|
|
Message Digest
Volume 28 : Issue 114 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
Re: size a major consideration in mobile phone sets
Re: size a major consideration in mobile phone sets
Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Re: Can I ring my own landline phone?
Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
====== 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: 25 Apr 2009 11:09:57 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: size a major consideration in mobile phone sets
Message-ID: <20090425110957.69122.qmail@simone.iecc.com>
>All my phone are CDMA; I one tried one of those antennas that you stick
>on the rear or side window with a small one on the inside that are
>supposed to help the signal improve, but I did not see any difference.
I'm not surprised, it's hard to see how a passive antenna could provide
much gain.
Wilson makes car amp kits with an external and internal antenna and an
amplifier in between. I haven't tried them, but they probably work.
See http://www.wilsonelectronics.com/Products.php?Type=A
R's,
John
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 08:21:09 -0700
From: Steven Lichter <diespammers@ikillspammers.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: size a major consideration in mobile phone sets
Message-ID: <7MFIl.3121$fD.2825@flpi145.ffdc.sbc.com>
John Levine wrote:
>> All my phone are CDMA; I one tried one of those antennas that you stick
>> on the rear or side window with a small one on the inside that are
>> supposed to help the signal improve, but I did not see any difference.
>
> I'm not surprised, it's hard to see how a passive antenna could provide
> much gain.
>
> Wilson makes car amp kits with an external and internal antenna and an
> amplifier in between. I haven't tried them, but they probably work.
>
> See http://www.wilsonelectronics.com/Products.php?Type=A
>
> R's,
> John
I looked at the site and yes it appears these system would work. [The
prices seem to be very high.]
--
The Only Good Spammer is a Dead one!! Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2009 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot In Hell Co.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 06:17:48 -0700
From: AES <siegman@stanford.edu>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Message-ID: <siegman-BEA9CC.06171825042009@news.stanford.edu>
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> 800 numbers are important for business because it's a great cost-saver
> to have the caller's ANI info sent to you with every call: it allows
> sophisticated call-center routing based on stored data about the
> individual caller and the area where the call is originating.
>
> Consider the advantages of knowing the following _before_ you decide
> to answer the call:
>
> * Whether the caller has recently made a purchase
> * Average household income for the caller's area
> * The average profit per purchase from callers in that area
>
> ... and anything else the database has on [that] particular number,
> [thus] allowing real-time routing decisions that shunt . . . likely
> high-dollar buyers to the "A Team" sales staff.
Let me offer a parody on this -- a parody that, on all too many
occasions in my personal experience, really seems to represent
real life:
Consider the advantages of knowing the following _before_
we decide to answer this call:
* Whether we recently sold this caller a product or service
of ours that we now know damn well is a real loser
* Whether this caller has shown a strong tendency in past
dealings with us to keep following up and demanding
satisfaction on lemons like this
* What it will cost us to make good and deliver what we
promised this customer
If so, routing decision is obvious -- it's "phone tree hell" for
this customer, now and forever.
***** Moderator's Note *****
That's the point I was making, albeit with more subtlety and class. ;-)
But seriously, folks: nothing exists in a vacuum. When 800 lines were
first introduced, consumers liked them because they prevented worries
about long-distance bills. However, since it's a "called party pays"
system, the recipient gets the ANI info; over time, systems have grown
up around that data which make call-center operations so much more
efficient that the cost of an 800 call is a marginal item to any firm
which does business over the phone.
Yes, it's true that someone who just bought a product is likely to be
calling for help, so an automated response can dramatically lessen the
dreaded "After Sale Support" item in a manager's "Actuals" report.
Commercial firms aren't willing to adopt the techies' "RTFM" response,
but they do support the attitude that users should be chained to rocks
and thrown into a vat of boiling instruction manuals when they call up
looking for help on finding a three-prong adapter for their electrical
outlet.
Yes, the system can be "abused", although those in the business would
not choose to use that word. If there are n calltakers currently
available for assignment, and n+1 calls ringing, then a business must
make a cold-hearted, calculated binary decision about which of the
calls merits attention from a human: time which must be paid for, no
matter how much revenue the call does or does not generate.
