TELECOM Digest     Thu, 28 Jul 2005 01:48:00 EDT    Volume 24 : Issue 341

Inside This Issue:                             Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet Phones Call on Wi-Fi (Jeff Bertolucci)
    Verizon Looks Past the Wires (Mark Harrington)
    AT&T Customers Being Taken Over by AllTel (Donna Eakins)
    Analog Cell Phone Service - What About OnStar? (John L. Shelton)
    Regarding Local Government Offering Wireless ISP (John L. Shelton)
    VoIP Cozies up to Cell Phones (Ben Charny)
    Ohio Recognizes New Telecom Era (Matthew Hisrich)
    Re: Looking For Retailer of Office Telephone System (Paul)
    Re: Question About "Network Interface" Phone Jack (William Warren)
    Re: Residents Fight to Keep Analog Cell Phones (Lisa Hancock)
    Re: Last Laugh! Spammer, age 35, meets "Moscow Rules" (panoptes@iquest)
    Re: Last Laugh! Spammer, age 35, meets "Moscow Rules" (Paul Coxwell)
    Re: Last Laugh! Spammer, age 35, meets "Moscow Rules" (Steven Lichter)

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; other stuff of interest.  

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeff Bertolucci <jeff@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Internet Phones Call on Wi-Fi
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:17:00 -0500


We test two of the latest Wi-Fi VoIP phones to see how wireless
Internet calling works.

By Jeff Bertolucci, special to PC World

Internet phones are going wireless. Internet phone vendors have merged
wireless networking with voice over Internet Protocol phone service to
create the Wi-Fi VoIP phone. This promising-if somewhat rough around
the edges-technology brings wireless calling to Net phones.

A Wi-Fi VoIP phone is a handset that looks a lot like a cell phone,
only it sends and receives audio signals via a wireless network. It
works within Wi-Fi's transmission range, which isn't very far. In our
tests, Wi-Fi VoIP calls abruptly disconnected whenever we ventured 70
to 100 feet from our wireless router.

But, you say, you already have a cell phone. Why should you consider a
Wi-Fi VoIP phone? Well, for some callers, VoIP is a whole lot
cheaper. Let's say you're on the road and dread paying those
outrageous cell phone roaming charges. With your Wi-Fi VoIP phone, you
simply enter a free wireless hotspot and make a call. If your VoIP
calling plan provides unlimited minutes to the U.S. and Canada, your
call is essentially free. If you're calling internationally, you'll
pay low VoIP rates, often as little as 3 cents per minute to
Europe. And with VoIP, there are no roaming charges.

Wi-Fi VoIP handsets are already available from some VoIP providers,
including BroadVoice and Net2Phone, as well as from hardware retailers
such as ZyXel. Siemens will sell a Wi-Fi handset later this
year. Vonage, the biggest VoIP startup, plans to introduce a Wi-Fi
VoIP phone before the end of the year.

The handsets are not difficult to use: If you can use a cell phone,
you've got the skills necessary to work a Wi-Fi VoIP phone. To make a
call, you key in a number and press Send. Calls are routed onto the
public-switched phone network via your VoIP carrier. The handsets can
also accept incoming calls; the phone number is likely the same as
your home VoIP line.

You need to have an account with a VoIP provider, and you need to make
sure that your handset works with the company's service. In most
cases, the handset works as part of your existing account, and the
service is included in the monthly fee you already pay. If you don't
already have a VoIP account, you can sign up for service when you
purchase a handset.

Initially, Wi-Fi VoIP should appeal to people calling internationally,
and to travelers who want to avoid roaming fees.

"A lot of people who travel may not have robust minute plans, and
they'll find this very useful," says IDC research manager Will
Stofega. He used a Wi-Fi VoIP phone during a recent trip to
Montreal. "The savings were incredible," Stofega says.

Don't confuse a Wi-Fi VoIP handset with a cordless VoIP phone, such as
the Uniden UIP1868, a 5.8-GHz unit designed for Packet8
subscribers. (Uniden makes an identical model for Vonage and other
VoIP providers.) The UIP1868 includes a base station that plugs
directing into a broadband connection or router, and supports up to
ten cordless handsets. The difference is that a Wi-Fi VoIP phone works
anywhere there's a free wireless access point, whereas the cordless
handset works only near its base station.

