with you 100% if they passed a law that females could not apply for an Internet connection. But your situation is very different. You made a free-will decision to live in a location that can not be economically served. There are consequences to that decision. I don't see any justification for your demand that somebody else picks up the tab. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:09 PM, Constance Warner wrote: It's more like trying to maintain a basic level of civilization. Several questionable aspects here... 1) Does Internet = civilization? 2) Have you not made the choice to live away from civilization? * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 02:27 PM 1/2/2010, tjpa wrote: It took 10 years for TV to go digital and, while not perfect, it transitioned pretty well. That's an unsubstantiated opinion. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Gee, if people were allowed to do without telephone service, how would the bill collectors get their work done? Fred Holmes At 02:35 PM 1/2/2010, tjpa wrote: On Jan 2, 2010, at 12:57 AM, phartz...@gmail.com wrote: My position is that they must FIRST be made to provide an alternative and reliable telephone system to every customer who would lose landline service BEFORE the wires are cut. No promises. They MUST do that FIRST. Why such rampant Socialism? If you live in a place that can be economically served you need to move. Do it now before property values crater. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 2:27 PM, tjpa t...@tjpa.com wrote: When we deny the inevitable and keep running with an unsupportable old technology it greatly increases the likelihood that when it finally goes it will go suddenly. Much better to face reality now and establish a long term plan. It took 10 years for TV to go digital and, while not perfect, it transitioned pretty well. Need to do the same for telephony. As posted on this a bit earlier, att is said to have expounded to the FCC in depth about their desire to end their participation in wired telephony, but offered not a word about what steps they would take to ensure that their wired customers would still be able to have phone service in the aftermath. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
When we deny the inevitable and keep running with an unsupportable old technology it greatly increases the likelihood that when it finally goes it will go suddenly. Much better to face reality now and establish a long term plan. It took 10 years for TV to go digital and, while not perfect, it transitioned pretty well. Need to do the same for telephony. Digital transmissions over existing copper lines can be nearly as fast for broadband as current FIOS capability [i.e. 50-80Mbps], and can also provide low power that works when the electric company isn't. Telcos aren't upgrading their hardware to do this. Instead they refuse to use existing lines for high speed in favor of FIOS, which may be easier to maintain, if they can ever get it installed. The fiber network isn't available in most of the country, and is not likely to be any time soon. Also FIOS shouldn't be installed without solar battery backup power. When telcos upgrade their technology to serve everyone affordably and efficiently, then, and only then, will be the right time to get rid of old land lines. Digital broadcast TV is a failure for most people in the US. It's a gift to cable, telcos and satellite companies that provide the same service for a charge, instead of free service over the air. Inexpensive land lines like ours could disappear and be replaced with cellular and/or VOIP, both of which cost significantly more, and are less reliable. Make it cheaper and reliable and I'll be happy to switch. Betty * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Well if you want old twisted pair forever, move to qwest territory. On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 8:32 PM, b_s-wilk b1sun...@yahoo.es wrote: When telcos upgrade their technology to serve everyone affordably and efficiently, then, and only then, will be the right time to get rid of old land lines. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Hey, weren't YOU one of the people arguing FOR universal broadband access, as an essential qualification for participating in our modern economy? I do have broadband access. Lots of people don't, and, as you pointed out, it's getting harder to participate in economic and civic life without it. I want for others to have the same goodies that I do. What I don't want is a condition where you have to have all these goodies on an expensive smartphone in your pocket, with high monthly payments, or you're a second-class citizen. On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:44 PM, tjpa wrote: On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:09 PM, Constance Warner wrote: It's more like trying to maintain a basic level of civilization. Several questionable aspects here... 1) Does Internet = civilization? 2) Have you not made the choice to live away from civilization? ** *** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** ** *** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Oh, come on. I live in MONTGOMERY COUNTY--the middle of Montgomery County, Silver Spring to be exact, not the back of beyond. If the telecoms can't service Montgomery County, we should all go after them with torches and pitchforks. I'm mainly concerned for people who can't live in Montgomery County, but who must live in places where service is much poorer, is nonexistent, or is beyond the financial means of most inhabitants. To be quite frank about it, I see no reason why the FCC should let the telecoms abolish landline service--which benefits the majority of people in this country--for the benefit of supposed progress, which currently amounts to providing more toys--in the form of cellphone bells and whistles--for the technologically pampered few, who can certainly live quite well enough without such fripperies. On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:43 PM, tjpa wrote: On Jan 2, 2010, at 3:09 PM, Constance Warner wrote: It helps everyone if there isn't an underclass that's excluded from basic participation in society, because something that's essential--like in this case a telephone--is no longer available. Access to basic services with only modest means is particularly important in a period of turmoil (like right now), when no one can be sure of any kind of economic security. Except that you have disadvantaged yourself by your own personal choice and action. I would be with you 100% if they