There was an article in our local paper about analog & no longer being able
to call 911,
but the writer didn't include "cellular" in the title - so I'm sure lots of
folks panic'd...
Just wondering around the different carriers & geo locations -
what do you see happening with analog turndown,
and what's being told/done with those folks with analog cellphones just for
911 access ?
--
----------------------------------
"If everything seems to be going well,
you have obviously overlooked something." - Steven Wright
P.Schuman wrote:
> There was an article in our local paper about analog & no longer being able
> to call 911,
> but the writer didn't include "cellular" in the title - so I'm sure lots of
> folks panic'd...
>
> Just wondering around the different carriers & geo locations -
> what do you see happening with analog turndown,
> and what's being told/done with those folks with analog cellphones just for
> 911 access ?
It's off in urban areas in the SF Bay Area. It is true that those people
that had tri-mode CDMA/AMPS phones are going to be able to call 911 in
fewer places than they did before, especially in areas further from
roads (i.e. parks and out on the ocean). However GSM customers, and
digital only CDMA customers, have had poorer 911 coverage for years.
I was just up in Yosemite this past weekend. AMPS is still on. It comes
from Golden State Cellular. However I did notice a lot more CDMA
coverage than before. The cabin we stayed at in Yosemite West is pretty
far from the public road (41) and I had both CDMA and AMPS coverage.
There was no GSM coverage. Ditto for MidPines, on 140 into Yosemite. I
was able to get CDMA and AMPS, but no GSM at the restaurant we stopped at.
SMS wrote:
> I was just up in Yosemite this past weekend. AMPS is still on. It comes
> from Golden State Cellular. However I did notice a lot more CDMA
> coverage than before. The cabin we stayed at in Yosemite West is pretty
> far from the public road (41) and I had both CDMA and AMPS coverage.
> There was no GSM coverage. Ditto for MidPines, on 140 into Yosemite. I
> was able to get CDMA and AMPS, but no GSM at the restaurant we stopped at.
>
> Yosemite Valley has AMPS, CDMA, and GSM coverage.
How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
comes from?
Anthony Guzzi <dukeofurl@sonic.net> wrote in
news:47cddfea$0$36392$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
> SMS wrote:
>> I was just up in Yosemite this past weekend. AMPS is still on. It
>> comes from Golden State Cellular. However I did notice a lot more
>> CDMA coverage than before. The cabin we stayed at in Yosemite West is
>> pretty far from the public road (41) and I had both CDMA and AMPS
>> coverage. There was no GSM coverage. Ditto for MidPines, on 140 into
>> Yosemite. I was able to get CDMA and AMPS, but no GSM at the
>> restaurant we stopped at.
>>
>> Yosemite Valley has AMPS, CDMA, and GSM coverage.
>
>
> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
> comes from?
>
You have to read the SID numbers off the phone's hidden data pages.
Sometimes they'll let you see them buried into the PHONE STATUS pages.
On Motorola phones, you key in ##DEBUG rapidly and the G doesn't show.
This puts the phone in DEBUG mode, at least it used to before this last
batch. You toggled in and out of DEBUG mode with the center then left
function keys under the display rapidly, which let you go back to the
regular user pages. Your phone will certainly vary in how you open this
function up and read it.
Are you related to the Italian Guzzis who make such wonderful motorcycles
I've enjoyed since my youth? I had 5 Moto Guzzi motorcycles and enjoyed
every one of them. First class machines.
Anthony Guzzi wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>> I was just up in Yosemite this past weekend. AMPS is still on. It
>> comes from Golden State Cellular. However I did notice a lot more CDMA
>> coverage than before. The cabin we stayed at in Yosemite West is
>> pretty far from the public road (41) and I had both CDMA and AMPS
>> coverage. There was no GSM coverage. Ditto for MidPines, on 140 into
>> Yosemite. I was able to get CDMA and AMPS, but no GSM at the
>> restaurant we stopped at.
>>
>> Yosemite Valley has AMPS, CDMA, and GSM coverage.
>
>
> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
> comes from?
I happen to know the carrier in that area. Actually I'm not sure about
the GSM coverage provider, but I think that AT&T has GSM in Yosemite
Valley, unless Golden State Cellular put in some GSM service. There is
no GSM on the way into the park on 120, once you get past Oakdale; it's
CDMA and AMPS only.
>> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
>> comes from?
>
>You have to read the SID numbers off the phone's hidden data pages.
>Sometimes they'll let you see them buried into the PHONE STATUS pages.
>
>On Motorola phones, you key in ##DEBUG rapidly and the G doesn't show.
I tried this and it doesn't work on my (T-Mobile) Motorola RAZR V3,
unless I'm misunderstanding the instructions. The 4 does show.
I can, however, go to Settings | Network | Available Networks, and
see a list: AT&T and T-Mobile. AT&T is given as 310-410 and T-Mobile
is 310-260. What are these numbers? Cell tower numbers? (I'm in
Fort Worth).
"Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.vmz8i@burditt.org> wrote in message
news:13srsl2pocbpi6d@corp.supernews.com...
> I can, however, go to Settings | Network | Available Networks, and
> see a list: AT&T and T-Mobile. AT&T is given as 310-410 and T-Mobile
> is 310-260. What are these numbers? Cell tower numbers? (I'm in
> Fort Worth).
The numbers are the GSM Network operator codes. They identify the carrier.
The first 3 digits are the country code (the USA is 310 and 311) and the
last three are the system: 260 is T-Mobile's current code (one of the dozen
or more they and their predecessors have used through the years,) 410 is
Cingular/AT&T, 380 was the old AT&T Wireless, 590 is Alltel's GSM roaming
service, etc.
Larry wrote:
> Anthony Guzzi <dukeofurl@sonic.net> wrote in
> news:47cddfea$0$36392$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net:
>
>> SMS wrote:
>>> I was just up in Yosemite this past weekend. AMPS is still on. It
>>> comes from Golden State Cellular. However I did notice a lot more
>>> CDMA coverage than before. The cabin we stayed at in Yosemite West is
>>> pretty far from the public road (41) and I had both CDMA and AMPS
>>> coverage. There was no GSM coverage. Ditto for MidPines, on 140 into
>>> Yosemite. I was able to get CDMA and AMPS, but no GSM at the
>>> restaurant we stopped at.
>>>
>>> Yosemite Valley has AMPS, CDMA, and GSM coverage.
>>
>> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
>> comes from?
>>
>
> You have to read the SID numbers off the phone's hidden data pages.
> Sometimes they'll let you see them buried into the PHONE STATUS pages.
>
> On Motorola phones, you key in ##DEBUG rapidly and the G doesn't show.
> This puts the phone in DEBUG mode, at least it used to before this last
> batch. You toggled in and out of DEBUG mode with the center then left
> function keys under the display rapidly, which let you go back to the
> regular user pages. Your phone will certainly vary in how you open this
> function up and read it.
>
> Once you have this SID number, then you can look it up on:
> http://www.mountainwireless.com/sid/sid1.shtml
> and match it to location and carrier. I'm on 00156, Alltel in Charleston,
> SC.
>
> A personal question, Anthony......
>
> Are you related to the Italian Guzzis who make such wonderful motorcycles
> I've enjoyed since my youth? I had 5 Moto Guzzi motorcycles and enjoyed
> every one of them. First class machines.
>
I wish I were, but I'm not. At least, I don't think I am...
But I am Italian however.
>>> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
>>> comes from?
>>
>>You have to read the SID numbers off the phone's hidden data pages.
>>Sometimes they'll let you see them buried into the PHONE STATUS pages.
>>
>>On Motorola phones, you key in ##DEBUG rapidly and the G doesn't show.
>
> I tried this and it doesn't work on my (T-Mobile) Motorola RAZR V3,
> unless I'm misunderstanding the instructions. The 4 does show.
>
> I can, however, go to Settings | Network | Available Networks, and
> see a list: AT&T and T-Mobile. AT&T is given as 310-410 and T-Mobile
> is 310-260. What are these numbers? Cell tower numbers? (I'm in
> Fort Worth).
>
>
I have no idea. The cells are numbered, but I never saw that in a
phone.
Probably something queer to GSM. I've never owned a GSM phone, always
having been on CDMA since they took my AMPS (analog) away. Maybe the
GSM guys here can help with that.
I hate it when someone stumps me, which is often. I just HAVE to find
out. It's my nature, I suppose.
310 means United States.
