|
|
Message Digest
Volume 29 : Issue 77 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Re: Fwd: How Pandora Slipped Past the Junkyard
Looking for basic reliable phone system that provides extentions
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Re: Waiting for Verizon..
====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:30:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <d9b03a06-7877-49e5-80e7-c39a9a36e8ce@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 15, 7:07 pm, Tom Metro <tmetro+telecomdig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Have those of you that have been using FIOS for a while had positive
> experiences in dealing with Verizon support for more subtle and
> highly technical issues, or are you just crossing your fingers and
> hoping it'll never come to that?
I don't have Vz's FIOS myself but I know several people who do and
they like it. The only drawback was during an extended power failure
which exceeded the time of the backup battery, once that happened they
had no voice telephone service until commercial power was restored.
(Given the nasty storms and power outages we've had lately, I would
think the backup battery needs to last longer; I think it's rated at
three hours.)
I think a problem will be with all consumer-oriented broadband
services will be when the initial promotional pricing ends and the
cost goes up steeply. Some carriers/services keep extending the
promotions or offer new ones, but the rules always change and the
consumer has to invest time to keep on top of it. If the consumer
does nothing the plan may default to a high level. Of course, other
services these days, like banks and cable TV, pull the same stuff.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <c49ffacb-c610-4b26-831e-b03bb3da2b3b@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 16, 9:09 pm, Sam Spade <s...@coldmail.com> wrote:
> > Historically, Bell provided good service in PA and NJ. But some other
> > Bell territories, such as served by baby Bell NYNEX, did not have as
> > good a record.
>
> If I recall correctly, sometime in the early or mid 1970s New York
> Telephone (I think that is what it was called) service standards fell to
> all time lows in metro-NYC. I was there a lot in those days, and I
> recall perhaps 50% of the pay stations in Manhattan being out of service.
> If I recall correctly, inter-office trunks also fell in the dumpster,
> more because of bad maintenance than growtth. Thus, the grade of
> service also went into the dumpster.
You are correct about NYC; it was circa 1970 when telephone service
quality seriously decayed. The problems included:
-- Far more rapid turnover (connects and disconnects) than in the past
or what the company expected. This put a high load on installers
(back then someone came to a home or business to wire in or remove all
telephone sets); as well as the central office. One big problem was
that the main distributing frames became overloaded with jumpers
causing problems.
--Difficulty in hiring and retaining skilled personnel. Oslin wrote
that the phone company was forced by external pressures to hire
unqualified people which hurt service quality.
--Old switching equipment not adequately maintained. For example, if
a line-finder was bad, lots of people were hurt.
--Growth in traffic volume exceeded estimates, straining equipment
capacity.
--As to pay phones, urban decay and vandalism contributed to the
outages, which were severe. There were still many 3-slot payphones in
service in those days. I remember a large bank of payphones in an H&H
Automat and only one was working, and there was a line to use it. NYC
circa 1970 was a troubled city. Things have changed dramatically.
The Bell System got much negative publicity from these problems. They
finally mobilized a task force and brought in craftsmen from other
Bell companies; sort of as if NYC had a hurricane and needed extra
assistance to restore service.
Another unrelated problem was a bad fire in a major switching second
circa 1973. Everyone served was out for a few weeks until the
switches could be laboriously cleaned by hand with q-tips and cables
respliced. A new ESS was installed and others quickly reprogrammed to
handle some of the toll and tandem switching capability that was
lost. Crews worked around the clock to restore service.
Sometimes I wonder if service problems today are a legacy from sloppy
or rushed cable work done back in the 1970s. Perhaps splices and
building distribution panels (say the panel in the basement of a large
old apt building) were adequate for voice grade communications but
don't hold up well for DSL. I also wonder if some of the old wiring
in apt and office buildings may not be well maintained, but I'm just
speculating.
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:51:07 +1100
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <pan.2010.03.17.22.51.04.47942@myrealbox.com>
On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:46:06 -0700, hancock4 wrote:
.......
> Sometimes I wonder if service problems today are a legacy from sloppy or
> rushed cable work done back in the 1970s. Perhaps splices and building
> distribution panels (say the panel in the basement of a large old apt
> building) were adequate for voice grade communications but don't hold up
> well for DSL. I also wonder if some of the old wiring in apt and office
> buildings may not be well maintained, but I'm just speculating.
Isn't that sort of statement just an acknowledgement that telephony
cabling and infrastructure has a "use by" date?
Why is there an expectation that infrastructure that has its technical
origins back in the early 20th century will still be up to the job of
satisfying the demands of this era?
I think that people have been more than well-served by this sort of
infrastructure over the years it has existed, but there must come a time
when it is acknowledged that total replacement is necessary and that such
a thing will cost money.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 23:15:15 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Fwd: How Pandora Slipped Past the Junkyard
Message-ID: <MPG.260b64d118fdb6a3989cbc@news.eternal-september.org>
In article <6645152a1003160931q4cec63e7n8894cdea5c172113
@mail.gmail.com>, john@mayson.us says...