passed a law that females could not apply for an Internet connection. But your situation is very different. You made a free-will decision to live in a location that can not be economically served. There are consequences to that decision. I don't see any justification for your demand that somebody else picks up the tab. ** *** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** ** *** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Guys, don't freak out. Local wired telephony is regulated at the state level. It's a utility. Regardless of what I WANT to do with the network, you all vote for the politicians that make the rules. The Telco is regulated, beyond belief. It's not just the FCC, it's every local and state government down sometimes to city and county level. I can't just decide that my ROI is unfavorable with POTS. Although it frankly is. I'm forced to provide it by regulation. And to add insult to injury, I'm forced to sell unbundled, and bundled network elements to competing providers at bargain basement rates. That's right, I built it and I maintain it and I have to give it away at a loss to CLECs. I have one large customer that always orders from me to get the service delivered. Thirty days later they port the lines out to a CLEC. They can do that, under FCC regulations. I get NOTHING out of that in ROI. And, I have to maintain it all at cut rate prices. So it's easy to figure that if I don't want to die as a business, I'm going to have to get cracking on this optical network. Those same FCC rules say I don't have to share access like I have to do with POTS. So if you were in my position what would you do. Probably you'd sell off as much of the network where you had low to negative returns as you could and concentrate on your core properties. That isn't to say POTS is going away. It isn't. But get used to the idea that it isn't going to be twisted pair for much longer. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Most businesses, large and small, continue to use landline phones extensively, in many cases almost exclusively, for incoming and outgoing business calls. Ditto for all governmental agencies nationwide. We are quite professional. No reason for worry. Thanks for your concern, The Phone Company :-) (nothing I say here represents my employer) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Some definition of terms may be in order. Can the person (or business) having their phone service provided by Comcast be described as a landline user? Or does landline == twisted pair? With regard to user experience, there's not much difference (until the power goes out!). On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 2:38 AM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: I figure that cell phone use could triple or even quadruple if all landline service were to be eliminated. While it may be true that up to 80% of households have at least one person in residence who has a cell phone, it remains clear that many, perhaps even most phone calls in such homes are still initiated or received on a landline phone at that address. etc. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 7:55 AM, John Emmerling jpemmerl...@gmail.com wrote: Some definition of terms may be in order. Can the person (or business) having their phone service provided by Comcast be described as a landline user? Or does landline == twisted pair? With regard to user experience, there's not much difference (until the power goes out!). ATT is asking to be allowed to cease providing POTS, twisted pair, if you will. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 01:08 AM 1/1/2010, Eric S. Sande wrote: I've never made a secret of the fact that an all-optical carrier network is what is desired. That has a downside in terms of edge device reliability, but in overall maintenance overhead it is way superior (read more profitable) than a copper based model. Why doesn't Verizon develop equivalent edge device reliability for VOIP/FIOS/...? Just way too expensive? I want the edge device reliability. I've been through too many extended power outages when a hurricane or ice storm came through. Maybe it will be unnecessary when all electrical distribution is underground, but we aren't there yet. I find edge device voice quality much better with land-line (I can actually tell who is talking to me all of the time.) and worth the extra cost of a land-line. I think CRT computer monitors are easier to read, but they are no longer available at all because of various reasons. I also think 4x3 monitors and TV screens are generally better. I purchase the widest screen I have room for on my physical desktop, and the widescreen monitor means I lose height and have to do more scrolling. Yes, I can rotate my monitor 90 degrees, but that doesn't really seem to work well either. Luddite? Yes! Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
To quote Ernestine, the telephone operator on Laugh-In, We don't care. We don't have to! We're the telephone company. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
I wonder if anyone has considered the political component of all this. What reactions will the proposal to kill landline service do to various voting blocks in the electorate--some of whom will protest, write their congresspersons, sign petitions, and generally make life unpleasant for anybody who wants to cut their telephone line? Example: we finally got my mother to buy a small cellphone for which you buy service with little phone cards, because we didn't want her to get stranded on the road somewhere, far from help. She keeps it turned off, most of the time. She's not a Luddite; she loves email and took to OS X with an alacrity that surprised us. But to her, the telephone is a LANDLINE in her house. She would be very DISPLEASED with any proposal that meant that she had to carry a little phone-- with a tiny, hard-to read keyboard--around with her all the time and pay a lot more for the resulting phone service. And where she lives, the cell coverage is very spotty, whereas landline service is pretty much universal, even in hard-to-reach areas. If anyone has the illusion that people like my mother will gladly suffer the cutoff of landline service, without making a lot of noise about it, and making elected and unelected officials very unhappy? That they will let this happen without taking major retribution at the ballot box? A lot of political issues are pretty abstract (e.g. carbon trading) and don't have an immediate effect on everyday lives. Cutting off landline phone service has an immediate effect on a lot of lives. There will be repercussions--and retribution--if this goes forward. