charles@uunet.uu.net (Charles McGuinness) (01/12/91)
In TELECOM Digest V11I24 Todd Inch <gtisqr!toddi@cs.washington.edu> says:
> I'm amazed that pulse is still around - is support enforced by tariff?
You may find this hard to believe, but some people actually prefer
rotary dial phones! A while back, my grandmother (who is 88 years
old) asked if I could install a phone for her in the kitchen. Of
course, I went out and bought one of those nice new phones with extra
large buttons to make things easy for her (certainly easier than
dialing her pre-500 series phone!).
But after I installed it she started complaining: "Honey, that new
phone, it's no good! It keeps dialing the wrong number!". She seemed
to be getting an 8 whenever she pushed 5. Of course, whenever I
tested the phone, it worked flawlessly. It could only be one thing --
pilot error. I tried to suggest, as gently as possible, that she must
have pressed the wrong keys. But, that didn't fly.
So, what could I do? I went to my local AT&T phone center and asked
for a wall mount rotary dial phone. After spending a few minutes
convincing them that I really knew what I wanted, they led me to a
closet full of these things, and let me pick my choice.
Grandma has been happily rotary dialing ever since.
Charlesjet@uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) (01/13/91)
In article <16011@accuvax.nwu.edu> jyacc!charles@uunet.uu.net (Charles McGuinness) writes: >In TELECOM Digest V11I24 Todd Inch <gtisqr!toddi@cs.washington.edu> says: >> I'm amazed that pulse is still around - is support enforced by tariff? >You may find this hard to believe, but some people actually prefer >rotary dial phones! A while back, my grandmother (who is 88 years And the rest of us have little choice. UH has no real organizational level telecommunications policies. Most departments still have the rotary *only*, department level switching units. When I got my office phone (touch tone) I discovered that I couldn't use the office-to- office intercom system easily because it was pulse driven. I now astound the mathematicians by manually dialing with the switchhook if I need to buzz another office. :-) J. Eric Townsend Internet: jet@uh.edu Bitnet: jet@UHOU Systems Mangler - UH Dept. of Mathematics - (713) 749-2120 Motorola skates on Intel's head!
john@icjapan.info.com (John Higdon) (01/15/91)
In article <72169@bu.edu.bu.edu> jet@uh.edu (J. Eric Townsend) writes: >And the rest of us have little choice. UH has no real organizational >level telecommunications policies. Most departments still have the >rotary *only*, department level switching units. As does most of Japan. The first thing that caught my attention when poking around with the phones here is that DTMF is the exception rather than the rule. This comes as quite a shock after reading glowing report after report of how the Japanese phone system is so superior. The bulk of the NTT switching network is crossbar that has had no DTMF capability added. Most PBXes, including the one at the hotel where I am staying, wouldn't recognize a DTMF tone if it bit it on the foot. The usual instrument for customers is a push button "cute" phone of domestic manufacture that pulses at 20 pps. The casual observer would be led to believe that touch tone is common in Japan, when in reality it is not. And those phones! The instuments are atrocious. They sound bad, have a half-life of about six months and are worse than your typical Time-Life special. In fact, the only DTMF other than on coin phones (which are in many ways superior to those in the US) I have seen so far is in the office where I am working. It is an American operation and those in charge found the local instrument offerings so bad that they (at great expense) brought "real" telephones over from the US. Amusingly, among the equipment was a Panasonic KX-T616. The phones the Japanese design and build for export are vastly superior to what they foist upon the home folk. While DTMF may be nearly universal in the US, it will be along time before the rest of the world can say the same.
bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) (01/29/91)
In article <16479@accuvax.nwu.edu>, ccplumb@rose.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Plumb) writes: > I'm simply of the opinion that it's not worth $2/month or whatever it > So it takes my modem 7.2 seconds instead of .98 to call in. Big deal. If the modem folks would define a way to specify 20pps, sticking to rotary would be even less painful. Our Cannon FAX has three positions: 10pps, 20pps, DTMF. Ask Hayes how to do 20pps... TT is great, but it is over $4 on residence lines in some places, and the telcos deserve as many customers as possible saying that is outrageous and sticking to rotary where possible. Many PBXs can be simply programmed to do the conversion at 20 pps, and the $ savings over a few years can be dramatic. If it isn't your own staff, but your 'customers' (e.g. hotel guests), the additional wasted 'people' time isn't an issue. The big fight may come when you say you will pay for rotary service but want to be class-marked as a TT customer so 0+ calls will first try bong-tone to let you TT in fone-card info. Normally rotary customers get the operator directly. The bong-tone includes the '#' tone to knock TT->pulse converters off the line. You are paying TT charges to the local telco, but the IXC would rather have you TT the card info rather than waste operator time.