>
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 3:55 PM, T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net> wrote:
>
> >> Please describe the service for the readers: is it an iTunes clone? I
> >> mean, does it download audio files to your iphone for playing as if it
> >> was an iPod, or do you get "streaming" audio via the cellular
> >> connections?
> >
> > It is a web (Flash) based music player. You start by telling it a few
> > artists you like. It then goes out and finds similar artists. I have
> > about 15 liked arists and genres in my list and as John said, it's great
> > at making recommendations.
>
> It's more than just that. It's an audio streaming service. They have
> clients for handheld devices such as the iPhone. My Squeezebox radio
> includes Pandora software.
>
> >
> > Not advised for a corporate environment though. It is a bit of a
> > bandwidth pig.
>
> Which is why so many corporate IT departments block them.
It's funny I do database and support work for a non-profit. One day
I'm at the office and I hear complaints that the network (Web) is so
slow. I note I hear music but there isn't a radio. One of the users
was streaming Pandora.
Had to explain to the agency director that they really should have an
AUP in the office that forbids streaming.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:18:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Rivers Bradley <rbradley.itg@gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Looking for basic reliable phone system that provides extentions
Message-ID: <7b948191-4fde-4e02-85ed-6e6ed2f51c7b@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
I have a customer that is looking for a basic 2 line anolog phone
system that allows callers to choose from a list of extensions (that
they can provide the ext list by voice). Anything else like remote
call fwding etc would be nice but not a priority. Thank you in
advance for any info that is given.
***** Moderator's Note *****
Perhaps some helpful soul who shares your IP block will suggest a
solution.
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:02:23 EDT
From: Wesrock@aol.com
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <4af56.43cbc454.38d2c78f@aol.com>
In a message dated 3/17/2010 5:31:45 PM Central Daylight Time,
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes
> The Bell System got much negative publicity from these problems.
> They finally mobilized a task force and brought in craftsmen from
> other Bell companies; sort of as if NYC had a hurricane and needed
> extra assistance to restore service.
As I recall, a foreman from Oklahoma City spent almost a year in the
Bedford-Stuyvesant (sp) area of Brooklyn supervising the rebuilding of
outside plant, including drops. He had an armed guard assigned to him
because the area was so dangerous.
Long retired, he died last month.
Wes Leatherock
wesrock@aol.com
wleathus@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:39:37 -0700
From: "Fred Atkinson" <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <003201cac633$7da68fe0$c800000a@mishmash>
Lisa Hancock said:
> I don't have Vz's FIOS myself but I know several people who do and
> they like it. The only drawback was during an extended power failure
> which exceeded the time of the backup battery, once that happened they
> had no voice telephone service until commercial power was restored.
> (Given the nasty storms and power outages we've had lately, I would
> think the backup battery needs to last longer; I think it's rated at
> three hours.)
A resourceful individual could come up with a better arrangement than
this battery backup.
Example: My father lived alone. He had a cablemodem, a router that
supported his VOIP line, and a cordless phone [in addition to his PC,
monitor, and printer].
I got him a very hefty UPS and plugged all three devices cablemodem,
VOIP router, and cordless phone) into it (and did not plug in his computer
or other devices). That would have lasted for quite a while had the need
arisen.
I would suspect that this FIOS unit does not use much power. Adding it
to the list of necessary items to keep voice going during a power outage
should not be overly demanding.
At my home, I have two UPS units. One powers my PC and monitor. The
other powers my DSL modem, my router, and my VOIP device. Should I have a
power outage, I won't be out of voice communication. Sure, my PC and my
monitor will probably go down after fifteen minutes. But the devices that
support my VOIP service will not go down unless there is an extremly long
outage.
Of course, you are always dependent upon the ISP. If they go down,
nothing else will matter.
I don't consider the fifteen minutes for the computer and monitor such a
big deal. What that UPS is best for is keeping power spikes, blackouts, and
brownouts from affecting your equipment.
Regards,
Fred
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:42:02 +0000 (UTC)
From: danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Waiting for Verizon..
Message-ID: <hnsauq$jq0$1@reader1.panix.com>
In <003201cac633$7da68fe0$c800000a@mishmash> "Fred Atkinson" <fatkinson.remove-this@and-this-too.mishmash.com> writes:
> I would suspect that this FIOS unit does not use much power. Adding it
>to the list of necessary items to keep voice going during a power outage
>should not be overly demanding.
>From actual measurements, the Optical converter pulls about 10 watts.
(Different friends have reported slightly different numbers when
I've lent them my KAW. I don't personally have FIOS).
Looking at the battery in my APC small UPS, it's 12V and 7.5 AH. Figuring
on a 50 percent drainage/efficiency number, that would be
12 [enter], 7.5 [times], 2 [divide] -> 45 watt-hours. meaning
that a 10 watt demand would run for about 4.5 hours.
My commercial grade UPS (also from APC) uses 2 12V batteries with,
iirc, 15 amp hours each. Or four times the capacity. That would
give us about 16 hours. (The batteries can drain a bit lower,
but the conversion efficiency overhead is bigger...)
A small car battery with 500 watt hours would get you... 50 hours.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom Digest (8 messages)
|
or 