See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 01:54:05 -0400
From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is your cellphone your only connection to the Internet?
Message-ID: <4dzmd94qrtxf.18rdt8jgmaih1$.dlg@40tude.net>
On 18 May 2015 20:34:44 -0000, Bill Horne wrote:
> Please tell me if you are using your cellphone as your only means
> of connecting to the Internet. I'll include "tethered" connections
> for this question. TIA.
Certainly while traveling, especially into Poland and into France, I've
relied entirely on tethered connections, using a local prepaid data SIM,
and an unlocked (but Cingular-labeled) Motorola SLVR handset (dating from
the old RAZR era), as wi-fi was simply unavailable to me there.
'Zat the sort of data-point you were looking for? Need more details?
Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
|
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 12:12:50 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is your cellphone your only connection to the Internet?
Message-ID: <20150521161250.GA28390@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 01:54:05AM -0400, tlvp wrote:
> On 18 May 2015 20:34:44 -0000, Bill Horne wrote:
>
> > Please tell me if you are using your cellphone as your only means
> > of connecting to the Internet. I'll include "tethered" connections
> > for this question. TIA.
>
> Certainly while traveling, especially into Poland and into France, I've
> relied entirely on tethered connections, using a local prepaid data SIM,
> and an unlocked (but Cingular-labeled) Motorola SLVR handset (dating from
> the old RAZR era), as wi-fi was simply unavailable to me there.
>
> 'Zat the sort of data-point you were looking for? Need more details?
Well, yes and no.
Yes, because it illustrates the fact that Internet access is now both
ubiquitous and mobile.
No, since I'm wondering if there is a more widespread change in
progress: if we (the Netizons whose children grew up with "always on"
connectivity and whom can remember a world where long-distance phone
calls were a rarity) are completing a circle, and going back to the
pointed, no-nonense world of telegraph messages where every word was
supposed to count.
I wonder, in other words, if the tawdry carnival atmosphere of the
"World Wide Wait" has (finally) started to give way to a new
appreciation for content over climate; for well-chosen words over
distracting images.
If only it is so!
Bill
--
Bill Horne
Moderator
|
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 00:38:49 -0700
From: Duncan <Duncan@xrtc.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones
Message-ID: <1432193929.1558928.274521145.4843D2CF@webmail.messagingengine.com>
On Wed, May 20, 2015, at 04:23, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> And I can't believe my area is the only area with a number that goes
> straight to police dispatch for these kinds of things.
In my area, the non-emergency number goes into the same queue as
911, but presumably with a lower priority.
|
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 06:18:41 -0400
From: Michael Muderick <michael@muderick.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Intercoms using 500 sets
Message-ID: <CAGhQzTqT+HssYj7Z=65wef-4wErcqvL5upSsAKrc643+L5j0qA@mail.gmail.com>
Bill, I've often run the ringers on 500 sets on AC mains. No problem. Not
sure if I have a circuit to run on 2 wires. But if you are using JK, quad,
you've got an extra pair for signalling. You might be able to come up with
something if the phones have a-lead control in the hook switch. Mike
Sandman may have an alternate solution.
regards,
mm
--
Michael Muderick
michael@muderick.com
610-449-6970
[Attachment of type text/html removed.]
|
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 11:52:25 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Intercoms using 500 sets
Message-ID: <20150521155225.GA28254@telecom.csail.mit.edu>
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 06:18:41AM -0400, Michael Muderick wrote:
> Mike Sandman may have an alternate solution.
Actually, another long-time contributor has offered to help:
Carl Navarro came up with a different option which is both
easier to use and available off-the-shelf (Thanks, Carl!).
Bill
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
|
| Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 19:38:19 -0400 EDT
From: bill@horneQRM.net (Bill Horne)
To: The Telecom Digest <telecomdigestsubmissions@remove-this.telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Does anyone remember the IMTS System?
Here's a trip down memory lane: does anyone remember the IMTS
systems that preceded cellular? I find myself getting nostalgic
for the "good old days" of the mobile world, and I wonder if
any of that equipment has been converted to other uses.
Bill
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
|
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 educational service offered to
the Internet by Bill Horne.
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 © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself. Thank you!
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.