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 10:31 AM 1/1/2010, you wrote: Example: we finally got my mother to buy a small cellphone for which you buy service with little phone cards, because we didn't want her to get stranded on the road somewhere, far from help. She keeps it turned off, most of the time. She's not a Luddite; she loves email and took to OS X with an alacrity that surprised us. But to her, the telephone is a LANDLINE in her house. She would be very DISPLEASED with any proposal that meant that she had to carry a little phone-- with a tiny, hard-to read keyboard--around with her all the time and pay a lot more for the resulting phone service. And where she lives, the cell coverage is very spotty, whereas landline service is pretty much universal, even in hard-to-reach areas. This pretty much describes my cell phone use also. I live in a mountainous area, and when you live in a valley, there's no service--regardless of how many towers they put up! My service at the house is iffy, even though I can see 2 towers out my window. This is why we've had extensive use of cable TV in this area for at least 40 years. Even though I rarely use the cell, I need to charge it occasionally. I'll plug it in and forget to put it back in my purse. Either that or I forget to charge it. Sue * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Well, if this is a nonstory, I'll be happy. Killing landlines would be a nuisance for most of us, a real hardship for some of us, and a bonanza for the phone companies. But while we're at it, we might ask why the cellphone service in this country mostly sucks, why you can't use iPhones with any carrier, and why there are more sophisticated cellphone services (like cellphone banking) in the third world, than we have here in the U.S. --Constance Warner On Jan 1, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Tony B wrote: This is one of the worst trolls I've seen on the list in a while. Not quite as bad as Tom's RAID rants, but right up there. ATT hasn't petitioned anyone to do anything, they were just answering an FCC query. Even when you were called on it and asked to provide links, you still didn't apologize for misleading everyone, although you must have read the story again a few times. In fact there's really no news here. As the articles state, we're down to 1 in 5 households that only have a landline, and that number is dropping all the time. When, not if. http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/185649/ atandt_tells_fcc_its_time_to_cut_the_cord.html On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 5:48 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote: ATT has petitioned the FCC to allow for the dismantling and removal of all landline telephone service in the United States. ATT wants to know when they can begin the euthanasia and how soon the termination can be completed. ** *** ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:// www.cguys.org/ ** ** *** * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 11:13 AM 1/1/2010, Tony B wrote: In fact there's really no news here. As the articles state, we're down to 1 in 5 households that only have a landline, and that number is dropping all the time. When, not if. Because of the word only in the above statement, it's not an interesting statement. What percentage of households have decided to rely entirely on other forms of communication than landline? Those who have both landline and cell phone presumably find their landline valuable. I for one don't want to depend on something that requires regular charging for emergency services. When a battery goes dead-dead, it takes a bit of time to replace it. And I may not remember to keep my phone charged. Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
I usually avoid this kind of discussion, but I will comment on Constance' rhetorical question about why US wired/wireless telephony is very different from other parts of the world. Up until the turn of the last century, the US had a HUGE investment in copper technology, while most of rest of the world had either very limited or (government) restricted capabilities. So, when wireless and fiber technology exploded on the market place, most of the rest of the world started from scratch and found ready markets. Also, in many parts of the world, whatever copper was strung on poles was routinely stolen almost as soon as it was put up. Fiber has literally no scrap value, so it isn't usually stolen (plus . On the other hand, US communications policy (for a number of both good and bad reasons) has tended to favor the existing infrastructure and made competitive strategies relatively difficult to implement, and many US communities are reluctant to see a forest of cellphone towers erected (mine included). Finally, the US (and Canada to some extent) has favored the concept of universal service across its vast geography, while wireless and fiber tends to be most economical in denser population centers and along major highways. I don't think my rural community would have ANY cell service if an interstate highway didn't run trough the middle of it, but the rules do require that we be served by the local TelCo. That is certainly true in rural parts of the third world. This, of course, isn't the whole story, but just parts of the answer. Mike Constance Warner wrote: Well, if this is a nonstory, I'll be happy. Killing landlines would be a nuisance for most of us, a real hardship for some of us, and a bonanza for the phone companies. But while we're at it, we might ask why the cellphone service in this country mostly sucks, why you can't use iPhones with any carrier, and why there are more sophisticated cellphone services (like cellphone banking) in the third world, than we have here in the U.S. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Verizon is helping out on their end. In Baltimore, MD, 3 people I've talked to last week have found their landlines have been cut by Verizon over the last couple of months even though they were still being used. When Verizon finally owned up to the fact, it still took two weeks for the landlines to be reconnected. Strange. Verizon calls me every 3 or 4 hours to try to get me to switch my land line from my current provider. