Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 15:39:13 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
Subject: Update: Verizon offers free calling, text and data for
customers impacted by Hurricane Michael
10.12.2018 Emergency Management
Verizon is extending this offer through Sunday, October 21 for
customers in the hardest hit areas of the Florida Panhandle
Alpharetta, GA - For our customers in the Florida Panhandle including
coastal Alabama that will feel the effects of Hurricane Michael,
Verizon Wireless is saying "We've Got Your Back." From October 10
through October 14, Verizon is providing free calling, texting and
data to its postpaid and prepaid customers who reside in the areas of
the Florida Panhandle including coastal Alabama that are in the direct
path of the storm. We will closely monitor the storm's path and impact
and will make additions and adjustments as needed, and will
communicate those details as those decisions are made. The offer is
now being extended through October 21 for customers in the hardest
hit areas of the Florida Panhandle.
(Remove QRM from my email address to write to me directly)
Date: 13 Oct 2018 13:35:41 -0700
From: HAncock4 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Finger Pointing
On Sunday, September 30, 2018 at 11:33:31 AM UTC-4, Fred Goldstein wrote:
> I co-wrote a book about the new electronic PBXs in the late 1970s. It
> is an area where Ma Bell was way, way behind the curve.
Would you have the exact citation for the book? I'd like to see if
it's on worldcat.org
> But Ma Bell was behind. It introduced Dimension, an *analog*
> electronic switch. Its backplane had 64 (or 128 on the D2000) time
> slots, and the voltage on each was the analog signal from one
> call. It had a pretty long feature list, but they were lumped in
> different Feature Packages, with different rental prices. D400 was
> the base unit. D2000 was multiple buses with (analog) links between
> them. D100 was a compact package variant on the D400. It was
> controlled by a proprietary minicomputer (D2000's being faster than
> D400's). It worked okay but its main marketing push was "we're Ma
> Bell and you don't need a capital request to install it." But they
> did have long-term contracts, as long as 12 years (two-tier, then
> VTPP, rates).
According to the Bell Labs records, Bell introduced several PBX's in
its last years just before Divestiture (at various points). The
On the low-end, several new key systems were introduced that allowed
small PBX users to switch over to a key system. This included the
Comkey 416, the Comkey 718 series, Horizon, and Merlin.
Our office had a Comkey 718 and it was pretty slick.
On the PBX side, the new systems had plug-in units to allow easy
growth and feature flexibility. Instead of hard wiring new selectors
or wired logic, they'd just pop in circuit cards to provide a specific
optional service feature or more capacity.
Some of the newer PBX's included:
770A PBX 40 to 400 stations, multiple features
800A up to 80 stations, basic or advanced service and traffic load
801A up to 40 trunks, 270 stations, mid range system
805A up to 18 trunks, 57 stations low cost basic system
812A up to 2000 lines advanced system
No. 101 ESS remote switching; full services.
What anyone recall how these Bell PBX's compared in terms of price,
performance, and reliability against independent systems-- from the
point of view of the customer? (I don't think customers cared whether
the PBX was digital or analog, indeed, if it was electro-mechanical or
electronic. They wanted reliability and a good price.)
My only experience with non Bell systems was very limited. I knew of
only one company who bought in a non-Bell PBX pre-1983. The price
saving was substantial. But the PBX was not reliable and eventually
had to be removed.
I once came across an _old_ Kellogg PBX. I thought it was built very
poorly compared to equivalent Bell PBX's. But it may not have been a
In the 1960s, Automatic Electric acquired the Leich Company which sold
PBX's. I don't know how good they were. Here are some catalogs.
(This is earlier than our discussion, but shown for comparative
(see pg 84:)
Date: 14 Oct 2018 23:13:09 -0500
From: "Neal McLain" <email@example.com>
Subject: Robert Reich: Living in a New Gilded Age
In Message-ID: <20181013201823.GA3162@telecom.csail.mit.edu>, Bill Horne
> Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2018 16:18:23 -0400
> Robert Reich: Living in a New Gilded Age ... why does the United
> States have the highest broadband prices among advanced nations and
> the slowest speeds?
> Because more than 80 percent of Americans have no choice but to rely
> on their local cable company for high capacity wired data
> connections to the Internet - usually Comcast, AT&T, or Verizon. And
> these corporations are among the most politically powerful in
> America. (In a rare exception to Trump's corporate sycophancy, the
> Justice Department is appealing a district court's approval of
> AT&T's merger with Time Warner.)
Contrary to [Professor] Reich's claim, most of those 80% of Americans do indeed have
choices other than the "local cable company":
--> In most locations, the local telephone company (DSL, FiOS, etc.)
--> In most locations, satellite networks (Dish Network and DirecTV),
provided that the downlink antenna can be placed in view of the
--> In some locations, Google Fiber.
--> In some locations, municipal broadband.
The success of municipal broadband networks has been inconsistent.
--> Chattanooga, Tennessee's broadband network has been a huge
success, currently serving some 82,000 customers.
--> But Provo, Utah's broadband network iProvo has been a disaster.
After numerous financial setbacks the city sold the system to
Google for $1.00.
As I've noted before in this space, most successful municipal
broadband networks were built in cities that already owned their own
electric power utilities. In these cities the city already owned the
utility poles and underground duct systems needed for the fiber
networks. That was certainly true in Chatanooga's case: the Electric
Power Board already owned the power network and built the broadband
network on the same infrastructure.
But even owning its own power utility didn't help in Provo.
In any case, my original statement holds: in most locations, the
"local cable company" isn't the only option.
End of telecom Digest Mon, 15 Oct 2018