I invite responses, pro or con, from those in the call-center-support
business.
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:11:11 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Message-ID: <pan.2009.04.26.00.11.07.829512@myrealbox.com>
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:50:34 -0400, AES wrote:
>> ***** Moderator's Note *****
.......
> Yes, the system can be "abused", although those in the business would not
> choose to use that word. If there are n calltakers currently available for
> assignment, and n+1 calls ringing, then a business must make a
> cold-hearted, calculated binary decision about which of the calls merits
> attention from a human: time which must be paid for, no matter how much
> revenue the call does or does not generate.
>
> I invite responses, pro or con, from those in the call-center-support
> business.
I *used* to be in the call-center system support business, and there are
many tools that can be used to essentially "tune" the call center to be
able to meet an anticipated demand with a set answering time.
As you said, it is a calculated decision to have the incoming calls wait a
certain period before answer, and basically the shorter you want to make
that time the more it is going to cost you in all sorts of resources.
If a business has a steady demand then it is a relatively simple task that
only needs minimal ongoing monitoring to ensure that you are still meeting
your criteria over time (and not wasting resources by exceeding that
criteria). If the business can have peaks of demand (emergency
services, places like ticket agencies, airlines etc) then it becomes far
more tricky to ensure that you keep standards acceptable while not wasting
too much money. Get it wrong in either direction and the consequences can
be significant.
--
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: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:21:24 -0400
From: Carl Navarro <cnavarro@wcnet.org>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Message-ID: <dq56v49og19a7vlgb56r659mhtkinghhat@4ax.com>
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:52:09 -0400 (EDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>I'm sorry you're having trouble. But there are several things that I
>don't understand, perhaps you or other readers can explain how things
>work these days and we can all learn together.
>
>1) How do you know there merely isn't a breakdown with your service,
>as opposed to an intentional disconnection of service? You said you
>had no notification; so maybe it's a mechanical difficulty? Maybe a
>wire was cut inside your building?
Wow, I think I've stepped back 30 years when we used to have to read
the WATS meters in the central office :-)
Toll free service is totally different than the concept of a dedicated
line that you're describing. A toll-free number is translated today
and can be delivered in a couple of different ways. First, and
easiest for us "smaller guys" is a RING TO number. My 800 number
rings to my main number. I don't get ANI, I get CID. If it's
blocked, I get "Out of Area" or "Unknown" or "Private", the same as if
they dialed my number directly. My service isn't expensive and I
could shop around, but I pay $2 per month for the 800 number and 4.25
cents per minute for the calls. My bill is seldom over $8.
Larger companies, or certain customers can get ANI delivery. A huge
software/hardware seller, an airline, someone with T-1 service and the
aforementioned dedicated lines, can get ANI service. Like 911, it's
delivered no matter what the status of your CID is, but it costs more
than my budget allows.
>2) Isn't repair service open 24/7? I presume your 800 number is for a
>business and as such, don't they have personnel on duty off hours?
>That is to say, if a car hits a pole and knocks out my phone service
>at 6 pm on a Friday night, am I and my neighbors out of luck until at
>least Monday morning when their offices reopen?
It depends on how your Toll Free number was disconnected and who has
control. We do business with a CLEC that quits on Friday at 5 and
comes back in on Monday at 9! Needless to say, we don't port 800
numbers to them.
>3) Just out of curiosity, why was this "one of your fears"? Did you
>have other troubles with your service?
>
>4) With 800 services, aren't there normally two providers involved--
>the local telephone company which supplies the loop to the Central
>Office, and the long distance company that actually handles the call?
>For 800 service, does one need a conventional local phone line plus a
>toll carrier?
Yep. Mine is that way.
>
>5) Presuming you are a business, it's been two weeks since 4/10. How
>did you ultimately find out the line wasn't working? Is the line
>physically dead--no incoming or outgoing calls of any sort, or does
>any of it partially work?
