30 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
The Telecom Digest for August 9, 2012
====== 30 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 Bill Horne 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 that person, or email address
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be sold or given away without the explicit written consent of the owner of that address. 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: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 06:17:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "John C. Fowler" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T sets deadline for 2G sunset in 4 years Message-ID: <1344431822.157.YahooMailClassic@web163902.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Replying to Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, which was a reply to <email@example.com>. tlvp wrote: > So: what service(s) exactly is at&t classifying as "2G" here? The information came from AT&T's 10-Q filing with the SEC, which states: Also as part of our ongoing efforts to improve our network performance and help address the need for additional spectrum capacity, we intend to re- deploy spectrum currently used for basic 2G services to support more advanced mobile Internet services on our 3G and 4G networks. We will manage this process consistent with previous network upgrades and will transition customers on a market-by-market basis from our Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) and Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution (EDGE) networks (referred to as 2G networks) to our more advanced 3G and 4G networks. We expect to fully discontinue service on our 2G networks by approximately January 1, 2017. Throughout this multi-year upgrade process, we will work proactively with our customers to manage the process of moving to 3G and 4G devices, which will help minimize customer churn. As of June 30, 2012, approximately 12 percent of our postpaid customers were using 2G handsets. We do not expect this transition to have a material impact on our operating results, but will continue to evaluate the financial impact of transitioning customers from 2G devices to 3G or 4G devices. They additionally define 4G as HSPA+ or LTE. I guess everything in the middle is 3G. John C. Fowler, firstname.lastname@example.org
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 08:57:25 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: Fastest texters in America face off in New York Message-ID: <email@example.com> Fastest texters in America face off in New York August 8, 2012 NEW YORK-The nation's fastest texters are facing off in the annual LG U.S. National Texting Competition. Eleven contestants from all over the country are coming to Times Square for the annual competition Wednesday afternoon. The winner gets $50,000. Competitors range from 16 to 24 years old. Last year's champion Austin Weirschke (Wear-Ski) is coming back to defend his title. ... http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2012/08/08/fastest_texters_in_america_face_off_in_new_york/
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2012 13:36:48 -0400 From: "Michael D. Sullivan" <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T sets deadline for 2G sunset in 4 years Message-ID: <CA+K-Lfan9fQSQ5vwq+kF3VBSGj6PqvTpv=BDtCvbCNgujxK82Q@mail.gmail.com> tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net>, in Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org>, asks: > So: what service(s) exactly is at&t classifying as "2G" here? > > GSM voice? > CSD data? > GPRS data? > EDGE data? > UMTA data? > HSDPA data? > HSDPA+ data? > other? 2G includes GSM, GPRS, and EDGE. I have no idea what CSD is. UMTA should be UMTS, which is 3G. HS(D)PA is 3G. HS(D)PA is characterized as 3G or 4G by some. Bill Horne <bill@horne.VALID-IF-THIS-IS-ELIDED.net>, in Message-ID: <502131BF.email@example.com> asked: > More details, please: what is "2G", and how is it different than 3G or > <n>G? Why would AT&T want to retire an architecture that represents > billions in sunk costs which are probably not yet recovered? 2G is the initial 1990s generation of digital voice, before data was a viable product. 3G is the faster, higher-bandwidth array of products that are predominantly data-oriented. In the case of GSM-based carriers, UMTS, also known as WCDMA, was the first real 3G technology (EDGE was sometimes described as 3G, but it is now considered 2.5G at best). The more advanced technologies enable more efficient transmissions, allowing more conversations per MHz, so to speak. Also, it is very unlikely that the "sunk costs" of 2G were not recovered long ago. > BTW, does this mean that AMPS is finally going away, that AT&T will > phase out TDMA, or that some other branch of the "voice" cellular tree > is to be pruned at the same time? AMPS has been gone (at least from the major carriers) for years. AT&T phased out the US-developed TDMA when it switched to GSM (which is also a TDMA access technology) in the 1990s. The phaseout of 2G (i.e., GSM) will end AT&T's use of TDMA. -- Michael D. Sullivan Bethesda, MD
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:22:12 -0500 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (PV) To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T sets deadline for 2G sunset in 4 years Message-ID: <O96dnQe4i93JM7_NnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@supernews.com> Bill Horne <bill@horne.VALID-IF-THIS-IS-ELIDED.net> writes: >More details, please: what is "2G", and how is it different than 3G or ><n>G? Why would AT&T want to retire an architecture that represents >billions in sunk costs which are probably not yet recovered? If you had a first generation iphone, you know what 2g is like. It's not a technology like a protocol, it's the hardware and backhaul that supports it. Where did you get the idea that costs weren't recovered? Considering how popular the iphone was even when it ran on that sucky network, I don't think there's any amortizing to worry about. Nobody wants that service now, even as a backup, because it gives an internet experience that is almost worse than useless. >BTW, does this mean that AMPS is finally going away, that AT&T will >phase out TDMA, or that some other branch of the "voice" cellular tree >is to be pruned at the same time? Eh? Those are both retired technologies and have been for quite some time. I don't think anyone even owns the spectrum to run AMPS/TDMA on analog anymore. Dead like the dodo. * -- * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews.
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:23:33 -0500 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (PV) To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: AT&T sets deadline for 2G sunset in 4 years Message-ID: <O96dnQa4i904M7_NnZ2dnUVZ_tednZ2d@supernews.com> "John Levine" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: >Because they want to make everyone get a new phone so they can try to >upsell them to a more expensive plan than the grandfathered 2G plan >they have now. There is no such thing as a "2G plan". And if you've held out and still have the original unlimited plan, you can still keep it. I've had the same plan since I got the first iphone, and I pay the same amount as I always have, and am still unlimited. >>BTW, does this mean that AMPS is finally going away, that AT&T will >>phase out TDMA > >They're long gone, shut down in 2008. Yeah, thought so. * -- * PV Something like badgers, something like lizards, and something like corkscrews.
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2012 10:07:35 -0400 From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Robocall claims to be from MCI Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Per Ron: >Over the last week or so, we've gotten several calls on our landline in >which a recording tells us to call MCI immediately to verify information >about our line or account or something. The number to call is >1-888-221-3190. Did a reverse lookup on the #; appears to be a >telemarketer. Anyone know about this? How to get it to stop? Over the past year robocalls to our landline have become so numerous that we have resorted to prefixing our answering machine's message with the SAT tones and not picking up the phone until we hear the voice of somebody we know. IMHO it's going to continue to get worse until the providers will offer some technological solution - but I would not hold my breath until that day comes. -- Pete Cresswell
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.
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
bill at horne dot net
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) 2012 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.