The Telecom Digest for July 24, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 199 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
====== 28 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: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:47:21 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Ars reviews the Motorola Droid X
Message-ID: <p0624080ac86e5ecac2cd@[10.5.11.42]>
Ars reviews the Motorola Droid X
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/07/ars-reviews-the-motorola-droid-x.ars
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 00:45:15 -0700
From: Thad Floryan <thad@thadlabs.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: California phone service apparently going down the tubes
Message-ID: <4C49488B.8030007@thadlabs.com>
I dropped landline service in 2002 because the cost (then) was
becoming ridiculous, thus I haven't been aware of how much worse
it's become.
In Dave Lazarus' column in today's Los Angeles Times:
<http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100723,0,1687635.column?page=2>
there's this tidbit at the end:
" [...]
" Speaking of reticence, no one at the California Public Utilities
" Commission got back to me when I wrote last week about a state
" Senate report on how consumers have gotten short shrift since the
" telephone market was deregulated in 2006.
"
" This week, the commission issued a response:
"
" http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RELEASE/120758.htm
"
" State regulators say they're miffed that Senate investigators
" don't think they're doing a good job of safeguarding consumers
" from runaway phone rates.
"
" "I am disappointed that the report focuses on only a few parts
" of the CPUC's efforts to protect and help consumers instead of
" recognizing all of our efforts, which are substantial and only
" getting better," declared Paul Clanon, executive director of
" the agency.
"
" He said the report "chooses to zero in on large rate increases
" for add-on services that not everyone buys, such as unlisted
" numbers," rather than citing lower costs for basic phone service,
" when the costs are adjusted for inflation.
"
" As I observed in my column,
"
" http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/16/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100716
"
" those large rate increases include AT&T jacking up its fee for
" an unlisted number by more than 600% and its charges for call
" waiting and call forwarding by about 86%.
"
" "Protecting the interests of consumers is what we do, and we do
" it well and thoughtfully," Clanon said. "We are constantly
" improving and refining our internal processes to give consumers
" the best care and assistance possible."
"
" All appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:22:13 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: California phone service apparently going down the tubes
Message-ID: <PJednXpPscY7LtTRnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com>
Thad Floryan wrote:
> I dropped landline service in 2002 because the cost (then) was
> becoming ridiculous, thus I haven't been aware of how much worse
> it's become.
>
> In Dave Lazarus' column in today's Los Angeles Times:
>
> <http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100723,0,1687635.column?page=2>
>
> there's this tidbit at the end:
>
> " [...]
> " Speaking of reticence, no one at the California Public Utilities
> " Commission got back to me when I wrote last week about a state
> " Senate report on how consumers have gotten short shrift since the
> " telephone market was deregulated in 2006.
> "
> " This week, the commission issued a response:
> "
> " http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/NEWS_RELEASE/120758.htm
> "
> " State regulators say they're miffed that Senate investigators
> " don't think they're doing a good job of safeguarding consumers
> " from runaway phone rates.
> "
> " "I am disappointed that the report focuses on only a few parts
> " of the CPUC's efforts to protect and help consumers instead of
> " recognizing all of our efforts, which are substantial and only
> " getting better," declared Paul Clanon, executive director of
> " the agency.
> "
> " He said the report "chooses to zero in on large rate increases
> " for add-on services that not everyone buys, such as unlisted
> " numbers," rather than citing lower costs for basic phone service,
> " when the costs are adjusted for inflation.
> "
> " As I observed in my column,
> "
> " http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/16/business/la-fi-lazarus-20100716
> "
> " those large rate increases include AT&T jacking up its fee for
> " an unlisted number by more than 600% and its charges for call
> " waiting and call forwarding by about 86%.
> "
> " "Protecting the interests of consumers is what we do, and we do
> " it well and thoughtfully," Clanon said. "We are constantly
> " improving and refining our internal processes to give consumers
> " the best care and assistance possible."
> "
> " All appearances to the contrary notwithstanding.
>
I believe that Clanon was trying to shine Mr. Lazurus on. My basic
exchange service for AT&T (SBC, Pacific Bell) increased by some 25% this
year. And, non-bundled Caller ID is now $9.95 per month. As we know,
wireless and VOIP providers throw in Caller ID for free.
Wireless and VOIP providers have true competition. Wireline carriers,
with limited, slight exceptions, are not competitive providers.
For shame on the California PUC.
