|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 81 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Q.: Prepaid UK data SIMs
Re: Q.: Prepaid UK data SIMs
Re: History of AT&T Mail
Re: History of AT&T Mail
Re: History of AT&T Mail
Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Re: History of AT&T Mail
====== 27 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: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 08:42:11 GMT
From: tlvp <PmUiRsGcE.TtHlEvSpE@att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Q.: Prepaid UK data SIMs
Message-ID: <op.uq6qhah3wqrt3j@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
***************************************************************
* *
* Moderator's Note. Pay Attention. This is important. *
* *
* PLEASE PUT "[Telecom]" IN YOUR SUBJECT LINE! *
* *
***************************************************************
Expecting to be in the UK for a week in April, with a laptop and
Sierra Wireless Air Card, I welcome advice as to which UK wireless
carriers offer reasonably priced prepaid data SIMs that I can use with
the Air Card to achieve net- connectivity.
Name of carrier, marketing name of data SIM, and ball-park pricing
estimates would be helpful.
Thanks very much; and cheers, -- tlvp
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 2009 00:14:07 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Q.: Prepaid UK data SIMs
Message-ID: <20090323001407.25905.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
> Expecting to be in the UK for a week in April, with a laptop and
> Sierra Wireless Air Card, I welcome advice as to which UK wireless
> carriers offer reasonably priced prepaid data SIMs that I can use
> with the Air Card to achieve net- connectivity.
That's a tough question. The mobile broadband market in the UK is
quite competitive, but everyone issues you a USB dongle modem. I
haven't looked at the dongles so I don't know whether they have a
separate SIM, or whether the dongles do something different from what
the card modems do. There's a mobile phone store about every 12 feet
from one end of the UK to the other, so your best bet may be to drop
into one or two of them and see what they have to offer.
Rather than prepaid, you'll probably be better of with a 30 day plan,
a monthly contract which you can cancel on 30 days notice, so if
you're going to be there for a week, you call and cancel the day after
you sign up. The prices are pretty reasonable, Orange offers 3GB
monthly for £19.57, T-Mobile prepaid charges £2/day or £10/week or
£20/mo with a 3MB monthly cap, but that may require a £39 dongle.
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 13:25:48 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: History of AT&T Mail [TELECOM]
Message-ID: <MPG.24303ea884f7641989971@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <slrngsao95.3tq.haynes@localhost.localdomain>,
haynes@giganews.com says...
> Originally there was a hosts table that related site names to IP
> addresses. Around the same time that Arpanet was turning into the
> Internet there was the beginning of the Domain Name System with the
> now-familiar hierarchical dotted site names and the name servers
> that replaced the hosts table. These are related because the
> Arpanet was small enough for the hosts table to be maintained and
> centrally administered; but when the Internet was opened up to many
> more users it became impossible to maintain the name->address
> mapping as a table.
I still remember the days of the host file. It still exists in virtually
every Linux distro in /etc/hosts
***** Moderator's Note *****
All current Windows boxes have a HOSTS file as well, and any
entry in it will prevent a DNS lookup. For that reason, it's a
favorite target of spyware: every malware author seeks to poison the
HOSTS file so as to deny AV software access to updates, to redirect
search-engine requests, and to prevent access to sites that warn users
about malware.
However, the HOSTS file can be very useful in small environments, such
as SOHO LANs. If there's a local online phonebook, putting an entry
into the hosts files will speed up access by preventing DNS lookups
and avoiding NAT redirections.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:20:35 +0000 (UTC)
From: richgr@panix.com (Rich Greenberg)
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: History of AT&T Mail [TELECOM]
Message-ID: <gq66ij$a2n$1@reader1.panix.com>
>***** Our esteemed Moderator Noted *****
>
>All current Windows boxes have a HOSTS file as well, and any
>entry in it will prevent a DNS lookup. For that reason, it's a
>favorite target of spyware: every malware author seeks to poison the
>HOSTS file so as to deny AV software access to updates, to redirect
>search-engine requests, and to prevent access to sites that warn users
>about malware.
If you want to the ability to go to most malware/adware sites, you can
get a free replacement hosts file which directs them to 127.0.0.0 (i.e
Limbo). Go to:
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm
Read the instructions, download hosts.zip and install it replaceing the
almost empty one that comes with windows.
--
Rich Greenberg N Ft Myers, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 239 543 1353
Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself & my dogs only. VM'er since CP-67
Canines:Val, Red, Shasta & Casey (RIP), Red & Zero, Siberians Owner:Chinook-L
Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:04:05 GMT
From: tlvp <PmUiRsGcE.TtHlEvSpE@att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: History of AT&T Mail [TELECOM]
Message-ID: <op.uq75hvo9wqrt3j@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
After Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:16:55 -0400, in response to a
submission then by T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>, the
Temporary Moderator Bill Horne noted:
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> All current Windows boxes have a HOSTS file as well, and any
> entry in it will prevent a DNS lookup. For that reason, it's a
> favorite target of spyware: every malware author seeks to poison the
> HOSTS file so as to deny AV software access to updates, to redirect
> search-engine requests, and to prevent access to sites that warn users
> about malware.
