---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <DAB79254-3516-4E38-BE0B-0DE1D71A0B78@roscom.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 02:25:41 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: Montana Governor Signs Order to Force Net Neutrality An executive order forbids broadband providers with new or renewed state contracts to block or charge higher fees for faster delivery of websites. By CECILIA KANG WASHINGTON - Most efforts underway to restore so-called net neutrality face big obstacles and would take many months, if not years, to succeed. But in Montana, the governor has used the stroke of a pen to bring the rules to broad parts of his state. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/22/technology/montana-net-neutrality.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <C40C615E-16C6-4D8B-87F9-35A6B82A624A@roscom.com> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 02:03:57 -0500 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> Subject: E.U. Fines Qualcomm $1.2 Billion Over Apple Deal Regulators said the giant American chip maker had offered financial incentives to ensure manufacturers bought equipment solely from the company. European antitrust officials hammered Qualcomm with a $1.2 billion fine on Wednesday, saying the American chip maker, whose technology underpins much of the world's mobile phone industry, had abused its dominant market position to squeeze out competitors. The penalty of 997 million euros follows a two-year investigation and is the latest move by regional regulators against a United States tech giant. Officials in Brussels say that Qualcomm offered financial incentives to Apple so that it would buy equipment solely from the chip maker. Qualcomm immediately said it would appeal the ruling, which would probably extend the case, originally announced in the summer of 2015, for years to come. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/business/eu-qualcomm-fine-antitrust.html ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20180126180228.21E2419D29F7@ary.qy> Date: 26 Jan 2018 13:02:27 -0500 From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> Subject: Re: POTS replacement suggestions? In article <20180125010955.84401.qmail@submit.iecc.com> you write: >I'm tired of paying almost $80/month/line when I don't make calls on >them. Keep in mind that your POTS line will keep working when the power fails, even as your VoIP and cell batteries go dead. You might want to keep one of them. >I am looking for the cheapest way to replace the incoming lines with >something that routes calls to those numbers to independent voice- >mailboxes. I don't need to use them to make outgoing calls. I've been happy with Callcentric, www.callcentric.com, who sell unbundled VoIP services. Domestic US incoming numbers are $2/month plus 1.5c/minute, or $6/mo and no per minute. Voicemail is free, you can pick it up on your website, or by calling your number, or they can e-mail you audio files. If you want actual phonecalls, get a cheap VoIP adapter liks a Sipura/Linksys SPA-1001 which is about $15 on ebay, plug one side into your Internet router and the other side into a phone, and now that's your phone, with voicemail for when you don't answer it. That's what I use, a two line POTS phone, line 1 is the real POTS line, line 2 is VoIP. Or if you prefer you can get a VoIP desk or cordless phone for $50 to $200 depending on how fancy. Callcentric has a lot of options that you can pick and choose for what works for you. They can port most US or Canada numbers, usually a one-time $10 fee, currently waived. R's, John ------------------------------ Message-ID: <p4ed43$h7h$1@dont-email.me> Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2018 23:08:17 -0600 From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> Subject: Re: POTS replacement suggestions? On 1/24/2018 6:54 PM, David B. Horvath, CCP wrote: > I still have POTS at home. Line 1 has been the traditional "home" line > that I retain largely because my mother calls that number rather than > my cell. Line 2 was my business line at home; it is the number I've > had on my resume and business cards for many years (and was my > outgoing fax/dial-up Internet too; I retained dial-up Internet for > backup until last year). > > I'm tired of paying almost $80/month/line when I don't make calls on > them. > > I am looking for the cheapest way to replace the incoming lines with > something that routes calls to those numbers to independent voice- > mailboxes. I don't need to use them to make outgoing calls. I > don't really need to answer calls to those numbers either (although > that might be nice). I do want to retain those numbers though. > > For similar reasons, I don't want to give up my existing cell number. > > I have highspeed internet at home (cable), and I have a Windows-based > PC that runs all the time (providing a flight tracking data feed), and > an android tablet and smartphones. VoIP, of course, assuming that you can port the numbers (I think that cost me $25 plus $1/mo) and that your Internet is reliable (fast isn't a big deal, phones don't use much bandwidth). I can only really speak to service from VOIP.MS, but that runs something like $7/mo per line for me (cheaper if you don't care about 911, CID, ported numbers) and comes with voicemail (delivered by email, if you wish). It requires an ATA box ($50 or so one-time). It can forward calls, which you want, and do a lot of other things that you don't care about. Their website is sorta confusing, best if you're interested to call and talk to a human. I've been using them for maybe 10 years with never a problem aside from an occasional echo. Other VoIP suppliers may be similar, better, or worse. They all probably have better prices than what you're paying. ------------------------------ ********************************************* End of telecom Digest Sat, 27 Jan 2018