We tested two Wi-Fi VoIP phones: the UT Starcom F1000, which we used
with BroadVoice's VoIP service, and the Net2Phone VoiceLine XJ200. (We
have previously reviewed Net2Phone's earlier model, the XJ100.)

Both are promising devices, but they're not ready for the mainstream.
Battery life is poor: The XJ200 kept conking out after 4 to 5 hours of
standby-yes, standby-time, during which we made maybe 10 to 15 minutes
of calls. The F1000 did much better, with about 33 hours of standby
time, but that pales in comparison to today's average cell phone,
which goes days between charges.

Another tech issue needs to be addressed: call handoffs from one
wireless access point to another. If you move from one hotspot to
another, your call gets dropped.

"You can't roam between access points," acknowledges Net2Phone
spokesperson Sarah Hofstetter.

Furthermore, Wi-Fi VoIP phones don't work in fee-based,
password-protected hotspots, such as a McDonald's or Starbucks that
offers wireless access. For a list of wireless hotspots worldwide
(free and fee), go to PCWorld.com's Hotspot Finder.

Setup may be tricky for Wi-Fi novices too. You'll need to know whether
your wireless LAN uses encryption, and if so, what kind (64-bit or
128-bit). In addition, you'll have to input your LAN's security code
into the phone, a task that allows the handset to run on your network.

At first glance, Net2Phone's slim Wi-Fi handset looks like your
average cell phone. At 5 inches long, it easily fits in a coat pocket
or handbag. Its 112-by-64-pixel LCD is backlit a cool shade of blue
and is easy to read. The phone includes all the features you'd
want-voice mail, caller ID, call forwarding, and call blocking-and its
$159 price is reasonable. Then again, if you want a combo camera
phone/MP3 player, look elsewhere.

Our main gripe is the XJ200's battery life, which at less than 5 hours
is way too short. We found ourselves recharging the phone daily; in
fact, we even reserved a spot on our strip outlet for the XJ200's AC
adapter. That said, the phone looks good, and its audio quality rivals
that of a comparably priced cell handset.

This handset, which we received from VoIP service provider BroadVoice,
costs $100 (after $40 rebate) and easily surpasses the XJ200 in
battery life, lasting 33 standby hours in our tests. It's slim like
the XJ200 (only three-quarters of an inch thick) and only 4 inches
long. It's downright petite: too petite, actually. We had to use the
tips of our fingernails to press the tiny number keys.

The F1000 also supports voice mail, caller ID, and other
essentials. Its screen controls are fairly intuitive, the
orange-backlit LCD was bright and easy to read, and audio quality was
as good as the XJ200's.

Our biggest complaint wasn't with the F1000, but with BroadVoice's
VoIP phone service. Audio quality was terrible whenever we downloaded
streaming video on our PC. Words were garbled and sentences were
clipped. By comparison, Net2Phone's quality stayed the same during
video streams.

Our advice: Save your money for the next generation of dual-mode
cell/Wi-Fi phones, which are 6 to 12 months away, according to
Net2Phone's Hofstetter.  These devices will provide the best of both
worlds: cell and Wi-FI VoIP access. We'll wait.

Copyright (c) 2005 PC World Communications, Inc.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, PC World Communications.

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Mark Harrington <newsday@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: Verizon Looks Past the Wires
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:19:09 -0500


BY MARK HARRINGTON STAFF WRITER

Faced with a continuing decline in its traditional landline business
while fielding explosive growth in wireless, Verizon Communications
Inc.  yesterday said it would accelerate spending this year on
wireless and broadband TV initiatives.

The news came as Verizon reported earnings climbed 18 percent to $2.11
billion on a 4.6 percent revenue increase to $18.57 billion. Most of
the earnings increase was tied to the sale of landline and directory
operations in Hawaii, and other onetime items. Without them, earnings
were flat at $1.8 billion.

Verizon said it added 1.9 million new wireless customers in the
quarter, a 25 percent increase and its best quarter to date in the
sector, but saw traditional landlines decline 3 million from the
prior-year quarter -- to 50.7 million from 53.7 million a year ago,
spokesman Robert Varettoni said.

While Verizon has seen increases in broadband DSL service, it
acknowledged that competition has impacted traditional landline
business, which has been on a years-long slide. One factor was the
acceleration of voice-over IP service, where Cablevision Systems
Inc. has seen explosive growth.