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote: This is one of the worst trolls I've seen on the list in a while. Not quite as bad as Tom's RAID rants, but right up there. ATT hasn't petitioned anyone to do anything, they were just answering an FCC query. Even when you were called on it and asked to provide links, you still didn't apologize for misleading everyone, although you must have read the story again a few times. Well, I wasn't called on it. I was asked to provide a link to show that ATT had petitioned the FCC. In fact, I was wrong about that. They did not petition the FCC, but rather informed the FCC when asked for their opinion on the subject, and made it perfectly clear that they no longer want to continue with landline service, are ready to tear it down and want the FCC to have a timetable set for the dismantling of the landline system. Petition or not, the intentions of ATT are obvious and they have now formally notified the FCC of their position on the issue. I will presume that the petition will not take long to materialize if the FCC does not move in the direction that ATT desires. In fact there's really no news here. As the articles state, we're down to 1 in 5 households that only have a landline, and that number is dropping all the time. When, not if. Well, this new event is news. Were it not news, it would not be making the rounds of tech and financial sites. The dismantling of landline phone service is actively moving over the bureaucratic hurdles to becoming a reality ASAP if certain interests hold sway. What does it mean that 1 in 5 households only have landline service? Does that mean that a lot of those households are located where there is no cell phone service? I have both at my house, but I cannot get a cell signal here. I can only use my cell when I leave the house. Ditto for others in my general area. If someone living in a given household has a cell phone, does that necessarily mean that phone is generally available for all others who live there? That 1 in 5 thing is a pretty nebulous stat that doesn't really respond to many aspects of the issue, in my opinion. Could it be that a landline system provides a reliable and therefore perhaps even necessary parallel communications system to cell phones in the event of emergency situations? Could that constitute a national or regional security issue? I recall that in numerous emergencies, cell phone systems exhibited failures because of high usage levels and/or power outages. VOIP is used to provide further indication that landlines should be done away with. Isn't it true that VOIP cannot generally be used to access the 911 system? That could be a bummer. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
I live in one of those areas Verizon sold off their pots service. Many of the folks in this area are considered rural. The only options we have are pots or cell. No local VOIP offered here. Right now I am working with my pots service to get a 6mps DSL service. Looks like I will be sticking with cable. We are supposed to have a competing cable service within the next 6 months. They are expected to offer VOIP. (They are presently running their trunk lines) Once you get outside of the big metro areas, pots still reigns. Stewart At 01:12 PM 1/1/2010, you wrote: Well, I wasn't called on it. I was asked to provide a link to show that ATT had petitioned the FCC. In fact, I was wrong about that. They did not petition the FCC, but rather informed the FCC when asked for their opinion on the subject, and made it perfectly clear that they no longer want to continue with landline service, are ready to tear it down and want the FCC to have a timetable set for the dismantling of the landline system. Petition or not, the intentions of ATT are obvious and they have now formally notified the FCC of their position on the issue. I will presume that the petition will not take long to materialize if the FCC does not move in the direction that ATT desires. In fact there's really no news here. As the articles state, we're down to 1 in 5 households that only have a landline, and that number is dropping all the time. When, not if. Well, this new event is news. Were it not news, it would not be making the rounds of tech and financial sites. The dismantling of landline phone service is actively moving over the bureaucratic hurdles to becoming a reality ASAP if certain interests hold sway. What does it mean that 1 in 5 households only have landline service? Does that mean that a lot of those households are located where there is no cell phone service? I have both at my house, but I cannot get a cell signal here. I can only use my cell when I leave the house. Ditto for others in my general area. If someone living in a given household has a cell phone, does that necessarily mean that phone is generally available for all others who live there? That 1 in 5 thing is a pretty nebulous stat that doesn't really respond to many aspects of the issue, in my opinion. Could it be that a landline system provides a reliable and therefore perhaps even necessary parallel communications system to cell phones in the event of emergency situations? Could that constitute a national or regional security issue? I recall that in numerous emergencies, cell phone systems exhibited failures because of high usage levels and/or power outages. VOIP is used to provide further indication that landlines should be done away with. Isn't it true that VOIP cannot generally be used to access the 911 system? That could be a bummer. Steve Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
- Original Message - From: Eric S. Sande esa...@verizon.net To: Computer Guys Discussion List COMPUTERGUYS-L@LISTSERV.AOL.COM Sent: Friday, January 01, 2010 1:08 AM Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!! Verizon is helping out on their end. Interesting. We still have a significant revenue stream from landlines. Very much so. But if you look at recent history we've basically sold off all of the territories where it would be less profitable to deploy newer technologies. That's a business decision. I've never made a secret of the fact that an all-optical carrier network is what is desired. That has a downside in terms of edge device reliability, but in overall maintenance overhead it is way superior (read more profitable) than a copper based model. I'm sympathetic, to a degree. I don't speak for VZ. Only for myself. In a sense, it's a technology transformation. When I started in this business it was all mechanical relays in big, sometimes quarter city block sized switching centers. Microwave towers on mountains and two copper wires to every home straight from the central office. It just isn't that way anymore (well some places it is, but...). I don't know if the ATT petition story cited is true. I'd like a link to it. As far as my operations are concerned, it's BAU. If you need service I'll make it happen. That's my job. But the technology I employ to do it is none of your business, hint. Oh, I'll tell you how I do it, if asked. I have no secrets that can't be figured out with Google and a basic knowledge of network design. We aren't that subtle and Machiavellian. If we are, I didn't get the memo. Wait a minute, who put this Illuminati membership card in my wallet? For that matter, I don't even OWN a wallet. Uh, right. :-) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
