33 Years of the Digest ... founded August 21, 1981
Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All Rights Reserved.

The Telecom Digest for May 20, 2015
Volume 34 : Issue 89 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
A Russian Smartphone Has to Overcome Rivals and Jokes About Its Origin (Monty Solomon)
Re: Cellular Monopoly areas (John Levine)
Re: Cellular Monopoly areas (Retired)
Re: Cellular Monopoly areas (Bob Goudreau)
Re: Cellular Monopoly areas (tlvp)
Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones (Elmo P. Shagnasty)
Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones (HAncock4)
Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones (David Clayton)
Some People Do More Than Text While Driving (Monty Solomon)
Re: Have your children stopped checking their voicemail? (tlvp)
Intercoms using 500 sets (Bill Horne)

It does not follow, because our difficulties are stupendous, because there are some souls timorous enough to doubt the validity and effectiveness of our ideals and our system, that we must turn to a state controlled or state directed social or economic system in order to cure our troubles.
Herbert Hoover

See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.

Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 09:03:22 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: A Russian Smartphone Has to Overcome Rivals and Jokes About Its Origin Message-ID: <B069CC70-49A1-4F62-BFD6-5233A6B07965@roscom.com> Few people looking to buy a state-of-the-art smartphone would even think about a Russian model, but the makers of the YotaPhone aspire to change that. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/17/world/europe/a-russian-smartphone-has-to-overcome-rivals-and-jokes-about-origin.html -or- http://goo.gl/SbRM77
Date: 18 May 2015 21:26:20 -0000 From: "John Levine" <johnl@iecc.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Cellular Monopoly areas Message-ID: <20150518212620.57116.qmail@ary.lan> >Everyone I talked to about it said the same thing: "Only >Verizon works around here". > >This raises several questions, first among them being >"Where are the competitors"? In rural areas? Hahahaha. Once you get very far away from big cities and big roads, they're not interested. Helpful tip: Android Tracfones run on Verizon's network. Even if you don't want all the smartphone stuff, they're perfectly competent phones, and they give you triple minutes and triple texts. R's, John
Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 17:55:16 -0400 From: Retired <Retired@home.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Cellular Monopoly areas Message-ID: <zsmdnb2lveNYwsfInZ2dnUU7-cWdnZ2d@giganews.com> On 5/18/15 4:34 PM, Bill Horne wrote: > I just finished a working vacation in North Carolina, and > I was very surprised to find out that certain areas > of the state have, for practical purposes, only one > cellular provider. > > [snip] > > Everyone I talked to about it said the same thing: "Only > Verizon works around here". According to http://opensignal.com/coverage-maps/US/Charlotte/ ... even Verizon has no service around Burnsville if you get very far from the highway.
Date: 19 May 2015 10:05:50 -0000 From: Bob Goudreau <BobGoudreau@nc.rr.com> To: The Telecom Digest <majordomo@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Re: Cellular Monopoly areas > I just finished a working vacation in North Carolina, and I was > very surprised to find out that certain areas of the state have, > for practical purposes, only one cellular provider. > > I spent a lot of time in the area around Burnsville, looking for > a home my wife and I can retire in, and although my Tracphone > would work more-or-less "OK" inside the city limits, anytime > I travelled more than a couple of miles outside them, I was > out-of-service. > > Everyone I talked to about it said the same thing: "Only Verizon works around here". I've run into similar problems when visiting relatives in Rumford, Maine. Like Burnsville, Rumford is a small town only a few miles from the Appalachian Trail. Sparsely populated areas get fewer cell towers than more crowded places, and towers in mountainous regions tend to provide less coverage than their peers in flatter places (due to all those mountains getting in the way). So none of this is especially surprising. Bob Goudreau Cary, NC
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 00:57:06 -0400 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Cellular Monopoly areas Message-ID: <i17n3vwiw4x6$.vjyutd5g3d5v$.dlg@40tude.net> On 18 May 2015 20:34:44 -0000, Bill Horne wrote: > I just finished a working vacation in North Carolina, and > I was very surprised to find out that certain areas > of the state have, for practical purposes, only one > cellular provider. > > I spent a lot of time in the area around Burnsville, looking > for a home my wife and I can retire in, and although my > Tracphone would work more-or-less "OK" inside the city limits, > anytime I travelled more than a couple of miles outside them, > I was out-of-service. > > Everyone I talked to about it said the same thing: "Only > Verizon works around here". > > This raises several questions, first among them being > "Where are the competitors"? The area is growing, and > ISTM that there would be at least one alternative to > such a sole-source situation. > > Bill In my experience, you can never know who the active carriers anywhere are. This past weekend, for example, in the Fresh Meadows subsection of Queens, NY, in and just outside one particular Chinese restaurant, a friend was unable to raise a Verizon signal, while I found high T-Mobile signal strength. And last Fall, in the generalized Londonderry, VT, area, I found that a change of position of just a few hundred feet could move me from a spot with no Verizon coverage but plentiful T-Mobile service to one with no T-Mo service but strong Verizon coverage. Sprint? AT&T? No idea -- I carry no handsets activated to those carriers. HTH. Cheers, -- tlvp -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 07:43:36 -0400 From: "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones Message-ID: <elmop-FA1600.07433619052015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu> In article <54a98ce6-3308-433a-adbe-fb3c7c0646be@googlegroups.com>, HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: > The problem is that there > is no alternative number for citizens to call for low-priority police > assistance I think what you mean is "no national standard number similar to 911, but for low-priority police assistance". Here in town, the police dispatch phone number--which is what everyone used to call prior to 911--hasn't changed in, quite literally, decades and decades. And they happily take low priority calls. I've never called 911, but I call the cops on a regular basis--for debris on the freeway, or broken signal lights, or whatever. ***** Moderator's Note ***** I thought "311" was being implemented for that. Bill Horne Moderator
