Plain Old Telephone Service Could Get A Lot More Exciting
from the fighting-back dept
I’ve bought into the belief that the “landline” telephone system (or the “plain old telephone system” – POTS) is in a process of steady decline – to be replaced by a variety of other technologies such as voice over IP and various cellular systems. POTS is simply too expensive without allowing you to do very much, and the old-school telephone companies seemed blind to the competition. Things may be changing somewhat, though. Researchers have been working out ways to add some intelligence to the old landline, allowing it to function much more like the overhyped (but underutilized) VoIP systems we’ve been promised for years. Of course, you still have to wonder if the phone companies will adopt it, but if done correctly, they could hold back the VoIP tide for some time. In the long run, though, the decentralized nature of VoIP makes it pretty difficult to beat by a centralized system.
Comments on “Plain Old Telephone Service Could Get A Lot More Exciting”
VoIP spam paradise?
What if spammers can make voice phone calls to random numbers all over the world with forged packets? Centralized systems do offer a crucial advantage of accountability, and even then we have enough problems with telemarketers. Spammers of the future could have telephones constantly ringing, forcing telephones to auto-pickup and make people hear porn ads.
And what about V44?
What if V44 modems (which offer up to twice the speed of 56k) become really popular, as people don’t have to go through the trouble of extra lines? Many DSL connections are no faster anyway.
Pointless
The landline guys are making the “Stereo AM radio” mistake. They assume that if they add some of the features that the competition has, they’ll be okay.
A basic clue for them: my PCS cell phone works both at home and most everyplace that I go. If I had a landline phone, it would only work at home. Explain, please, why I should get a landline phone if I have a cell phone?
There are two misfeatures of landline phones that I’m very glad to be rid of: paying for long distance service, and phone solicitors. Also, I’m glad not to have to deal with GTE/Verizon for the landline and with the exasperating and often infuriating long distance companies. I really don’t care about buddy lists and that stuff… at home (where my landline would be), I have a (gasp) computer.
But even fixing those things wouldn’t tempt me to get a landline. The reason that I don’t have a landline phone any more is simple: I don’t need it because I have a cell phone.
Re: Pointless
>Explain, please, why I should get a landline phone if I have a cell phone?
Better reception and cheaper international phone calls?
>phone solicitors.
What if solicitors call your cell phone?
> Also, I’m glad not to have to deal with >GTE/Verizon for the landline and with the >exasperating and often infuriating long >distance companies.
What if GTE/Verizon has an infuriating process of cancelling cell phone subscriptions, or of charging vast sums for cell phone calls when the buttons got accidentally pressed inside one’s pocket and made a phone call?
Re: Re: Pointless
My cell gives me better reception at home than I can get from GTE (excuse me, Verizon). I dunno about international rates; I never call internationally.
In the US, that’s against Federal law. In 3 years of having a cell phone, I’ve only gotten one solicitation call, and as soon as I explained they’d reached a cell phone, they were gone.
You obviously haven’t ever had to deal with the, um, joys of GTE’s billing and service departments. I’ve had no trouble at all with my cell phone suppliers. GTE, however, was a seemingly endless source of grief in the six years I had to deal with them.
A Tampa-area newspaper said of GTE “they think they’re Ma Bell, but they’re only Ma Kettle.” Or something like that.
My fault for compounding the GTE grief by using MCI for my long distance. A more infuriating combination would be hard to imagine. Not that I’d want to imagine anything worse.