Cablevision saw subscribers to its Optimum Voice service jump from
around 71,000 lines in the first quarter of last year to more than
400,000 now. "Our voice-over IP is the most highly penetrated in the
country," Jim Maiella, a Cablevision spokesman, said yesterday. Around
1,000 new customers a day sign up, he said.

But analysts aren't convinced cable will vanquish phone companies
anytime soon.

Peter Rhamey, who tracks Verizon for BMO Nesbitt Burns, a
Toronto-based financial services company, allowed that Verizon was
losing some landline telephone business to companies like
Cablevision. But he said he expects that it will in large part be
offset by the easing of regulations that forced Verizon to offer cheap
line-lease agreements to rivals such as MCI and AT&T. (Verizon is in
the process of acquiring MCI.)

Analysts have long realized the "second wave of competition is coming
from cable companies," Rhamey said. But "I don't necessary see a huge
line loss from cable."

On a conference call with analysts yesterday, Verizon chief executive
Ivan Seidenberg said he expects the number of traditional wirelines to
continue to decline, but said Verizon was "seeing a steady turnaround
in revenue performance, as we ramp up our growth initiatives around
broadband, long distance and Enterprise Advance," its corporate data
initiative.

"Our challenge, of course, is to move fast enough to develop scale in
these growth businesses, to offset the decline in our traditional
business," he said.

Toward that end, Verizon said it would up its capital expenditures
this year by $650 million to $15.3 billion. It had previously said
2005 capital spending would increase only 10 percent.

Doreen Tobin, Verizon's chief financial officer, said the increase was
"primarily" tied to the wireless business, "the result of the very
strong growth at Verizon Wireless, and some increased spending related
to the FiOS deployment as we get ready to roll out video, and do the
planning and engineering work to prepare for our 2006 deployment."

Seidenberg said Verizon was "moving aggressively to build FiOS," the
company's fiber-based TV initiative. He said Verizon expects to
accelerate market share growth in broadband and corporate data markets
in the second half of the year.

Copyright 2005 Newsday Inc.

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, Newsday, Inc. 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Donna Eakins <daeakins@webbwireless.net>
Subject: AT&T Customers Being Taken Over By AllTel
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 13:40:45 -0500


I just recently found out my husband's cell phone which was AT&T here
in TX Collin County area was switched over to Alltel without
notification.

We received a $1100 phone bill. All calls including local was charged
for roaming at .99 a minute.  Do you have any contact info on who we
can contact about this?  We have tried calling the number on the bill
to no avail.  No one will discuss it. They will not transfer you to a
manager or someone higher up they state no one is available.

We have contacted Alltel; the account number is not valid with
Alltel. They show no records of my husband being an AllTel customer
and have stated the charges are excessive.

AT&T or Cingular is unwilling stating it is an Alltel problem.
 
If you have any contact info of someone we can contact would
appreciate it.  Otherwise we just will not pay the bill. It will go to
collections.

We would rather not hurt our credit. But if that is what it takes we
will.

This is a total nightmare.  Imagine last month's bill was from AT&T for
$49.00, the next month we receive a bill for $1100.00 from AllTel.
 
Thanks,

Donna Eakins


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you describe is a typical thing
since AT&T Wireless went out of business. Much of it went to Cingular
(for example, my AT&T Free to Go prepaid wound up with Cingular) but
I understand other accounts went wherever. I do not know what the
logic was behind that. Can AT&T tell you _why_ the account was sold
to Alltel, and _why_ no advance notice was given?  I know that
Cingular 'customer care' is now outsourced to India and _those people_
know absolutely nothing about anything. My (former) AT&T Wireless
(now Cingular Wireless) account was totally screwed up; The 'customer
care' people (now located in India) know nothing except how to ask for
your credit card number and how to say 'no refunds given'. India (my
generic name for 'customer care') even denied I could have any service
at all since 'Cingular has no service in area 620' (southeast Kansas).  
I told them my service was out of Wichita, KS area 316 and the dumbos
even told me 'when you get back to Wichita your phone will start
working again. 