The second numbers are the carrier.
www.mountainwireless.com has a wealth of information on cellular and PCS
systems. They work very hard to bring the latest lists, decoded to mere
customers can see why their damned digital phones won't connect to the
tower right in front of them while the phone reads NO SERVICE. It's a
great read these webpages.
There is some confusion about analog and 911. All the carriers warned their
customers that 911 won't work once analog is turned off. It appears only
AT&T and Verizon have made the switchoff. Alltel has kept theirs on even
past their own deadline (3/31/08). Some, including Golden State have no
plans to turn analog off yet.
"Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.vmz8i@burditt.org> wrote in message
news:13srsl2pocbpi6d@corp.supernews.com...
>>> How do you determine which coverage you have in an area, and who it
>>> comes from?
>>
>>You have to read the SID numbers off the phone's hidden data pages.
>>Sometimes they'll let you see them buried into the PHONE STATUS pages.
Bill Radio wrote:
> There is some confusion about analog and 911. All the carriers warned their
> customers that 911 won't work once analog is turned off. It appears only
> AT&T and Verizon have made the switchoff. Alltel has kept theirs on even
> past their own deadline (3/31/08). Some, including Golden State have no
> plans to turn analog off yet.
Yeah, I used Golden States' AMPS up in Yosemite in March. What sucks is
that a lot of areas in the Bay Area that used to have AMPS coverage, now
have no coverage at all.
Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>
> "Gordon Burditt" <gordonb.vmz8i@burditt.org> wrote in message
> news:13srsl2pocbpi6d@corp.supernews.com...
>
>> I can, however, go to Settings | Network | Available Networks, and
>> see a list: AT&T and T-Mobile. AT&T is given as 310-410 and T-Mobile
>> is 310-260. What are these numbers? Cell tower numbers? (I'm in
>> Fort Worth).
>
> The numbers are the GSM Network operator codes. They identify the
> carrier. The first 3 digits are the country code (the USA is 310 and
> 311) and the last three are the system: 260 is T-Mobile's current code
> (one of the dozen or more they and their predecessors have used through
> the years,) 410 is Cingular/AT&T, 380 was the old AT&T Wireless, 590 is
> Alltel's GSM roaming service, etc.
>
> There's a pretty good up-to-date list here:
> http://www.howardforums.com/archive/topic/657335-1.html
Cool. Interesting that Alltel has some GSM networks.
My V195 on SpeakOut shows "SpeakOut" at 310-410 (AT&T) and "Other" at
310-260 (T-Mobile). Is the network number to name translation in the SIM
card?
My other V195 on T-Mobile shows "T-Mobile" at 310-260, and "Cingular" at
310-410.
What's strange is that the T-Mobile phone works at my house, whereas it
never did with other 850/1900 handsets. Either it's roaming onto AT&T,
or this handset is able to get a T-Mobile signal where other handsets
cannot. The T-Mobile coverage map shows almost no coverage at my house,
though they recently got approval for a new site that would give me good
1900 MHz coverage.
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:KS8Qj.3237$26.2380@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net ...
> Cool. Interesting that Alltel has some GSM networks.
I believe they inherited them when they bought Western Wireless. I don't
know if leaving some GSM capacity up was part of an ingenious plan to milk
roaming revenue or just a contractual obligation they inherited with WW's
system.
> My V195 on SpeakOut shows "SpeakOut" at 310-410 (AT&T) and "Other" at
> 310-260 (T-Mobile). Is the network number to name translation in the SIM
> card?
>
> My other V195 on T-Mobile shows "T-Mobile" at 310-260, and "Cingular" at
> 310-410.
This is probably a question for John Navas or Dennis Ferguson, but the way I
understand it is that name translation tables are in the SIM, but can also
be in the phone which can override the SIM if the phone chooses to.
My first T-Mobile phone (back when they were Voicestream) said "Voicestream"
with it's original VS SIM in it, but "T-Mobile" with a newer SIM. Either
SIM reports "T-Mobile" in any of my newer T-Mo phones. I assume the old one
(a Nokia 8290) had no table of it's own, and relied on the SIM to "tell" it
what network it was on, where the newer phones have a table designed to
override any legacy T-Mo name with "T-Mobile."