No, you're thinking of the old landlines of the 50's and 60's. Today they're over-shared the same as everything else and are probably about as reliable in an emergency. I mean, there are different types of emergencies. A 9/11 event will clog all the services. But an accident in your bathroom can likely be handled via cell/voip as reliably as a landline. Maybe better if you have your cell phone with you and don't have to crawl to the nearest phone. But then, how many of us leave our doors unlocked, so you'll still have to crawl to the door to unlock it. Could it be that a landline system provides a reliable and therefore perhaps even necessary parallel communications system to cell phones in the event of emergency situations? Could that constitute a national or regional security issue? I recall that in numerous emergencies, cell phone systems exhibited failures because of high usage levels and/or power outages. VOIP is used to provide further indication that landlines should be done away with. Isn't it true that VOIP cannot generally be used to access the 911 system? That could be a bummer. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
We rarely even lock our doors when we go out, makes coming back in so easy. On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote: No, you're thinking of the old landlines of the 50's and 60's. Today they're over-shared the same as everything else and are probably about as reliable in an emergency. I mean, there are different types of emergencies. A 9/11 event will clog all the services. But an accident in your bathroom can likely be handled via cell/voip as reliably as a landline. Maybe better if you have your cell phone with you and don't have to crawl to the nearest phone. But then, how many of us leave our doors unlocked, so you'll still have to crawl to the door to unlock it. Could it be that a landline system provides a reliable and therefore perhaps even necessary parallel communications system to cell phones in the event of emergency situations? Could that constitute a national or regional security issue? I recall that in numerous emergencies, cell phone systems exhibited failures because of high usage levels and/or power outages. VOIP is used to provide further indication that landlines should be done away with. Isn't it true that VOIP cannot generally be used to access the 911 system? That could be a bummer. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
OMG. RAID and POTS. Some of us are not aging well. I'm really surprised at the high degree fear of change on what is supposed to be a discussion for techies. I think anyone who is tech aware has to to admit that the days of POTS (a switched telephone network) are numbered. It just does not make technological sense. We know how to perform this function much better and at lower cost. Saying that we should have an orderly plan for its demise i just good common sense. That does not mean that twisted copper pairs are going away. In some areas twisted pairs will go away. In other areas that will be around for a long time. What will change is the signaling that travels over the lines. It is going to be purely digital. That is inevitable and it will be happening soon. Digital does not have to mean poor quality. Analog POTS lines support a frequency domain from 200 to 2000 Hz at best. Transmitting that digitally is no big deal. It is true that some crappy carriers try to push quality below this, but I don't think it is prevalent. The crappy quality of cell phones is more likely the fault of having a crappy cell phone. There are lots of those out there. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Bringing up ATT again? Stewart At 03:55 PM 1/1/2010, you wrote: Digital does not have to mean poor quality. Analog POTS lines support a frequency domain from 200 to 2000 Hz at best. Transmitting that digitally is no big deal. It is true that some crappy carriers try to push quality below this, but I don't think it is prevalent. The crappy quality of cell phones is more likely the fault of having a crappy cell phone. There are lots of those out there. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Tony B ton...@gmail.com wrote: No, you're thinking of the old landlines of the 50's and 60's. Today they're over-shared the same as everything else and are probably about as reliable in an emergency. I do not disagree with you on this. However, should there really be active movement to dispose of POTS before reliable and fully useable wireless coverage or another alternative is available to everyone? There certainly are numerous parts of the United States where wireless has never been available, and there do not seem to be concrete plans to rectify that situation in many of those locations. It just seems to me that ATT would be in a better position to be supported in the undoing of their POTS were their wireless coverage 100% usable in the areas where they have the wired service that they want to rid themselves of. Given the often poor track record of ATT toward consumers, many folks would be expecting that company to act rather selfishly in this endeavor of theirs. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!...FUD
In fact there's really no news here. As the articles state, we're down to 1 in 5 households that only have a landline, and that number is dropping all the time. When, not if. The 1 in 5 stat looks like FUD to me. That's B.S. The United States doesn't have the broadband or cellular capacity to eliminate land lines [and it doesn't need to steal from TV bandwidth either]. Early on, corporations decided to make incompatible systems instead of a series of nationwide roaming networks. They also didn't want gummint interference, only our tax dollars to whatever they pleased. The key word is ONLY. Most people who have their own homes have a land line PLUS cellular. It's not either/or. There's not enough bandwidth for everyone to get rid of land lines. There's not enough reliability for everyone to switch from land lines to cellular or VOIP. Might work in the city or inner 'burbs, but there's a lot of the country where it would be a real hardship to lose land lines, whether or not they own/use mobile phones or VOIP. When was the last time you had to use VOIP during a power failure, even one that lasted only a few hours? Or FIOS when power is out long enough for the batteries to die? Have you ever tried to use a mobile phone during an emergency like a hurricane? They often don't work or connections are sporadic because everyone is tying up the network. Verizon land lines work well. Thanks Verizon. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!...FUD
