32 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Previous Issue (Only one)
The Telecom Digest for May 6, 2014
====== 32 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: Mon, 05 May 2014 02:23:59 -0700 From: Thad Floryan <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: OOma? Message-ID: <536758AF.firstname.lastname@example.org> On 5/3/2014 12:38 AM, Randall Webmail wrote: > From: Thad Floryan <email@example.com> > >> Two months ago in the ba.internet group one person wrote he recently >> subscribed to Ooma's service and it was a no-brainer and the quality >> is excellent and service is free with only a monthly cost of $3.91 >> (in Silicon Valley) for federal and state taxes and E911 service. > > How is this preferable to the ~$50 Obihai box, which for a > one-time payment gives permanent pseudo-POTS service? FWIW, no one has ever mentioned Obihai in a VoIP thread in the ba.internet thread before, so your question about it is the first I've heard of Obihai. I'm curious how Obihai can avoid charging federal and state fees and the E911 service tax; if they're not charging those fees that may come and bite them. "permanent pseudo-POTS service" is a gamble with any vendor. I've been tracking Ooma for over 7 years noting they were founded in 2004. At this point they have exceeded the normal startup belly-up time and it looks like they'll be around for the long-term given the reviews and articles I've read about Ooma and the other comments in the ba.internet group. Obihai seems to have been founded in 2009 per their whois creation date and there's meagre info about the company and its management on their website vs. a lot of info on Ooma's website about Ooma. I suppose one could compare product data sheets of both companies to determine which company's products better suits one's needs. I get the impression Obihai is concentrating on doing business mostly with companies noting Ooma has also recently entered that arena. Obihai's document downloads are here to learn more about their products and service: http://www.obihai.com/docs-downloads and http://www.obihai.com/product-primer and I'm getting the impression they are ATA devices requiring a contract with a VoIP provider such as Callcentric (as mentioned on Obihai's brochures) but there's something called OBiTALK for which I don't have time to peruse. Since you seem to have some interest in Obihai (customer or employee?) why don't you write a article for comp.dcom.telecom about Obihai? We really baven't had much discussion about VoIP for quite awhile and I'm getting weary reading articles from the New York Times and the WSJ. :-) I also note Obihai is touting Google Voice interoperability but that Google service is ending May 15 which is just 10 days away. Obihai also doesn't appear to have DECT6 capability which is yet another feature of Ooma especially its new DECT6 wearable device for instant E911 calls suitable for the elderly, invalids, and folks who live by themselves. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Enhanced_Cordless_Telecommunications FWIW, I'm extremely pleased with the Ooma service for my home and how well it and its features function as a true plug'n'play device which was a pleasure to setup after all the years I've spent for clients/employers setting up PBX and Asterisk-based VoIP services. I neglected to mention previously that Ooma's service also provides a dial tone which is nice for people transitioning from landlines. As I wrote previously, I'm happy to answer any questions about Ooma's Telo product and service for home use, I still have all my notes and books for Asterisk and can answer "some" questions about it, too, but note the last time I worked with Asterisk was in 2008. Thad
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:43:19 -0700 (PDT) From: HAncock4 <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: Teletypes and computers--50th anniversary of BASIC language Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Friday, May 2, 2014 8:24:15 AM UTC-4, Bill Horne wrote: > >> A terminal room photo: > >> > >> https://www.flickr.com/photos/dartmouthflickr/13566198805/in/ > >> > > set-72157643275728555/ > >> (I believe the units pictured are the heavy duty model 35; along with > >> the built-in dial-up modem.) > I think those are Model 33 TWX machines. In the picture series, there is one 33 unit. While the overall lines of the two models are similar, the 35 had a higher profile, and the paper cover was a dome; while the 33 had a flat cover. https://www.flickr.com/photos/dartmouthflickr/13566263093/in/photostream/ Here is the writeup for the model 35: http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/archives/technical/western-union-tech-review/19-2/p062.htm (The Dartmouth units appear not to have any paper tape read/punch capability).
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 02:44:01 -0700 From: Thad Floryan <email@example.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: First spam message was sent in 1864 over telegraph wires Message-ID: <53675D61.email@example.com> One of my favorite drinks is Snapple Lemon Tea. Under the bottecap of every Snapple beverage is a trivia item, and one that I haven't seen before today contained this tidbit: Real Fact #950 The first spam message was transmitted over telegraph wires in 1864. Googling found this web page: http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/the-web/20/392/2172 which corroborates that tidbit and the date as 1-June-1864 with this scanned typewritten message: TO THE EDITOR OF THE TIMES Sir, -- On my arrival home late yesterday evening a "telegram," by "London District Telegraph," addressed in full to me, was put in my hands. It was as follows: -- "Messrs. Gabriel, dentists, 27, Harley-street, Cavendish-square. Until October Messrs. Gabriel's professional attendance at 27, Harley-street, will be 10 till 5." I have never had any dealings with Messrs. Gabriel, and beg to ask by what right do they disturb me by a telegram which is evidently simply the medium of advertisement? A word from you would, I feel sure, put a stop to this intolerable nuisance. I enclose the telegram, and am, Your faithful servant, Upper Grosvenor-street, May 30. M. P. As stated in a sidebar at the above URL: This is one of the earliest known unsolicited electronic messages. But telegrams were costly to send, which limited spam. Bingo! Charge for email and spam will disappear. Yeah, sure. :-) Thad
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 14:46:34 -0500 From: Jim Haynes <firstname.lastname@example.org> To: email@example.com. Subject: Re: First spam message was sent in 1864 over telegraph wires Message-ID: <slrnlmfqkq.2hi.jhaynes@Henry.localdomain> There were also scams involving telegraphy. A couple I read about: A boy got some telegraph company stationery and a reasonable facsimile of a telegraph delivery boy's uniform. He prepared a fake telegram, put into an envelope, and took it to a company saying it was a collect telegram. When they paid, he gave them the fake and left. An executive of a U.S. company was traveling in Europe. The scammers sent a message to his company, ostensibly from him, telling them to accept a shipment of chemicals and pay $500 C.O.D. The company paid, and the chemicals turned out to be bottles of colored water.
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 18:51:02 -0400 From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: firstname.lastname@example.org. Subject: D-Link DPH-50U Message-ID: <email@example.com> I've been given a D-Link DPH-50U, which appears to be a way to connect a "500" set to Skype. I'd like to know if this is worth having, and what experience readers have had with "Skype Out" service, which is required to make calls from the phone connected to the D-Link DPH-50U. I'd also like to know if the unit can be used for other services. TIA. Bill -- Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
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) 2014 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.