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:07:42 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is Broadcast TV about to be killed?
Message-ID: <i2athc$3et$2@news.eternal-september.org>
Neal McLain <nmclain@annsgarden.com> wrote:
>The following letter was written by James Edwin Whedbee, M.Ed., owner of
>KZJW-LD (low-power digital), a broadcast station licensed to Bledsoe,
>Texas. KZJW-LD originates some programming, but for most if its
>broadcast day, it retransmits KENW, the PBS affiliate of Eastern New
>Mexico University.
>"Now, we get to the crux of my position as a TV Broadcaster and as a
>Democrat. The U.S. Constitution, and particularly the First Amendment of
>the same, says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment
>of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
>freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably
>to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
>grievances." The freedom of speech or press is intended to be encumbered
>by Congress with 'spectrum fees.' The Fifth Amendment of the U.S.
>Constitution says, [....]
This is a typical argument from someone who has no argument: Quote a
twisted version of the Constitution (the Constitution says nothing about any
right to operate a TV station), and then throw in stuff about being a veteran
and a contributor to the Democratic party.
Fact is that technology is changing. The people (aka the marketplace) have
spoken and they are moving quickly toward wireless Internet. In my circle of
friends (techies, Burning Man artists, board game players, web site
developers, circus performers, jazz musicians) very few people even own TVs.
But they are all connected to the Internet in one form or another, either with
handheld devices, laptops, or desktops or all three.
I'm getting a little tired of hearing old-school people whine about how
something should be preserved when the evidence is that the world is moving
away from their obsolete technology. And I'm no 20-something. I grew up in a
world where AM radio was king. But that was then and this is now.
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:01:03 +0000 (UTC)
From: wollman@bimajority.org (Garrett Wollman)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is Broadcast TV about to be killed?
Message-ID: <i2cebv$2kt2$1@grapevine.csail.mit.edu>
In article <i2athc$3et$2@news.eternal-september.org>,
David Kaye <sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Fact is that technology is changing. The people (aka the marketplace) have
>spoken and they are moving quickly toward wireless Internet. In my circle of
>friends (techies, Burning Man artists, board game players, web site
>developers, circus performers, jazz musicians) very few people even own TVs.
With respect, David, you have an extremely unusual circle of friends.
San Francisco is not representative of America.
-GAWollman
--
Garrett A. Wollman | What intellectual phenomenon can be older, or more oft
wollman@bimajority.org| repeated, than the story of a large research program
Opinions not shared by| that impaled itself upon a false central assumption
my employers. | accepted by all practitioners? - S.J. Gould, 1993
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 02:10:18 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is Broadcast TV about to be killed?
Message-ID: <i2atm8$3et$3@news.eternal-september.org>
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>My impression is that he feels the government made a committment to
>him, as a broadcast television station owner, then later broke that
>committment, causing him to suffer substantial economic loss.
And yet, the guy owns an LPTV which spends most of its broadcast day relaying
another station.
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:54:11 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Statement by Apple on White iPhone 4
Message-ID: <p0624081cc86f4f5ede40@[10.5.11.42]>
July 23, 2010
Statement by Apple on White iPhone 4
White models of Apple's new iPhone 4 have continued to be more
challenging to manufacture than we originally expected, and as a
result they will not be available until later this year. The
availability of the more popular iPhone 4 black models is not
affected.
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/07/23iphonestatement.html
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:51:21 +0000 (UTC)
From: David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <i2cdpp$i0n$1@reader1.panix.com>
"Mark J. Cuccia" <markjcuccia@yahoo.com> writes:
>On Tuesday 20 July 2010, the CRTC announced that Toronto ON will likely
>need an additional area code to its already existing 416/647 overlay,
>by or during 2015.
MD did one of the first overlays, and there was a hue & cry not
to be believed; you have thought the state's children were being
bundled up & sent to the Soylent Green plant.
But now, does anyone even raise their voice? My pet theory is
coincident with splits/overlays was the saturation of users with
cell phones. Most cell phone calls are dialed with 10D; and the
users seem to cope. That coping seems to translate back to
wireline, even if the 2500 pad lacks a SPEND key to push.
BTW, Toronto is showing one of the big advantages of overlays.
Repeated splits get harder and harder; but an additional
overlay is hardly noticeable.
--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
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 Bill Horne. 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 moderated by Bill Horne.
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) 2009 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 (8 messages)
|
| |
or 