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 09:56:41 -0700 (PDT) From: HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones Message-ID: <3af50fac-e028-4c1e-9778-21e23b391cd5@googlegroups.com> On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 11:31:03 AM UTC-4, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: > HAncock4 wrote: > >> The problem is that there is no alternative number for citizens to >> call for low-priority police assistance > > I think what you mean is "no national standard number similar to > 911, but for low-priority police assistance". No, I meant that there is no alternative number. A few places have established 311, but most places do not have it. In my town, to contact the police, you either call 911 or their office number. The office is staffed only during regular business hours, not nights or weekends. In any event, the business office can't handle things like broken traffic lights, which our 911 center doesn't want to bothered with, even though a police response is needed*. > Here in town, the police dispatch phone number--which is what > everyone used to call prior to 911--hasn't changed in, quite > literally, decades and decades. And they happily take low priority > calls. Philadelphia attempted to use its old number for non emergency calls, but it never took root, and was discontinued. Indeed, lots of people never knew the old number, despite publicity; people simply dialed "Operator", and asked for police or fire. In many small towns, dispatching has been centralized and taken over by a larger entity, such as a county-wide unit. (A disadvantage is that the county dispatchers are unfamiliar with local geography. "Hello, I'm in Smithtown and there's a brush fire at the cemetary!" The county dispatcher will require an address, whereas the old dispatcher knew there was only one cemetary in Smithtown and exactly where it was. This is an actual example, by the way.) > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > I thought "311" was being implemented for that. While a number of cities have 311, many do not, and it isn't widespread in suburban areas. One challenge with that is that it becomes a central site for all kinds of municipal complaints far beyond police matters, such as broken swings at the playground or low water pressure. Initial reports have stated some centers are inadequately staffed, overwhelmed with calls, and city agencies slow to respond. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-1-1 If a street illumination light is burned out, it can wait several days to be repaired without being a safety hazard; that isn't a police matter. But if a traffic signal is out, accidents can occur at the intersection. Cops can't necessarily fix a broken traffic signal, but they can, and very often do, put up temporary stop signs so there is some safety. If the intersection is very busy, cops may direct traffic. Anyway, there needs to be a 24/7 reporting method for situations like broken traffic lights, even if 911 centers do not consider that a "true emergency".
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 08:22:58 +1000 From: David Clayton <dc33box-usenet2@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: FCC may kill 911 access for unregistered mobile phones Message-ID: <pan.2015.05.19.22.22.57.694946@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au> On Tue, 19 May 2015 07:43:36 -0400, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote: > In article <54a98ce6-3308-433a-adbe-fb3c7c0646be@googlegroups.com>, > HAncock4 <withheld@invalid.telecom-digest.org> wrote: > >> The problem is that there is no alternative number for citizens to >> call for low-priority police assistance [snip] > ***** Moderator's Note ***** > > I thought "311" was being implemented for that. Isn't the main issue that no matter what alternative number or technology are put in place, there are always a percentage of population so stupid that they will always misuse things like 911? -- 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: Tue, 19 May 2015 09:41:16 -0400 From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Some People Do More Than Text While Driving Message-ID: <D1079A83-ED00-454A-8AC8-4A7A85A7CA04@roscom.com> Some People Do More Than Text While Driving Texting while driving has company. Some people are also using social media services, taking selfies, and even making videos while they are behind the wheel. A survey released this morning shows that many motorists have expanded their behind-the-wheel activities beyond texting to include using Facebook, Snapchat and Twitter, taking selfies and even shooting videos. The survey was commissioned by AT&T, itself a phone company, but one that has invested heavily in discouraging distracted driving through its "It Can Wait" public service campaign. The telephone survey was conducted by Braun Research, which polled 2,067 people who own a smartphone and drive at least once a day. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/19/some-people-do-more-than-text-while-driving/
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 01:07:17 -0400 From: tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org. Subject: Re: Have your children stopped checking their voicemail? Message-ID: <107agoifcnbwa$.utv1goja8tx4$.dlg@40tude.net> On 18 May 2015 20:34:44 -0000, Duncan Smith wrote: > ... voicemail ... On my T-Mobile line, I can't > turn it off, or even set the forwarding delay to more than 20 seconds ... A T-Mo CSR (customer service rep, at 1-800-WEST-WYR) can turn off the Forward-to-Voicemail service for you -- all of it, or any of the four parts (on busy, on ring-no-answer, on call-reject, on handset-not-in-service). Or, can adjust the "number of rings" to wait before forwarding takes place, if you'd rather do that than disable it entirely. Just do check up on whether the desired action took effect -- sometimes a CSR thinks (s)he's done what you asked for, but hasn't quite made it :-) . Cheers, -- tlvp (whose T-Mo forward-to-VM has been off for years now :-) ) -- Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.
Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 20:12:19 UTC From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net> To: Telecom Digest <telecom@telecom-digest.org> Subject: Intercoms using 500 sets I'm still working on an old problem: I want to set up an intercom from my basement to the kitchen, and I want to know if anyone else has done that without buying a 20 Hertz ringing supply or a "PLAR" circuit. So, some questions: 1. Will Western Electric sets ring if I use 60 Hz ring voltage? 2. Is there an alternative buzzer circuit which can be used with only two wires? I've already got a length of "JK" (a.k.a. Quad) wire running down there, and I don't want to run more if I can avoid it. All suggestions welcome. Bill Horne (Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly) -- E. William Horne 617-803-0992 (Cell)

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 educational service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne.

The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
339-364-8487
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 © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.


Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself. Thank you!

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 (11 messages)

Return to Archives ** Older Issues