|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 108 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
size not a major consideration in wireline phone sets
====== 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, 19 Apr 2009 10:01:35 -0400
From: Will Roberts <oldbear@arctos.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: size not a major consideration in wireline phone sets
Message-ID: <0MKpCa-1LvXb01qat-000cnP@mrelay.perfora.net>
In Telecom Digest, at 21:34 EDT on 17 Apr 2009, Julian Thomas wrote:
>Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 21:34:25 -0400 (EDT)
>From: "Julian Thomas" <jt@jt-mj.net>
>To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
>Subject: Re: Cell phone recycling: delete, then dispose
>Message-ID: <300.20480100212ee949.104@jt-mj.net>
>
>On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 07:24:38 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>>In those days it was tech progress to "miniaturize" telephone
>>components small enough so they all fit into a single set. Prior to
>>the 300 set of 1938, telephones required a separate ringer box and
>>condenser/network. Indeed, I think in those days handset models cost
>>more than candlestick models. No one could've imagined that a land-
>>line phone (forget about mobile phones) could be as tiny as today's
>>cellphones.
>
>The WE 200 series dial sets (with a separate ringer box); either deskset
>had a small base and a cradle with a full off-hook actuator (candlestick
>were similar), as opposed to the 300 series, which were squarish with a
>cradle with two button actuators and integrated ringer.
For a very brief history and photos of U.S. rotary dial telephones, please
take a look at my web page at http://www.arctos.com/dial
I believe that the evolution of the dial telephone set was driven more by
the desire to reduce manufacturing, inventory, installation and maintenance
costs than by any desire for miniaturization per se. (The exception to this
was the "Princess" phone which was intentionally designed to have a small
footprint so that it could be marketed as a bedroom extension which would
fit on the typical small bedside nightstand table.)
Portability was never an issue until the advent of wireless technology
which allowed mobile telephony to be carried around rather than bolted to
an automobile. Its precursor was the hand-held "walkie talkie" of
World War II -- a remarkable device given the limitations of vacuum tube
technology and its requirement of sufficient battery power to heat a
filament and to provide plate voltages of 65 to 90 vdc.
"Briefcase phones," "bag phones," "brick phones" and other transitional
designs made from about 1985 to 1995 evolved remarkably quickly into
the pocket-size devices which we use and throw-away today.
Even Dick Tracy did not imagine a disposable "wrist radio." :)
Regards,
Will
------------------------------
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 (1 message)
******************************
|
or 