Most of those statistics take into account young people who are very mobile and do not have land lines. (Plus metropolitan areas) My two oldest children fall into that category. My daughter and son-in-law own a house but have no land line. MY son lives in an apt. and has no land line. However Verizon cell service is extremely reliable in this area. Within my congregation only a few (read less than a handful) have cell only phones. Most of them have Cell phones, but only for travel or emergencies. Stewart At 06:58 PM 1/1/2010, you wrote: The 1 in 5 stat looks like FUD to me. That's B.S. The United States doesn't have the broadband or cellular capacity to eliminate land lines [and it doesn't need to steal from TV bandwidth either]. Early on, corporations decided to make incompatible systems instead of a series of nationwide roaming networks. They also didn't want gummint interference, only our tax dollars to whatever they pleased. The key word is ONLY. Most people who have their own homes have a land line PLUS cellular. It's not either/or. There's not enough bandwidth for everyone to get rid of land lines. There's not enough reliability for everyone to switch from land lines to cellular or VOIP. Might work in the city or inner 'burbs, but there's a lot of the country where it would be a real hardship to lose land lines, whether or not they own/use mobile phones or VOIP. When was the last time you had to use VOIP during a power failure, even one that lasted only a few hours? Or FIOS when power is out long enough for the batteries to die? Have you ever tried to use a mobile phone during an emergency like a hurricane? They often don't work or connections are sporadic because everyone is tying up the network. Verizon land lines work well. Thanks Verizon. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!...FUD
We'd be cell only but DSL is the only thing that is available here and adding a landline decreases the total cost of service for the DSL so we keep it. I couldn't bring myself to pay full price for DSL nightmare. On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Rev. Stewart Marshall revsamarsh...@earthlink.net wrote: Most of those statistics take into account young people who are very mobile and do not have land lines. (Plus metropolitan areas) My two oldest children fall into that category. My daughter and son-in-law own a house but have no land line. MY son lives in an apt. and has no land line. However Verizon cell service is extremely reliable in this area. Within my congregation only a few (read less than a handful) have cell only phones. Most of them have Cell phones, but only for travel or emergencies. Stewart At 06:58 PM 1/1/2010, you wrote: The 1 in 5 stat looks like FUD to me. That's B.S. The United States doesn't have the broadband or cellular capacity to eliminate land lines [and it doesn't need to steal from TV bandwidth either]. Early on, corporations decided to make incompatible systems instead of a series of nationwide roaming networks. They also didn't want gummint interference, only our tax dollars to whatever they pleased. The key word is ONLY. Most people who have their own homes have a land line PLUS cellular. It's not either/or. There's not enough bandwidth for everyone to get rid of land lines. There's not enough reliability for everyone to switch from land lines to cellular or VOIP. Might work in the city or inner 'burbs, but there's a lot of the country where it would be a real hardship to lose land lines, whether or not they own/use mobile phones or VOIP. When was the last time you had to use VOIP during a power failure, even one that lasted only a few hours? Or FIOS when power is out long enough for the batteries to die? Have you ever tried to use a mobile phone during an emergency like a hurricane? They often don't work or connections are sporadic because everyone is tying up the network. Verizon land lines work well. Thanks Verizon. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** * * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 03:50 PM 1/1/2010, Tony B wrote: A 9/11 event will clog all the services. But an accident in your bathroom can likely be handled via cell/voip as reliably as a landline. Maybe better if you have your cell phone with you and don't have to crawl to the nearest phone. But then, how many of us leave our doors unlocked, so you'll still have to crawl to the door to unlock it. Many folks have a cordless phone on their landline. Works as long as the electricity is on. One can carry the cordless handset into the bathroom, etc. The VOIP I've seen is copper inside the building. In fact, one connects the inside wiring to the VOIP box instead of the TELCO's copper junction box on the outside of the house. I live in Annandale, VA, and don't have reliable cell service (signal strength) in my home. VOIP is a great waster of electrical power. Lots of circuitry has to be kept powered, not required of a POTS telephone set. That's why a standby (UPS) battery for VOIP lasts only a few hours. Fred Holmes * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 04:55 PM 1/1/2010, t.piwowar wrote: I think anyone who is tech aware has to to admit that the days of POTS (a switched telephone network) are numbered. I believe that POTS is entirely digital once the copper wire gets to the junction at the TELCO. No longer switched, except perhaps logically, but definitely not physically. Has been that way for a long time. I want my household connection to be as simple and reliable as possible -- a copper pair to a passive device. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