>
> However, the HOSTS file can be very useful in small environments, such
> as SOHO LANs. If there's a local online phonebook, putting an entry
> into the hosts files will speed up access by preventing DNS lookups
> and avoiding NAT redirections.
>
> Bill Horne
> Temporary Moderator
The HOSTS file can be useful as well to deny malicious links access
to the domains they wish to connect to -- lines of the form
127.0.0.1 known.malware.site
will cause any link to "known.malware.site" to terminate in the
"local loopback" IP address 127.0.0.1, which means nothing happens.
Some anti-malware software populates the HOSTS file with literally
thousands of these "inoculations" against malware, very effectively,
I might add :-) .
Cheers, -- tlvp
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 12:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Message-ID: <5f205fc6-05d7-48e3-a285-813b729ff849@e18g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 22, 12:08 am, Jim Haynes <hay...@giganews.com> wrote:
> It's interesting that the founders of FedEx discovered and filled a market
> niche for overnight delivery of things that can't be faxed.
I wonder if FedEx "discovered" or more likely "rediscovered" an old
market.
There were always 'express' shipments, including of documents. In
writeups on the history of the Twentieth Century Limited, offices
would send material between NYC and Chicago overnight on that train.
Other items were shipped on other trains as well for expedited
handling. There was once a company, the Railway Express Agency, that
handled this sort of thing. When railroads faded in importance in the
late 1960s, so did this company.
Years ago even commuter trains had baggage cars that would deliver
parcels and newspapers to local stations. I used to see hospital
supplies shipped by commuter train in the late 1970s.
I don't know the time aspects, but the Post Office used to offer
premium air mail service, as well as special delivery. What that
meant in terms of time saved I don't know. Supposedly it was no
longer needed when all long distance first class mail was sent by air,
but I think in the old days the PO expedited shipments more than they
do now. That is, now I think they tend to batch mail into as large as
batch as possible and send it out once a day, whereas before small
shipments would be dispatched several times throughout the day. Years
ago there were multiple deliveries per day; and I believe "special
delivery" meant they sent someone out specially to deliver a specific
item (not quite offered now).
There was a survey done and they found that many office people were
using FedEx as a matter of routine even when it wasn't necessary, such
as to another floor in the same building, or when an extra day to
deliver would be fine.
FedEx handles more than just mere sheets of paper; many items are too
big or oversized to fax.
I wonder if FedEx's volume has declined on account of email
capabilities. On the flip side, it may be delivering more goods from
catalog sales to buyers who want their order right away.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:03:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Leatherock <wleathus@yahoo.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Message-ID: <365903.19597.qm@web112211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
In a message dated 3/21/2009 11:09:07 PM Central Daylight Time, "Jim Haynes" <haynes@giganews.com> writes:
> It's interesting that the founders of FedEx discovered and filled a
> market niche for overnight delivery of things that can't be faxed.
Someone earlier commented on Western Union's early fax rates, in
connection with my comment that for many things the cost was not a
factor, that cost is always a factor. In a technical sense he is
right, but in the context of the W.U. fax rates as posted they were
not prohibitive for many legal documents, plans, etc.
Your comment about FedEx is very relevant. The "founders" of
FedEx is well known...Fred Smith, who first proposed his plan for
FedEx in s college paper. His professor gave him a low grade, saying
is was an interesting concept but of no practical value because there
would never be sufficient demand, at the rates that would have to be
charged, to give it commercizl viabiliy.
When I was with Southwestern Bell in the early days of wide area
calling arrangements, I recall a small town near Austin that had been
pleading for Extended Area service with Austin. The local managers
finally got Area Headquarters to do a full enginnering study with
proposed rates. The local managers thought that the proposed rates
were so high as to be prohibitive, but when they presented them to the
town council, the councilmen and -women were not aghast and one of the
councilwomen said she'd do a personal survey of each subscriber. She
reported back before long that SWBT would lose two aubscribers at the
proposed rates but five other non-subscribers would take the service
at the proposed rates.
Our views of what would be a prohibitive cost often do not
reflect the actual views and needs of customers, as this example and
Fred Smith's clearly demonstrate.
Wes Leatherock
wleathus@yahoo.com
wesrock@aol.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Western Union public fax services, 1960
Message-ID: <e808c633-6657-46c8-aed9-3d19ca5f9db0@k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 22, 10:35 pm, Wes Leatherock <wleat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Someone earlier commented on Western Union's early fax rates, in
> connection with my comment that for many things the cost was not a
> factor, that cost is always a factor. In a technical sense he is
> right, but in the context of the W.U. fax rates as posted they were
> not prohibitive for many legal documents, plans, etc.
Admittedly there's much we don't know about the WU fax service, but it
does appear there was inadequate public demand to make it viable.