Please make a note of this address:

               Cingular Wireless/AT&T Free2Go
               Attention: Management person
               Post Office Box 68056
               Anaheim Hills, CA 92807   

They have no phones there; no email nor fax, or so they claimed when
the India 'customer care' people refused to give me any number to
call. You may wish to write to that address also. I wrote a letter
to them around July 1 demanding the return of the $20 prepayment they
ripped off from me. July 18 I got an answer from them giving the 
usual 'no refunds on prepaid service' line. I wrote them back and
said maybe usually no refunds, but in this case _you will make a 
refund_ or you will get sued in Small Claims Court. The Montgomery
County courthouse is five blocks up the street from my home, and as
luck would have it, there is a local agent here in town I can give
the legal service to. So its no skin off my nose either way. Even
their agreement with me did not make any provision for _fraud_.  I
am waiting now for an answer to that second letter. That post office
box seems to go to something called 'Cingular Wireless/AT&T Free2Go'
correspondence unit. I'll put something here depending on what
response I get back. The first letter back from them was a boiler
plate response, not even signed with any name at all; that is why
my second letter was to 'Attention Management Person'.

In your case my suggestion would be _make copies of all paperwork
Alltel sent you (the invoice for $1100 I assume) showing whatever
account number was assigned to you -- the number Alltel now claims
they do not recognize as an account of theirs -- and ask what is the
meaning of the thing. Send it registered mail. Tell them to find
the proper department for your letter. Ask them if it is true your
cell phone account was sold to (or transferred to) Alltel, and if so
why was no notification given to customers?  I assume in Collin
County, Texas there is a _local cellular tower_ and you were paying
local rates (not roaming rates) prior to this fiasco. If so, then
you still should be paying local rates. Offer to send them a check
for whatever your usual bill should be. And _do not worry_ about the
very unlikely event your credit will be harmed any. Frankly put, that
just sounds like a collection bluff. Obviously, document all the 
paperwork and keep copies of it. If Alltel wishes to change the terms
of the contract mid-stream, you have a perfect right to get out of
any contract. Please stay in touch and let us know how this is 
resolved. You may wish to send copies of this file to the Alltel
corporate office also, which is in Little Rock, Arkansas I think.   PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:22:36 -0700
From: John L. Shelton <john@jshelton.com>
Subject: Analog Cell Phone Service - What About OnStar?


When OnStar (from GM) was announced some years back, it was said to
operate on the analog cell phone network. GM claims that since 2004,
they started using Digital/Analog radios.  So it seems there's a large
fleet of cars out there that will be crippled with the coming death of
analog cell phone service.


John
john@jshelton.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:19:38 -0700
From: John L. Shelton <john@jshelton.com>
Subject: Regarding Local Government Offering Wireless ISP


I sent the following letter to Newsweek magazine after they posted an
editorial in favor of letting local government offer wireless Internet
access :

In your 2005, July 18 issue, Steven Levy wrote "Pulling the Plug on 
Local Internet."

Mr. Levy suggests that it is right for cities to offer competitive
Internet services, perhaps because they can offer lower-cost options,
and don't "focus excessively on the affluent."  Yet at the same time,
cities are actively fighting the same telcos to prevent them from
offering television service.  (SBC, for example, is pushing state-wide
regulation to allow them to offer TV services, rather than having to
seek approval from each of thousands of towns.)

Government has no business making rules that it applies to others,
then "competing" in the same market. If a local government wants to
establish an independent competitive entity, it should bow out of
regulation. If it wants to regulate, then it shouldn't play.  We
wouldn't accept a football game where the referees were playing as one
of the teams.

Our cities will best be served by open competition in all areas --
phone, TV, Internet, and others. Let government protect us from fraud
and force. Don't let government play favorites or compete without
independent regulation.

John
john@jshelton.com


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although I do not entirely agree with
you, I can see the logic in what you are saying. (Here in the Digest
a couple days ago, I ran that article by Levy since it came through
on our RSS newswire feeds.)  The problem as I see it is that SBC has
for a long time tried to do the very same things they now complain 
about the municipalities doing; squelching the competition with  very
low prices and very unfair tactics. For instance, here in Independence,
Kansas they have been having a price war with our 'local' phone
company for more than a year now: to 'win back' customers allegedly
stolen from them by Prairie Stream Communications (our local telco,
SBC has been giving away their service (the entire package except for
DSL) for $2.95 per month. The _only_ way you can get DSL is by signing
up with SBC. They (SBC) have stalled repeatedly on things like local
number portability; they have been caught in lie after lie with things
like reduction in price on DSL, Lifeline rates, etc. And although they
answer with a live person _immediatly_ on a special phone number set
up to woo back customers who have left them, once they have you back,
you (on future calls) go right into the voicemail queue with all the
hassles of complicated and complex billing, etc. Although in theory
you are correct, I am pleased to see them squirm a little as they
begin (hopefully) to realize there is no law saying people _have_ to
use their 'services'; get along quite nicely without them and there
are lots of other alternatives.  PAT] 