At 04:55 PM 1/1/2010, t.piwowar wrote: We know how to perform this function much better and at lower cost. Better is in the eye of the beholder. My opinion is that it is accomplished at lower cost by cutting corners. I want the good stuff and am willing to pay for it. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Fred Holmes f...@his.com wrote: At 04:55 PM 1/1/2010, t.piwowar wrote: That does not mean that twisted copper pairs are going away. In some areas twisted pairs will go away. In other areas that will be around for a long time. What will change is the signaling that travels over the lines. It is going to be purely digital. That is inevitable and it will be happening soon. Will the twisted copper pairs carry power to the handset? That's the issue for me. Or will the power required by the device in the home and any devices on the network outside of the TELCO be small enough that reasonable batteries will last two weeks? A small solar panel would be nice to keep the system going or at least get you service in the morning. -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Actually a solar panel with a battery would keep you up about 95% of the time. Most highway departments have used this set up to run warning lights and sensors on highways for years. Stewart At 07:46 PM 1/1/2010, you wrote: A small solar panel would be nice to keep the system going or at least get you service in the morning. -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) Rev. Stewart A. Marshall mailto:popoz...@earthlink.net Prince of Peace www.princeofpeaceozark.org Ozark, AL SL 82 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Before we trash the old, copper-wire (or even fiber-optic) landlines, I'd like to point out an inconvenient truth: in a lot of places and circumstances, cellphones will not work. Here are just a few cases where cellphones will fail: 1. Below ground, in parking garages, the below-ground levels of hotels, etc. I would imagine a lot of basements fall into this category. It's really annoying when you have to leave a meeting and go several levels up to make or receive an essential call. 2. Blind spots in existing coverage, where a signal from a cell tower doesn't reach--because of buildings in the way, odd quirks of the terrain, the intrinsic limits of the cell towers, etc. When I was looking for a cellphone provider, I found a lot of complaints from once-hopeful subscribers who could not get service from their own carriers inside their own apartments, in a supposedly covered area. (Of course, the disappointed subscribers could not get out of their cellphone contracts, in spite of the lousy service.) 3. As was mentioned in an earlier posting, hilly terrain means that those in valleys sometimes can't get coverage, because of the intrinsic limitations of cell tower technology. Areas such as West Virginia (right next door to the National Capitol area) and the Mountain West might just be out of luck if landline service gets trashed in favor of cellphones. 4. One personal case: in the National Radio Quiet Area, near the radio telescopes at Green Bank, where my uncle's farm is located. Cellphones are not allowed there, so no landlines means no telephone service. Somehow I just don't see them tearing down the radio telescopes just because Big Corporate Telecom does not want to bother with landlines any more. The result: a wide area where there is no telephone service at all. There are probably a lot of other cases where cellphones are not viable, but where landline service would work--and does work at present. This is IN ADDITION TO areas where landline service is now available, but where it doesn't seem PROFITABLE to put in cell towers. If you've looked at cellphone service coverage maps, perhaps while shopping for a cellphone provider, you know that there are areas where there is no service at all, from any carriers. I'm really happy for young, mobile professionals who carry expensive smartphones everywhere, are in constant communication with all the rest of the planet, and who don't need landlines any more. I'll bet it gives them a glow of inner satisfaction to be so perfectly technologically up-to-date. But until the telecoms get all the bugs worked out for near-universal cellphone service (including those listed above and in other postings), abolishing landlines is a major disservice to this country, and a trashing of the common good in favor of Big Telecom corporate profits. --Constance Warner * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 4:55 PM, t.piwowar t...@tjpa.com wrote: OMG. RAID and POTS. Some of us are not aging well. I'm really surprised at the high degree fear of change on what is supposed to be a discussion for techies. I believe the only real fear of change as per this discussion is the almost taken for granted thought that att, and probably other landline telephone providers, will find a way to stick it to the public. I think anyone who is tech aware has to to admit that the days of POTS (a switched telephone network) are numbered. It just does not make technological sense. We know how to perform this function much better and at lower cost. Saying that we should have an orderly plan for its demise i just good common sense. Well there, you have said it yourself. An orderly plan. That is most assuredly what will be missing from the equation. When, as you say, the time comes, there will have been many vague promises and assurances made by the telcos about ensuring coverage and service to all that will not be met...guaranteed. That does not mean that twisted copper pairs are going away. In some areas twisted pairs will go away. In other areas that will be around for a long time. What will change is the signaling that travels over the lines. It is going to be purely digital. That is inevitable and it will be happening soon. Not so fast here. None of us really can know what the eventual outcome will be, and what that time frame will be. Att sez they want out of the copper business...period. They flat out do not want wires. Back in 2007 att was rattling their wire cutters in public over the issue of twisted pair service. It didn't get much public notice, but various announcements and press releases made it clear that att was going to primarily focus on wireless services and was going to back out of wired services. It is just that they kinda formalized that position the other day over at the FCC, a somewhat necessary step to clear bureaucratic procedures on the path to a realization of their plans. What they have not done is to convince ANYBODY that they can meet their goal in a manner that does not screw a lot of the public. In fact, in providing the FCC with their vision of replacing all landline service, att failed to offer any suggestions whatsoever about how to serve the estimated 20% of U.S. households that cannot get wireless service, many of them being within areas served by att's own system. My position is that they