Remember, it wasn't only the rates, but the limited origin and
destination options, the need for pickup and delivery to a single
central site, and let's not forget alternative methods to get
materials to a distant place. I don't know how expensive an
individual fax machine was, but I can't help but suspect if WU offered
the service to many more cities nationwide it would've been more
succesful. Also, handling a larger document, while admittedly
expensive, would've been attractive for sending plans instead of
cutting them up.
Remember, WU's original telegram service was successful since they
used railroad stations as small town agents, and had branch offices in
larger cities.
In 1960 old industrial cities were still quite busy, and places like
Philadelphia, Boston, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Detroit, St. Louis
should've been part of the fax network. Newer sunbelt cities like
Houston and Atlanta at a minimum should've been included too.
> Your comment about FedEx is very relevant. The "founders" of
> FedEx is well known...Fred Smith, who first proposed his plan for
> FedEx in s college paper. His professor gave him a low grade, saying
> is was an interesting concept but of no practical value because there
> would never be sufficient demand, at the rates that would have to be
> charged, to give it commercizl viabiliy.
We don't know what was specifically proposed in the paper. Again,
FedEx was not a new idea, but a revival of a long existing service
provided by carriers. We also don't know what other issues were
involved in providing the service.
As to the price, remember that FedEx's price in constant dollars was
far below what WU charged but the service was far more convenient and
comprehensive.
> When I was with Southwestern Bell in the early days of wide area
> calling arrangements, I recall a small town near Austin that had been
> pleading for Extended Area service with Austin. The local managers
> finally got Area Headquarters to do a full enginnering study with
> proposed rates. The local managers thought that the proposed rates
> were so high as to be prohibitive, but when they presented them to the
> town council, the councilmen and -women were not aghast and one of the
> councilwomen said she'd do a personal survey of each subscriber. She
> reported back before long that SWBT would lose two aubscribers at the
> proposed rates but five other non-subscribers would take the service
> at the proposed rates.
Just out of curiosity, what were the rates, miles covered, savings in
tolls, and year? What were the specific reasons that local managers
thought the proposed rates were too high? Were marketing people (as
opposed to technical people) consulted?
> Our views of what would be a prohibitive cost often do not
> reflect the actual views and needs of customers, as this example and
> Fred Smith's clearly demonstrate.
I don't agree with that.
Every business has to weigh its costs against its revenues. A
proposed cost must be weighed against other costs saved or new
revenues received. A new way of doing business is compared against
existing methods to see what benefits are gained for what costs. Some
things may be desirable but just too expensive. It took _decades_
between the time Touch Tone service was first introduce and the time
almost all businesses found it cost-justified to have it; and part of
the reason was that the cost of it went down.
Likewise for consumers. As a college student with friends in many
different places, my long distance charges were high. I looked into
WATS and FX lines available at that time but they were simply too
expensive--I didn't make that many calls to justify their high costs,
although not worrying about the "meter running" would've been
wonderful. Even the home metro area package offered back then was too
expensive. That is, back then. Today, my home national "WATS" line
is dirt cheap and even though I don't make as many toll calls,
certainly justified.
In terms of telecom services, let's not forget how businesses used
them 40 years ago as compared to today with much cheaper rates. Back
then companies were _very_ sensitive about telecom prices. Only
authorized employees could make outside calls. Toll calls were
strictly limited and carefully logged. Payphones were available and
mandated for personal calls. Companies ordered only features that
they needed and no more; for example, key systems that didn't have
optional line lamps. When advanced-feature PBXs and key systems came
out many companies stuck with cheaper basic systems. As previously
mentioned, things like photocopier use was strictly regulated.
The earliest computers were too expensive except for a handful of
highly specialized users, most of whom had Defense Dept money to help
out. It took several technological improvements through the 1950s to
lower the cost of hardware enough to broaden interest beyond a mere
handful. Certainly bsuinesses and engineers wanted them for what they
could do, but they were just too expensive to justify. IBM's biggest
growth in the 1950s was not electronic computers, but old fashioned
punched card tabulating machines which did the job much more cheaply.
When IBM's computers could've been literally been counted on hands and
toes, IBM sold _thousands_ of punched card electronic calculating
system as a poor man's computer (the 604, also the CPC).
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:36:52 -0500
From: Jim Haynes <haynes@giganews.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: History of AT&T Mail [TELECOM]
Message-ID: <slrngsdmda.35a.haynes@localhost.localdomain>
On 2009-03-22, Tony Toews [MVP] <ttoews@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
>
> In about 1989 or so I knew email was going to be a good thing. I
> was then accessing Compuserve and local BBSs. I talked to Telus,
> the then provincial telco and was able to get an X.400 email address
> with which I experimented sending email to the Compuservice account
> and so forth.
A quote from St. Patrick's Almanac
"X.400 was designed by people who really didn't want to
communicate with each other in the first place."
Michael J. O'Connor
------------------------------
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 Patrick Townson. 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 currently being moderated by Bill Horne while
Pat Townson recovers from a stroke.
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) 2008 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 (9 messages)
******************************
|
or 