Received: by bu-cs.BU.EDU (5.58/4.7) id AA06153; Sun, 5 Feb 89 00:56:50 EST Message-Id: <8902050556.AA06153@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 89 0:30:48 EST From: The Moderator Reply-To: TELECOM@bu-cs.BU.EDU Subject: TELECOM Digest V9 #48 To: TELECOM@bu-cs.bu.edu TELECOM Digest Sun, 5 Feb 89 0:30:48 EST Volume 9 : Issue 48 Today's Topics: numbers in use but not recognized yet modems over cellular connections the "$11 yuppie plan" 1199 in connecticut curious timeout on 0+ 1+Area Code Ringback as intercom Starlink Re: More Thoughts on Starlink Large coins and cheap calls Re: USA-Direct [Moderator's Note: I call this issue 'cleaning out the mbox' because I have deliberatly gone through the mailque and selected *lots* of short items which had been waiting for processing. In doing so, I've cut the TELECOM Digest mail backlog down and given you a very wide range of subject matter in this issue. For next: A little later today you will receive a special mailing from me. It will not be under the TELECOM Digest banner for reasons which will be apparent when you recieve it. PT] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 10:36:13 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: numbers in use but not recognized yet A reader previously wrote of being in a new area code (508 in Massachusetts) and learning that some people in distant areas could not yet call 508 area. This apparently also happens with prefixes. Once in Maryland before 0+number went away, I attempted to dial 0-850-xxxx and it got rejected; 850 was a rather new prefix in the Baltimore-Washington Int'l airport area. And someone else in Maryland could not call 202-994 prefix (long-distance, to DC). (I.e. both calls required help from a human operator.) Was there a similar experience with people on N0X/N1X prefixes? (I.e. some people in distant areas had calls to such prefixes rejected by their local equipment?) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 13:12:59 EST From: jsol@bu-it.BU.EDU To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: modems over cellular connections I would advise against using modems on Cellular phones. The "unpredictable brief drops in audio" are the cells switching off (which can sometimess happen when you are stationary). There was alot of push in the early days about cellular computer technology, but right now it is alot of wind. If you do want to try the modem, make damn sure you can return it if it doesn't work. --jsol ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 13:14:11 EST From: jsol@bu-it.BU.EDU To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: the "$11 yuppie plan" That doesn't count usage. My "yuppie plan" costs $0.00/month, and $0.65/minute for usage. Needless to say if you use it alot it can get very expensive. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 13:18:10 EST From: jsol@bu-it.BU.EDU To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: 1199 in connecticut On Step-by-Step exchanges in CT, 119X was the ringback (you got different rings depending on which digit you dialed last. 1192 gave you continuous ring, for example). On ESS and crossbar it was something else, I believe 99X-XXXX where XXXX was the last 4 digits of your number, and the X in 99X was an arbitrary check digit on a per prefix basis. My best friend had the best of me for years. He lived in Bethany which was crossbar, and all I had was step. Then we moved to Hamden and I got my very first ESS line (it was a #1ESS). CT has a package named Totalphone, which is speed-calling 8, call waiting, call forwarding, and 3-way calling. I won the feature-game with that one (smile). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 13:21:19 EST From: jsol@bu-it.BU.EDU To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: curious If people are so sure that 1+number is going away, can they explain how Step switches will handle that? I believe that the 355A Step machines in Central and Western Mass aren't being replaced anytime soon, so this is a real question. We just had an area code split here 617/508, so I'll bet 1+number will go away in 617 but that's because all the switches are electronic (or crossbar). I believe the 355A step machines will have equal access too, but that won't require modification to the machine, only an interface to the toll switch. --jsol [Moderator's Note: Jon Solomon, a/k/a jsol, was formerly Moderator of [TELECOM Digest], and the founder of this journal in 1981.] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 12:46:02 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: timeout on 0+ On direct-dial, you apparently NEVER depend on timeout. But on some cases of 0+, you do: 0 by itself will time out and call your local operator. I noticed 0+number in use, according to the phone book, in 213 area after introduction of N0X/N1X prefixes and before the 213/818 split; only the timeout distinguished between, say, 0-413-xxxx and 0-413-xxx-xxxx (this was just about my very first note to Telecom!), and this is still in use, right? The 2nd area to get N0X/N1X prefixes was New York City (then all in 212), and in late 1980 I noticed that 0+ within 212 now required 0+212+number (area code 212 was printed on the instruction card for this). The explanation received via Telecom was that some of the New York equipment couldn't handle the 0-xxx-xxxx stuff via timeout, so the area code requirement was put in for areacode-wide uniformity. ------------------------------ Date: 3 Feb 89 10:52:17 PST (Friday) From: Swenson.PA@Xerox.COM Subject: 1+Area Code To: TELECOM@bu-cs.bu.edu On a local radio news report about the upcomming addition of 1+area code to ac 415, the reoprter said that this leaves area code 408 (southern part of San Francisco