must FIRST be made to provide an alternative and reliable telephone system to every customer who would lose landline service BEFORE the wires are cut. No promises. They MUST do that FIRST. Digital does not have to mean poor quality. Analog POTS lines support a frequency domain from 200 to 2000 Hz at best. Transmitting that digitally is no big deal. It is true that some crappy carriers try to push quality below this, but I don't think it is prevalent. The crappy quality of cell phones is more likely the fault of having a crappy cell phone. There are lots of those out there. Limiting audio quality is actually very common with carriers. That is a primary means of retaining bandwidth. As bandwidth requirements increase, audio quality will progressively suffer. Yes, the phones also have crappy sound reproduction if for no other reason than you just cannot get anything to sound good coming out of such a tiny flat speaker coupled with such meager audio amps that all these infinitesimal phones have. I figure that most cell phones can't really claim less than around 60% distortion rates at typical listening levels, incoming distortion figures included. Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 5:48 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.comwrote: ATT has petitioned the FCC to allow for the dismantling and removal of all landline telephone service in the United States. ATT wants to know when they can begin the euthanasia and how soon the termination can be completed. Perhaps this helps explain why they have also recently petitioned for even more of the broadcast television frequencies, demanding a re-farming of all terrestrial television broadcasting transmitter sites as previously noted in this forum. ATT all wireless that is laughable. They can have this when they can reliably service every single iPhone absolutely everywhere in the country and not a second before. -- John Duncan Yoyo ---o) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Verizon is helping out on their end. In Baltimore, MD, 3 people I've talked to last week have found their landlines have been cut by Verizon over the last couple of months even though they were still being used. When Verizon finally owned up to the fact, it still took two weeks for the landlines to be reconnected. Richard P. On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 5:48 PM, phartz...@gmail.com phartz...@gmail.com wrote: ATT has petitioned the FCC to allow for the dismantling and removal of all landline telephone service in the United States. ATT wants to know when they can begin the euthanasia and how soon the termination can be completed. Perhaps this helps explain why they have also recently petitioned for even more of the broadcast television frequencies, demanding a re-farming of all terrestrial television broadcasting transmitter sites as previously noted in this forum. * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Verizon is helping out on their end. Interesting. We still have a significant revenue stream from landlines. Very much so. But if you look at recent history we've basically sold off all of the territories where it would be less profitable to deploy newer technologies. That's a business decision. I've never made a secret of the fact that an all-optical carrier network is what is desired. That has a downside in terms of edge device reliability, but in overall maintenance overhead it is way superior (read more profitable) than a copper based model. I'm sympathetic, to a degree. I don't speak for VZ. Only for myself. In a sense, it's a technology transformation. When I started in this business it was all mechanical relays in big, sometimes quarter city block sized switching centers. Microwave towers on mountains and two copper wires to every home straight from the central office. It just isn't that way anymore (well some places it is, but...). I don't know if the ATT petition story cited is true. I'd like a link to it. As far as my operations are concerned, it's BAU. If you need service I'll make it happen. That's my job. But the technology I employ to do it is none of your business, hint. Oh, I'll tell you how I do it, if asked. I have no secrets that can't be figured out with Google and a basic knowledge of network design. We aren't that subtle and Machiavellian. If we are, I didn't get the memo. Wait a minute, who put this Illuminati membership card in my wallet? For that matter, I don't even OWN a wallet. Uh, right. :-) * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Eric S. Sande esa...@verizon.net wrote: I don't know if the ATT petition story cited is true. I'd like a link to it. I did not have a link at first, having read the story but failing to note its source, and then not being able to quickly find it when I initially posted on this subject. Here are a couple of sources, and a number of others are available. Look up on ATT end landlines. http://gigaom.com/2009/12/30/att-to-fcc-let-my-landlines-go/ http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=516690 * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
Here is another link to the plan by ATT to discontinue landline service: http://www.electronista.com/articles/09/12/30/carrier.asks.fcc.to.phase.out.land.phones/ * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
Re: [CGUYS] Kill it!!!
On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Eric S. Sande esa...@verizon.net wrote: Interesting. We still have a significant revenue stream from landlines. Very much so. But if you look at recent history we've basically sold off all of the territories where it would be less profitable to deploy newer technologies. I figure that cell phone use could triple or even quadruple if all landline service were to be eliminated. While it may be true that up to 80% of households have at least one person in residence who has a cell phone, it remains clear that many, perhaps even most phone calls in such homes are still initiated or received on a landline phone at that address. Most businesses, large and small, continue to use landline phones extensively, in many cases almost exclusively, for incoming and outgoing business calls. Ditto for all governmental agencies nationwide. There would be a monstrous increase in cell phone use were landlines to be done away with, and along with that, a huge need for additional bandwidth to provide for that increase in call volume. Where is that bandwidth going to come from? What kind of reliability can be expected from an all wireless phone system? Steve * ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *