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 20:16:50 PDT
From: Ben Charny <cnetnews@telecom-digest.org>
Subject: VoIP Cozies up to Cell Phones


Abstract of article by Ben Charny

Net telephony shook up traditional phone service, now it's on to cell
phone variants of VoIP for companies such as start-up Mint Telecom.

http://news.com.com/VoIP+cozies+up+to+cell+phones/2100-7352_3-5759701.html?tag=sas.email

Read all technology news from this week:
http://www.news.com/thisweeksheadlines/

Copyright 2004 CNET Networks, Inc. All rights reserved.
CNET Networks, Inc.
235 Second Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
U.S.A.

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 23:11:01 -0400
From: Matthew S. Hisrich  
Subject: Ohio Recognizes the New Telecom Era

 
Written By: Matthew S. Hisrich
Published In: IT&T News
Publication Date: August 1, 2005
Publisher: The Heartland Institute


State economies around the country are likely to improve thanks to
recent legislative action on telecom reform. Ohio, the largest state
to pass reforms so far this year, leads others that have transported
the government's view of the industry into the present.

The reform legislation takes a step toward bringing the Public
Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) up to speed with market realities
by following the lead of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC). Last year, the FCC overturned much of the regulatory structure
upon which state agencies such as PUCO rested. Recognizing that new
technologies and a vibrant marketplace have transformed the
telecommunications industry, the FCC sought to shift away from
heavy-handed regulatory oversight and price-setting.

In this new competitive environment, Ohio's legislators realized
PUCO's role of 'monopoly czar' is no longer necessary. By
transitioning into oversight of competitive forces already at work,
PUCO will more effectively deliver positive results for consumers and
the economy as a whole.

The legislation further encourages PUCO to recognize these advanced
communications as part of the competitive marketplace when considering
regulatory action. Up to now, agency officials focused solely on
wireline technology in crafting rules. That narrow focus essentially
ignored the many changes taking place around the regulators, including
cell phones, Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP), wireless Internet,
and the entry of cable and electric utilities into the
marketplace.

In response, state legislators across the country are introducing and
enacting a wave of legislation meant to document the need for
change. Alabama, Idaho, Iowa, North Dakota, Tennessee, and Utah all
signed telecom reform into law.

As in these other states, legislators in Ohio chose to adopt the FCC's
position. In a state suffering from declining investment in basic
infrastructure as a result of below-market price-setting, the need for
a reform was clear. The Ohio House voted 81-13 and the Senate voted
30-2 to adopt the bill.

The legislation encourages investment by ensuring that PUCO follows
federal law in its actions. Requirements or prices for network
elements, resale of telecom services and network interconnections, for
example, cannot exceed or be in any way inconsistent with the more
restrictive federal regulations. And, despite designs it once held to
expand its oversight into this arena, PUCO is now prohibited from
exercising jurisdiction over Internet-based telecommunications such as
VoIP.

While work remains to overhaul the structure of state regulatory
agencies, placing a 'cap' on their jurisdiction based on federal
standards is a necessary first step. Ohio, a state once known for
having a restrictive regulatory and price-setting environment that
undermined competition and innovation, can now begin fostering a
reputation for welcoming entrepreneurial investment.

Matthew S. Hisrich <a href=mailto:hisrich@buckeyeinstitute.org > is a
policy analyst with The Buckeye Institute for Public Policy
Solutions.

Copyright by THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE
19 South LaSalle Street - Suite 903
Chicago, IL 60603
phone 312/377-4000 * fax 312/377-5000
http://www.heartland.org

NOTE: For more telecom/internet/networking/computer news from the
daily media, check out our feature 'Telecom Digest Extra' each day at
http://telecom-digest.org/td-extra/more-news.html . Hundreds of new
articles daily.

*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This Internet discussion group is making it available without
profit to group members who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information in their efforts to advance the
understanding of literary, educational, political, and economic
issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes only. I
believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S.  Copyright Law. If you wish
to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use,' you must obtain permission from the copyright
owner, in this instance, The Heartland Institute. 

For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

------------------------------

From: Paul <paule-nospam@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Looking For Retailer of Office Telephone System
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 14:03:14 -0400
Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com


> Hi folks.  I'm looking for a price quote on an office telephone with a
> port for a pair of dual jack headsets that interface between the
> telephone handset and a computer.  I need to take audio from the
> computer in one earpeace and audio from the telephone in the other.
> I'm in Cincinnati and would like a supplier as local to that area as
> possible.

Take a look at www.hellodirect.com -- they have a good selection of
headset gizmos and office phones.

-- Paul


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And also check into Mike Sandman's
catalog at http://sandman.com which is also a good source for odd
parts and pieces relating to telephone stuff.  PAT]

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 14:28:38 -0400
From: William Warren <william_warren_nonoise@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Question About "Network Interface" Phone Jack


Tony P. wrote:

> In article <telecom24.338.4@telecom-digest.org>, 
> wylbur37nospam@yahoo.com says:

>> After living in the same place in New York City for years, I recently
>> moved to another place (also in New York City).  The room I moved to
>> has an existing phone jack but it looks different from the old
>> square-ish ones I'm accustomed to.  (The old ones consisted only of 4
>> terminals inside the case).  This new one is rather rectangular and
>> has a label on the outside that says:

>>  Network Interface
>>  *Caution
>>    Disconnect plug from this jack during installation and repair
>>    of wiring.
>>  *Testing
>>    Plug working phone directly into this jack. If phone operates,
>>    fault is in wiring. If phone does not operate, call repair
>>    service.

>> When I opened the case, I noticed that the red and green wires (the
>> only ones that will be actually used by the telephone itself) are also
>> connected to a little circuit board whose most conspicuous component
>> is a yellow cylinder-shaped object (about 3/4" long and about 3/8"
>> diameter) with the following markings ...

>>  250V
>>  TI
>>  0.47 MFD
>>  +/- 10%

>> * What is the purpose of this circuit board?
>> * Is it really necessary? (How come the old-fashioned jacks
>> didn't have this?)
>> * What if I were to disconnect it?

> The capacitor is probably part of an RF shield on the jack.[snip]

The capacitor is used to "terminate" the line with a value that
approximates one standard ringer, so that if someone calls in a
trouble report, the tester can check if (s)he "sees" the capacitor
with the NI jack disconnected. Depending on local practice, the
Central Office might be programmed to report a fault on any line that
it rings which doesn't show a ringer attached, so you should leave it
alone.

It doesn't hurt anything.

William

(Filter noise from my address for direct replies)

------------------------------

From: hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Subject: Re: Residents Fight to Keep Analog Cell Phones
Date: 27 Jul 2005 11:49:13 -0700


Chet Brokaw wrote:

> Johnny Smith has a new digital cell phone, but he relies on an older
> analog bag phone when he travels the wide open spaces in the western
> part of the state to line up cattle for sale at a local livestock
> auction.

I understand the older 'bag phones' can send out a much stronger
signal.  There are plenty of fringe reception areas even in
"developed" states all over the U.S.  If one looks closely at a
carrier's map, they'll find lots of places with the different shade to
indicate no or limited service.

Clearly there is a need for such higher powered phones.

There are also those of us who have plain vanilla cell phones and
call-plans who have no need or desire for fancy phones or services.
Yet we are being pressured to spend our money to upgrade to stuff we
don't want by forced obsolescence.

Years back GM got hammered by its "planned obsolescence" of
automobiles.  At least an automobile would physically wear out and had
a limited life.  Telephones, especially when not used often, don't
wear out.

> In rural areas where cellular towers are far apart, analog phones
> often work when digital models can't get a signal. With the Federal
> Communications Commission pushing the move to all-digital phone
> service across the country, Smith and others in rural areas are urging
> the agency to wait until more towers are built to improve service.

Why is the FCC pushing this?  Is it really good for the country or
actually good for the carriers to make more money selling replacement
phones and fancier services and plans?

> According to current timelines set up by the FCC, wireless companies
> can phase out analog service by 2008.

I get offers from my carrier to "upgrade" to digital.  They'll sell me
a crappy phone and double my monthly charge and give me LESS than I
have now!

> The National Emergency Number Association, whose aim is to implement a
> universal emergency telephone number system, opposes a blanket delay
> in the move to the new digital phones, said Rick Jones, director of
> operations issues for the organization. However, the group is also
> willing to consider requests for waivers by individual companies in
> areas where a delay might make sense, he said.

Who the heck are these people?

So my cell phone won't pinpoint me.  (Actually I kind of like that.)
But I'm pretty good with geography and know where I'm at.

[public replies please]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our local Cingular Wireless agency here
in Independence tells me that all they are allowed to sell now for 
use in the 620 area (that is, local service) are the newer GSM
phones. If a person _insists_ on having one of the older style phones
it has to be in the 316 Wichita area; 620 is now strictly GSM. She
told me I can continue to use my older Nokia 5165 phone (either the
Cingular Wireless one or the AT&T Free2Go phone 'for maybe another
year or two' until they are eventually phased out.  PAT]

------------------------------

From: panoptes@iquest.net
Subject: Re: Last Laugh! Spammer, age 35, meets "Moscow Rules"
Date: 27 Jul 2005 14:00:03 -0700


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes!! 'Clue' is the name of the game,
> either from Parker Brothers or Milton Bradley. A wonderful game which
> I still remember.  PAT]

It's from Parker Brothers, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc.

http://www.hasbro.com/clue/

(Parker Brothers is not to be confused with Milton Bradley, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc.)

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 22:05:57 +0100
From: Paul Coxwell <paulcoxwell@tiscali.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Last Laugh!  Spammer, age 35,  meets "Moscow Rules"


>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember the old parlor
>> game we used to play as kids? I think the name of the game was
>> 'Murder'

>"Clue", perhaps?  As in: 'The butler did it, with the ice-pick, in the
>parlor.

"Clue" was sold in Britain by Waddington's under the name "Cluedo."  I
used to have the game as a kid, and I think it's still available in
the stores.

The murdered owner was Dr. Black.  The suspects were Colonel Mustard,
Rev. Green, Professor Plum, Mrs. White, Miss Scarlett, and Mrs.
Peacock.  The potential murder weapons were a dagger, a candlestick, a
rope, a revolver, a length of lead piping, and a spanner (wrench).  I
know there were nine locations, including -- at least in the British
version -- a library, a study, a billiard room, and conservatory.

- Paul.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, that's the way I remember it
also. Dr. Black had quite an elegant mansion with a library, billiard
room and observatory. But the American version as I recall it had
a slew of servants working for Dr. Black, including Cook and Butler, 
all of whom apparently disliked the good doctor enough to kill him
sometimes in the version we played here. But we also had Professor
Plum, Reverend Green and the other characters you named.   PAT]

------------------------------

From: Steven Lichter <shlichter@diespammers.com>
Reply-To: Die@spammers.com
Organization: I Kill Spammers, Inc.  (c) 2005 A Rot in Hell Co.
Subject: Re: Last Laugh!  Spammer, age 35,  meets "Moscow Rules"
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 00:08:52 GMT


I guess someone finally took my signature seriously.

Robert Bonomi wrote:

> In article <telecom24.339.17@telecom-digest.org>, TELECOM Digest
> Editor introduced Danny Burstein  <dannyb@panix.com> message by
> noting:
 
>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone remember the old parlor
>> game we used to play as kids? I think the name of the game was
>> 'Murder' 

> "Clue", perhaps?  As in: 'The butler did it, with the ice-pick, in the
> parlor'

>> and it was about this wealthy, rich old geezer who had been
>> murdered in his home, which was a mansion-like place. Using cards and
>> dice, and moving tokens around on a board accordingly, we kids had to
>> use logic and the process of elimination to guess the three cards
>> hidden from view: (1) who murdered the old gentleman, (2) the way his
>> murder was committed, and (3) the room of the house it happened in. By
>> looking at your cards, the tokens on the board and thinking about
>> previous incorrect answers, we junior detectives had to announce to
>> the other players out loud, "I suggest that (victim) was murdered with
>> (weapon: gun, knife, candleobera or other blunt instrument) in the
>> (room: kitchen, parlor, library, den, bedroom, etc) by (criminal: the
>> butler, the cook, Colonel Mustard, Mrs. Green, others). The person who
>> made the right choices won of course, but a wrong choice got the
>> player eliminated. Today's 'Last Laugh' is brought to us by Danny
>> Burstein who tells us the true story of the victim (Vardan Kushnir)
>> who was murdered in his apartment, apparently with a blunt instrument,
>> but police have not been able to figure out _who_ the perpetrator was.
>> Personally I doubt they are looking very hard either. PAT]