My favorite confusing naming was last year in California, where my T-Mo
phones reported both GSM networks (AT&T's current "Blue" and Cingular's old
"Orange" they sold to T-Mo) as "Cingular."
My WinMo phone allows me to override any network name with any text string I
want via a registry edit, so I renamed the California nets back then to AT&T
and T-Mobile West.
> What's strange is that the T-Mobile phone works at my house, whereas it
> never did with other 850/1900 handsets. Either it's roaming onto AT&T, or
> this handset is able to get a T-Mobile signal where other handsets cannot.
> The T-Mobile coverage map shows almost no coverage at my house, though
> they recently got approval for a new site that would give me good 1900 MHz
> coverage.
Congratulations- maybe we can lure you back from the dark side one of these
days... ;-) When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta)
nationwide, you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP router
that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just $10 extra
per month.
In <bEbQj.49106$oQ4.11509@fe113.usenetserver.com> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> writes:
>"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
>news:KS8Qj.3237$26.2380@newssvr23.news.prodigy.ne t...
>> Cool. Interesting that Alltel has some GSM networks.
>I believe they inherited them when they bought Western Wireless. I don't
>know if leaving some GSM capacity up was part of an ingenious plan to milk
>roaming revenue or just a contractual obligation they inherited with WW's
>system.
Whoaaaaaaa... I thought D.T. bought up Western Wireless.
Was it a split up, with some going to one and the
rest to another?
Oh, and another reason to "leave some GSM capacity up"
is to prevent the FCC, on behalf of a competitor, pulling
a "you didn't use it, now you've lost it" line.
--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
> Congratulations- maybe we can lure you back from the dark side one of
> these days... ;-)
I doubt it. Verizon still has far better coverage in Northern (and
Southern) California than T-Mobile (or AT&T or Sprint), even without
AMPS. I only bought the T-Mobile phones because I needed some newer
900/1800 MHz phones for traveling to Europe and Asia to use with prepaid
SIM cards. The quad-band V195 was a good deal from T-Mobile Prepaid, and
I can have them unlocked inexpensively if I don't want to wait 90 days.
> When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta)
> nationwide, you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP
> router that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
> $10 extra per month.
I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m. off-peak
Verizon account, and my OneSuite account. In fact I rarely use up $10 on
OneSuite in six months.
> > When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta) nationwide,
> > you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP router
> > that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
> > $10 extra per month.
>
> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m.
> off-peak Verizon account, and my OneSuite account. In fact I rarely
> use up $10 on OneSuite in six months.
The idea is to replace your landline with it.
My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons and
fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to a
cellco, though, and saving $20/month.
At 25 Apr 2008 03:07:25 +0000 danny burstein wrote:
> Whoaaaaaaa... I thought D.T. bought up Western Wireless.
> Was it a split up, with some going to one and the
> rest to another?
IIRC, Voicestream and Western Wireless were run by the same guy. He sold
Voicestream to DT who renamed it T-Mobile, and a few years later sold WW to
Alltel.
> Oh, and another reason to "leave some GSM capacity up"
> is to prevent the FCC, on behalf of a competitor, pulling
> a "you didn't use it, now you've lost it" line.
Alltel is already using the bandwidth for CDMA. But, as a rural carrier,
they have more capacity than they need, and from what I understand, just
leave a few channels of GSM running for roaming use alongside their CDMA
system.
Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 24 Apr 2008 20:34:24 -0700 SMS wrote:
>
>>> When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta) nationwide,
>>> you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP router
>>> that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
>>> $10 extra per month.
>
>> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m.
>> off-peak Verizon account, and my OneSuite account. In fact I rarely
>> use up $10 on OneSuite in six months.
>
>
> The idea is to replace your landline with it.
Yes, if naked DSL was the same price as bundled DSL it would work.
> My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
> voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons and
> fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to a
> cellco, though, and saving $20/month.
My local AT&T line is under $17 per month, including taxes and fees.
On 2008-04-25, Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
> At 25 Apr 2008 03:07:25 +0000 danny burstein wrote:
>> Oh, and another reason to "leave some GSM capacity up"
>> is to prevent the FCC, on behalf of a competitor, pulling
>> a "you didn't use it, now you've lost it" line.
>
> Alltel is already using the bandwidth for CDMA. But, as a rural carrier,
> they have more capacity than they need, and from what I understand, just
> leave a few channels of GSM running for roaming use alongside their CDMA
> system.
All available evidence I have says there's not a lot of money to be
made providing roaming service these days, however. As far as I can
tell the trend now is to drive intercarrier charges for roaming down
close to nothing and to make your money not from other carriers'
customers' use your network, but rather from your customers' use of
other carrier's networks. That is, the value of roaming agreements isn't
the revenue from other carriers, it is the cheap access to other
carriers' networks that you can sell to your own customers.
What this means is that providing roaming service using a technology
your own customers don't use doesn't usually make sense. You won't
make much money from other carriers' customers, and you won't make any
more money from your own customers since they can't use the other carrier's
network. I'll hence bet that Western Wireless may actually have
had some GSM customers or other contractual commitments that are forcing
Alltel to keep the network up.
Also as far as I can tell (and it isn't what I would have guessed)
running a dual-technology network actually seems to add significant
costs. I know Movistar shut down the CDMA half of the network they
acquired in Mexico (taking pretty much all CDMA coverage along highways
in rural northern Mexico with it), and the amount Telefonica claimed
in their financial reports to have saved by doing this was surprisingly
large. I also know that the difference between the highly profitable
China Mobile and the never profitable China Unicom, two companies which
started out at pretty much the same place, is widely blamed on the additional
costs China Unicom took on to build and maintain their dual-mode
CDMA/GSM network. It seems to cost real money to do that.
At 25 Apr 2008 16:14:13 +0000 Dennis Ferguson wrote:
> What this means is that providing roaming service using a technology
> your own customers don't use doesn't usually make sense. You won't
> make much money from other carriers' customers, and you won't make any
> more money from your own customers since they can't use the other
carrier's
> network. I'll hence bet that Western Wireless may actually have
> had some GSM customers or other contractual commitments that are forcing
> Alltel to keep the network up.
That makes sense- I assume when Alltel bought WW, they'd have inherited
it's contractual obligations as well, like providing roaming service until
year X.
> > The idea is to replace your landline with it.
>
> Yes, if naked DSL was the same price as bundled DSL it would work.
Here in Denver, naked DSL is only $5 more than bundled.
> > My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
> > voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons
and
> > fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to
a
> > cellco, though, and saving $20/month.
>
> My local AT&T line is under $17 per month, including taxes and fees.
For $17, I wouldn't be looking for replacements either! ;-)
On Apr 25, 11:34 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> Todd Allcock wrote:
> > Congratulations- maybe we can lure you back from the dark side one of
> > these days... ;-)
>
> I doubt it. Verizon still has far better coverage in Northern (and
> Southern) California than T-Mobile (or AT&T or Sprint), even without
> AMPS. I only bought the T-Mobile phones because I needed some newer
> 900/1800 MHz phones for traveling to Europe and Asia to use with prepaid
> SIM cards. The quad-band V195 was a good deal from T-Mobile Prepaid, and
> I can have them unlocked inexpensively if I don't want to wait 90 days.
>
> > When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta)
> > nationwide, you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP
> > router that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
> > $10 extra per month.
>
> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m. off-peak
> Verizon account, and myOneSuiteaccount. In fact I rarely use up $10 onOneSuitein six months.
Same here...unless I call outside the country my $10 on Onesuite
usually last about 6 months.
"Zar" <zahirletap@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:75f96df9-f9e6-46e9-80bf-0deed2cd71c0@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>> > When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta)
>> > nationwide, you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP
>> > router that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for
>> > just
>> > $10 extra per month.
>>
>> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m. off-peak
>> Verizon account, and myOneSuiteaccount. In fact I rarely use up $10
>> onOneSuitein six months.
>
> Same here...unless I call outside the country my $10 on Onesuite
> usually last about 6 months.
That really wasn't my point- I was making the case that "Talk Forever" at
$10/month could replace the $30/month a POTS line costs. The "free" LD
would just be gravy.
In SMS' case, he gets a really good deal on POTS (<$20/month), and I'd agree
with him that the convenience and reliabilty of a landline isn't worth
dumping to save $5-10/month. In my case, Qwest in Denver charges me about
$35 including junk fees and taxes, so a $10/month unlimited service would
make more sense. I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
$20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for internet
if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net savings would be $10
rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline reliability. T-Mo's
service would save me $20/month which would justify switching. IMO.
"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:_BFWj.70$Ci1.57@fe099.usenetserver.com:
> I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
> $20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for
> internet if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net
> savings would be $10 rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline
> reliability.
Wow...I'm only paying $US2.065/month for Skype Out Unlimited to any phone
or sellphone in the USA/Canada/AK/HI/PR. It isn't really unlimited at
10,000 minutes per month, but if you overrun that you have serious
personal issues Skype can't help you with.
When you buy Skype Unlimited, they take $30 off each of the incoming
Skype In phone numbers you buy. That came to about $24/number for the
two numbers in my system, one in Charleston, SC and one in London, UK.
that's the PER YEAR rate, not per month. So, the total monthly fee for
US and Canadian customers is 2.065out + 2 in = $4.065 for really
unlimited incoming calls plus 10000 minutes/month calling out.
All the other features like Skype-to-Skype with full motion color video,
video conferencing, all of Skype's online services are free. FREE is our
FRIEND.
The Skype phones have become kind of BIZARRE, lately. You have a
sellphone, so if you're not a hobbleware Verizon slave, you can install
Skype Mobile or PDA versions right on your sellphone and have an all-in-
one VoIP device...right in your pocket, even on the road, saving big
money compared to sellphone LD to Timbuctoo. I have my old Netgear Skype
phone in the bedroom, a really nice USB headset for the mainframe, Skype
on my Nokia N800 Linux tablet (which also runs mobile over BT to the
sellphone data on Alltel EVDO).
....I kid you not........
SKYPE ON THE PLAYSTATION PORTABLE!
I installed it on 3 PSPs belonging to my buddy's 11, 14 and 16 year old
girls. Even a teenager hasn't trashed 10000 minutes/month. All they
need is wifi Daddy already has or any wifi the PSP can find wherever they
are! NO MORE $300 sellphone bills from the kiddies! Each girl has her
own Skype Unlimited/Skype In phone number....$4.065/month for 10000 min
out and unlimited min in. http://skype.com/allfeatures/skypeonpsp/
They've all learned to dial +1-areacode-number, now, after some really
embarrassing calls dialing 843-number on Skype, which calls odd people in
VIETNAM (+84 country code)....(c;
The girls have a list of "acceptable restaurants and places" that have
free wifi for their phones. We eat often at Atlanta or Panera Bread but
never Starbucks any more....no free wifi for Skype.
I've called Vietnam many times in haste, too....(c;
VoIP doesn't HAVE to cost $20+/month before you make the first call.
Works great!
> > I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
> > $20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for
> > internet if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net
> > savings would be $10 rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline
> > reliability.
>
> Wow...I'm only paying $US2.065/month for Skype Out Unlimited to any phone
> or sellphone in the USA/Canada/AK/HI/PR. It isn't really unlimited at
> 10,000 minutes per month, but if you overrun that you have serious
> personal issues Skype can't help you with.
Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
(although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of E911
compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't integrate
into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned "running PC.")
That also eliminates MagicJack (which I already own and subscribe to at
$20/year unlimited in/out, but it's RJ-11 interface hardware requires a
running PC as well.)
> The Skype phones have become kind of BIZARRE, lately. You have a
> sellphone, so if you're not a hobbleware Verizon slave, you can install
> Skype Mobile or PDA versions right on your sellphone and have an all-in-
> one VoIP device...right in your pocket, even on the road, saving big
> money compared to sellphone LD to Timbuctoo.
Yes. My WinMo phone has Skype, Fring and SIP clients installed, supporting
four of my VoIP accounts in addition to my T-Mo cellphone account.
> VoIP doesn't HAVE to cost $20+/month before you make the first call.
> Works great!
If I lived alone I'd be on the same page as you. In a family of five with
three kids ranging from four through ten, I want the phones to work like Ma
Bell intended- 911, no country codes for local calls, etc. T-Mobile will
give me that for $10/month (over and above my cellphone bill), through my
existing home wiring, with 911 capability, when Talk Forever launches
nationwide.
Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:GtOWj.260$gi1.248@fe107.usenetserver.com:
> Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
> (although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of
> E911 compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't
> integrate into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned
> "running PC.")
>
>
You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!
Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.
Now, if you read the rest, you don't have to have a PC running, AT ALL,
to use Skype anywhere in the house. That's what wifi is for! The RJ-11
interface with some Vonage BS phone company is FAR more expensive than
Skype phones on wifi. I took out all the wires....my wifi covers my
whole neighborhood from the node up the tree!
My SELLphone is my Skype phone because I have my Skype In number
FORWARDED to my SEllphone number if I don't answer Skype calls....even
Skype-to-Skype calls! So, if a friend in Japan, for instance, wants to
call me, he calls me on Skype-to-Skype, my SELLphone rings and I talk to
him....from anywhere I happen to be, without a Skype phone, by just using
airtime if he calls me from Japan at 3AM in the morning! If he calls me
on Skype-to-Skype at NOON in Japan, I'm on free N/W airtime on Alltel and
that call costs both of us NOTHING! My bill has LOTS of evening
"Unknown" calls from the Skype-to-Skype callers.....long winded calls...
(c;
You don't need a single piece of extra equipment to use Skype from what
you already own.....Screw the wired phones in the house.
> > Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
> > (although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of
> > E911 compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't
> > integrate into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned
> > "running PC.")
> >
> >
>
> You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!
> Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.
Did you miss the "three kids ages four to ten" part?
> Now, if you read the rest, you don't have to have a PC running, AT ALL,
> to use Skype anywhere in the house. That's what wifi is for!
I'm quite familiar with how Skype works and how it doesn't.
> The RJ-11
> interface with some Vonage BS phone company is FAR more expensive than
> Skype phones on wifi.
Yes, it is. But again, I'm intending to use T-Mo's Talk Forever router with
SIM card slot for $120/year. Sure, it's 2-3 times as expensive as Skype,
but it meets MY requirements I listed earlier: no PC needed to have RJ-11
compatibility, E911, and no special dialing requirements ("Daddy, where's
the '+' on this phone...")
> I took out all the wires....my wifi covers my
> whole neighborhood from the node up the tree!
Again, if I lived alone, I'd be on the same (or at least a similar) page.
> My SELLphone is my Skype phone because I have my Skype In number
> FORWARDED to my SEllphone number if I don't answer Skype calls....even
> Skype-to-Skype calls!
Can Skype be trained to report your Skype-in number as the CID number on
forwarded calls? If so, that could be your "Circle" number and they'd all
be free.
> You don't need a single piece of extra equipment to use Skype from what
> you already own.....
To use it like _I_ want to, rather than how _you_ have it, I do. In
addition, AFAIK, Skype desn't port. Keeping my four-year old home number
is critial for the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor- another system design
parameter you no longer have to factor in...) ;-)
> Screw the wired phones in the house.
I'm old school- phones plug into jacks- even cordless ones! ;-)
Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:34TWj.103$xb2.91@fe103.usenetserver.com:
> Can Skype be trained to report your Skype-in number as the CID number
> on forwarded calls? If so, that could be your "Circle" number and
> they'd all be free.
>
>
One of Skype's GREATEST ASSETS is its inability to report your telephone
number you don't have to anyone...cops, Homeland Security, Council On
Foreign Relations, FBI, Illuminati, the spammers, whoever you call
including those goddamned 800 number bloodsuckers selling your
number....noone. Skype Out has no number and isn't hooked to Skype In
where the number you are given is in the SAME block of numbers as AOHell's
huge racks of dialup modems so the spammers don't waste their time dialing
modem after modem after modem selling nothing. Other than the errant,
irate British wifey calling me by error because my London phone number is
one digit off the number for the Hook And Nail Pub, which is more
entertaining than ANY computer software I own and wouldn't trade it for
anything, I've never gotten a single COLD CALL from even Experian wanting
to ask me about my credit rating....a great asset to the Skype system.
Nope....Skype in calls are forwarded through Skype Out so they all come up
with the number 000-123-4567, which I haven't tried to put into My Circle,
yet.
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.verizon.]
On 2008-05-15, Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
>> You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!
>
>> Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.
>
> Did you miss the "three kids ages four to ten" part?
Skype's right for him, so by extension it must be right for everyone else in
the world, too.
analog sunset & 911 access 
Linear Mode