If I"m not lazy, I try to remember to test my 800 number weekly. I
open the bill and look at the traffic once a month. I learned the
hard way.
>
>> Anyone know the procedure for demanding that our number be returned to
>> us? We have had this number for 15+ years.
>
>6) Our 800 numbers portable from one toll carrier to another? Is that
>physically and legally possible?
Assuming there's not a billing dispute, you can force the number back
into your possession. A certain company will drag their feet, but you
still can get the number via this method.
>While we're on the subject of 800 numbers, are they still important
>for business? So many local subscribers today have unlimited long
>distance in their land line or cell phone, or their toll service is so
>cheap that it doesn't matter as it did years ago. Usually businesses
>advertise both a regular number along with their 800 number.
It's absolutely important. I don't have long holding times, but I
still want my customers to call me and I want to make it as easy as
possible to call me instead of my competitor. If you can't make long
distance calls on your line because you haven't PICC's a carrier, or
you could call somebody for the price of a local call, sometimes free,
what would you choose? My main phone number sits in a town of about
50K main stations, but the greater metro area is about 500K. Yeah,
I'll take door #2 :-)
Carl
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 14:37:13 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Message-ID: <MPG.245d2265a278cfd89899ef@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <dq56v49og19a7vlgb56r659mhtkinghhat@4ax.com>,
cnavarro@wcnet.org says...
>
> On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:52:09 -0400 (EDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>
> >I'm sorry you're having trouble. But there are several things that I
> >don't understand, perhaps you or other readers can explain how things
> >work these days and we can all learn together.
> >
> >1) How do you know there merely isn't a breakdown with your service,
> >as opposed to an intentional disconnection of service? You said you
> >had no notification; so maybe it's a mechanical difficulty? Maybe a
> >wire was cut inside your building?
>
> Wow, I think I've stepped back 30 years when we used to have to read
> the WATS meters in the central office :-)
>
> Toll free service is totally different than the concept of a dedicated
> line that you're describing. A toll-free number is translated today
> and can be delivered in a couple of different ways. First, and
> easiest for us "smaller guys" is a RING TO number. My 800 number
> rings to my main number. I don't get ANI, I get CID. If it's
> blocked, I get "Out of Area" or "Unknown" or "Private", the same as if
> they dialed my number directly. My service isn't expensive and I
> could shop around, but I pay $2 per month for the 800 number and 4.25
> cents per minute for the calls. My bill is seldom over $8.
>
> Larger companies, or certain customers can get ANI delivery. A huge
> software/hardware seller, an airline, someone with T-1 service and the
> aforementioned dedicated lines, can get ANI service. Like 911, it's
> delivered no matter what the status of your CID is, but it costs more
> than my budget allows.
>
I used to have Network Plus for my 800 service. They delivered ANI data
as CLID data. They followed the proper thinking, since I was paying for
the call I sure as hell deserved to know who was calling.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 18:22:18 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Qwest disconnected our 800 number
Message-ID: <fHOIl.68120$_R4.5603@newsfe11.iad>
T wrote:
>
> I used to have Network Plus for my 800 service. They delivered ANI data
> as CLID data. They followed the proper thinking, since I was paying for
> the call I sure as hell deserved to know who was calling.
>
And, the calling party "sure as hell" deserves to know you will be
seeing his number, even though he has elected CLID blocking.
To be fair to both parties, a no-charge recording should announce to the
caller that, unless he hangs up immediately, the called party will
capture his number.
But, the "telcos" wouldn't like that, and I suspect neither would you.
***** Moderator's Note *****
There must be something in the air today: it seems that half the
contributors want to go to war with the other half!
Bill Horne
Temporary Moderator
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 14:34:40 -0400
From: T <kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: Can I ring my own landline phone?
Message-ID: <MPG.245d21cb825fdde29899ee@reader.motzarella.org>
In article <MPG.245c60c9253c5f809899ec@reader.motzarella.org>,
kd1s.nospam@cox.nospam.net says...