>>         ===================================

>>     Russia's Biggest Spammer Brutally Murdered in Apartment

>> Created: 25.07.2005 13:14 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 14:24 MSK,

>> MosNews

>> Vardan Kushnir, notorious for sending spam to each and every citizen
>> of Russia who appeared to have an e-mail, was found dead in his Moscow
>> apartment on Sunday, Interfax reported Monday. He died after suffering
>> repeated blows to the head.

>> Kushnir, 35, headed the English learning centers the Center for American
>> English, the New York English Centre and the Centre for Spoken English,
>> all known to have aggressive Internet advertising policies in which
>> millions of e-mails were sent every day ...

>> 	http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/07/25/spammerdead.shtml

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Funeral arrangements have not been
>> announced; they are still pending. That, you see, is how spammers in
>> Russia are dealt with; a good, effecient dispatch of their rotten
>> souls if I do say so myself. A prompt cremation of his earthly remains
>> and all his spam with him should follow and assure he burns in Hell
>> forever in his special, reserved spot. PAT]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes!! 'Clue' is the name of the game,
> either from Parker Brothers or Milton Bradley. A wonderful game which
> I still remember.  PAT]


The only good spammer is a dead one!!  Have you hunted one down today?
(c) 2005  I Kill Spammers, Inc.  A Rot in Hell Co.

------------------------------


TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
networks such as Compuserve and America On Line, Yahoo Groups, and
other forums.  It is also gatewayed 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.

Contact information:    Patrick Townson/TELECOM Digest
                        Post Office Box 50
                        Independence, KS 67301
                        Phone: 620-402-0134
                        Fax 1: 775-255-9970
                        Fax 2: 530-309-7234
                        Fax 3: 208-692-5145         
                        Email: editor@telecom-digest.org

Subscribe:  telecom-subscribe@telecom-digest.org
Unsubscribe:telecom-unsubscribe@telecom-digest.org

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

Anonymous FTP: mirror.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/
  (or use our mirror site: ftp.epix.net/pub/telecom-archives)

RSS Syndication of TELECOM Digest: http://telecom-digest.org/rss.html
  For syndication examples see http://www.feedrollpro.com/syndicate.php?id=308
    and also http://feeds.feedburner.com/TelecomDigest

*************************************************************************
*   TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from                  *
*   Judith Oppenheimer, President of ICB Inc. and purveyor of accurate  *
*   800 & Dot Com News, Intelligence, Analysis, and Consulting.         *
*   http://ICBTollFree.com, http://1800TheExpert.com                    *
*   Views expressed herein should not be construed as representing      *
*   views of Judith Oppenheimer or ICB Inc.                             *
*************************************************************************

ICB Toll Free News.  Contact information is not sold, rented or leased.

One click a day feeds a person a meal.  Go to http://www.thehungersite.com

Copyright 2004 ICB, Inc. and TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.

              ************************

DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE JUST 65 CENTS ONE OR TWO INQUIRIES CHARGED TO
YOUR CREDIT CARD!  REAL TIME, UP TO DATE! SPONSORED BY TELECOM DIGEST
AND EASY411.COM   SIGN UP AT http://www.easy411.com/telecomdigest !

              ************************

Visit http://www.mstm.okstate.edu and take the next step in your
career with a Master of Science in Telecommunications Management
(MSTM) degree from Oklahoma State University (OSU). This 35
credit-hour interdisciplinary program is designed to give you the
skills necessary to manage telecommunications networks, including
data, video, and voice networks.

The MSTM degree draws on the expertise of the OSU's College
of Business Administration; the College of Arts and Sciences; and the
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology. The program has
state-of-the-art lab facilities on the Stillwater and Tulsa campus
offering hands-on learning to enhance the program curriculum.  Classes
are available in Stillwater, Tulsa, or through distance learning.

Please contact Jay Boyington for additional information at
405-744-9000, mstm-osu@okstate.edu, or visit the MSTM web site at
http://www.mstm.okstate.edu

              ************************

   ---------------------------------------------------------------

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 TELECOM Digest V24 #341
******************************