pennsula +) the only area in the US that does NOT require 1+area code. Is this correct? Bob Swenson Swenson.PA@Xerox.com ------------------------------ From: cantor%evetpu.DEC@decwrl.dec.com (David A. Cantor) Date: 3 Feb 89 23:43 To: telecom_digest%evetpu.DEC@decwrl.dec.com Subject: Ringback as intercom In Vol 9 Iss 38, James Harvey (jbh@mibte.uucp), referring to ringback codes, writes: >...More frequently, people use the ringback numbers as an intercom, (call >ringback, wait till somebody upstairs picks up extension, talk). In the bad old days (mid-50s, Everett, Mass.), I recall the phone book had a paragraph which said to call the business office for instructions for calling another party sharing your party line. I had a friend who had a party line, and did just that. Guess what code they gave him. Ringback (911-wait for tone-6-hang up). (That's how I learned about the ringback code and how I got interested in this sort of thing.) Years later, when moving from one part of Arlington to another, I had "duplicate service" (same phone number at two addresses simultaneously) for a few days. I talked the phone company representative into giving me the code I could dial so that I could speak to a roommate at the other residence. They gave me the ringback code and asked me not to use it except for the purpose of calling someone at the other residence. Dave C. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Feb 89 21:51:16 HST From: kahuna!newton@csvax.caltech.edu (Mike Newton) To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Subject: Starlink Starlink claims one small advantage over PCP for a small population -- PCP refused to allow calls from Hawaii, while Starlink claims they do. Starlink, however, did not serve the city i was interested in, so Reach Out America is still the cheapest for me. - mike (newton@csvax.caltech.edu CSO Observatory, Hilo Hawaii 808 935 1909) ------------------------------ To: uunet!comp-dcom-telecom@uunet.UU.NET From: van-bc!sl@uunet.UU.NET (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) Subject: Re: More Thoughts on Starlink Date: 3 Feb 89 18:01:01 GMT In article telecom@bu-cs.BU.EDU (TELECOM Moderator) writes: >I'd like to hear the experiences of some of you who subscribe to Starlink >after a month or so of using it. They also claim their 'throughput' is >much faster than Telenet, meaning you would probably spend less time on line >each day. Who knows, maybe you could get done in 12 hours what formerly took >30 hours on PCP? I havn't used either in the past few years, but Tymnet used to have a reputation for pumping data a bit more efficently than Telenet. As I remember Tyment is *not* an X.25 network internally. Does anyone out there have some uptodate info? -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532 ------------------------------ From: Mark Brader To: telecom@bu-cs.bu.edu Date: Sat, 4 Feb 89 02:53:45 EST Subject: Large coins and cheap calls > * - In Germany, if you use a large coin to make a cheap call, there's a > button on the phone you can push, put in the actual amount the call cost, > and get your large coin back. Only in Germany do they expect people to > understand that. The newer coin phones in Britain, which in the cities means most of them, also have this feature. However its use in this way is not documented; you have to figure it out. Is this a case of expecting people to understand it, or expecting people not to understand it? (The button is marked "follow-on call" and the documentation says it is to let you make an additional call or calls on the same deposit of money. However, it is also noted that when you hang up you get back the largest amount of your unused money that can be made from the coins you deposited, and that you can add additional coins at any time. Hence, the button can be used in the manner described for the German phones.) Of course, this is never a problem in either the US or Canada, because in neither country do the phones take coins above 25 cents ... not even now that we have a circulating $1 coin in Canada. (Well, no phones that I've ever seen, anyway.) Mark Brader "'You wanted it to WORK? That costs EXTRA!' SoftQuad Inc., Toronto is probably the second-place security hole utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com after simple carelessness." -- John Woods ------------------------------ To: comp-dcom-telecom@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU From: decvax!decwrl!apple!denwa!jimmy@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: USA-Direct Date: 4 Feb 89 01:11:54 GMT In article , gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > Based on the above information, I would say that the 'no extra > charge' is just marketing hype. They set the rates and then > they say there is no *EXTRA* charge. I think what they mean is that you _know_ what the rate will be. You don't have to worry about any local surcharges. > I also fail to see how using USADIRECT saves time or hassle. If you > have to go to a special phone, it almost certainly does neither. I have found it to be wonderful, especially when I did not know my AT&T International Calling Card number. If you call collect or person-to-person, you can leave a easily leave a message. Foreign operators may know phone lingo, but try conveying a message. You can use your regular Calling Card number. And, as previously mentioned, you can check the quality of connection before proceeding (this was often necessary when calling from Australia). And then, sometimes it's just nice to speak fluent English to someone (we're not talking Australia here). -- Jim G. E-Mail: or ^^^^^^ V-Mail: (213) 551-7702 Fax: 478-3060 The-Real-Me: 824-5454 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest *********************