>
> In article <MPG.24592f37761d6a8998995a@news.verizon.net>,
> first.last@verizon.net says...
> >
> > In article <MpqdnfX74Yj8FXPUnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@earthlink.com>, red-nospam-
> > 99@mindspring.com says...
> >
> > > One famous kind of test number belongs to NYNEX, the regional Bell
> > > telephone company operating in the northeast U.S.A.. In New York at
> > > least, there are "9901" numbers, or local numbers of the form xxx.9901,
> > > which result in a recording which identifies the exchange represented
> > > by the first three digits. The 9901 numbers may not necessarily exist
> > > for all combinations of first three local number (central office code)
> > > digits.
> > >
> > > All these tests and services vary with each phone company; they are
> > > not usually found in the phone book, needless to say.
> >
> > In the old New England Telephone days, I used to dial 9816 for a
> > ringback. Not sure if the "6" could be any digit or not..
> >
> > --Gene
>
> Yes it used to be 981+last 4 digits of your telephone number in RI.
Forgot to add, 980 would do tone pad test and quiet line.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 01:12:02 GMT
From: tlvp <PmUiRsGcE.TtHlEvSpE@att.net>
To: redacted@invalid.telecom.csail.mit.edu
Subject: Re: AT&T doubling 3G capacity
Message-ID: <op.usyyybnywqrt3j@acer250.gateway.2wire.net>
On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:17:54 -0400, <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Apr 20, 5:48 pm, Ergyn Sadiku <ergy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tweaks to the HSPA network will bring 3G capacity up to 7.2 Mb/s even
>> before AT&T implements next-gen wireless technologies.
>
> What is "3G" and "4G"?
Pretty much marketing-speak for technologies beyond GSM/GPRS.
>> AT&T is increasing the downlink capacity on its high-speed packet
>> access (HSPA) from 3.6 megabits per second to 7.2 Mb/s through
>> software upgrades at the base station
>
> I presume this HSPA is some sort of data communication. But what is
> being "downlinked", and from what to what and what does that higher
> speed mean in terms of service?
HSPA is shorthand for HSDPA (High Speed Download/Data Packet Access)
and/or HSUPA (High Speed Upload/Universal Packet Access) -- your choice
as to what the D and the U really mean (I've seen both). Data, of course.
To/from your data handset (WAP or web browser on your cell phone, or
your cellular data modem (Sierra Wireless, for example)).
> Will any of this improve the coarse quality of today's voice
> transmissions over cell phones? Cell phone conversations are not the
> easiest to make; if the speaker on either end is not careful to speak
> clearly and directly into the mouthpiece, the words get "blurred" and
> hard to understand.
Voice? No. Data: SMS, HTML, WML, FTP, that sort of internet data stuff.
I had the pleasure of using one of Sierra Wireless's data modems -- a
PCMCIA-card called the AirCard 881 -- with a prepaid data SIM from
Orange (PL) -- in a Windows laptop while in Poland recently.
In Warsaw, it connected almost as fast as my basic DSL connection at home
in CT, through an HSDPA-enabled tower that provided (up to) 3.6 Mb/sec
speeds.
(The Air Card 881's inherent fastest data rate is claimed as 7.2 Mb/sec.)
In the countryside, only EDGE or UMTS speeds were available, but it still
was perceptibly faster than old-fashioned copper-loop dial-up, ~ 75 kb/sec.
> ***** Moderator's Note *****
>
> I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one confused by all the new
> acronyms.
>
> I'm curious if any of the readers can weigh in on the trade-offs
> between voice quality and bandwidth on cell phones.
Not exactly addressing the above, but: Voice and Data are incompatible
with each other when swapping one SIM between such a data modem, on the
one hand, and a GSM cellular handset. You've only got one SIM, after all,
and it can only reside in one unit's SIM slot at a time :-) , even if it
*is* good for voice calls in the (unlocked) cellular handset.
> Bill Horne
> Temporary Moderator
Cheers, -- tlvp
------------------------------
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 