Lee_C._Moore.WBST128@xerox.com (10/10/89)
Because of a service person who went wild in my house, I am now
shopping for a new answering machine. I am taking this opportunity to
by a top-of-the-line machine. Is there any machine that is currently
considered the best, hottest or most feature-full (consumer) answering
machine?
If there is sufficient interest, I will summarize for the group.
Thanks,
Lee Moore -- Xerox Webster Research Center, Webster, NY, USA
Arpa Internet: Moore.Wbst128@Xerox.Com
UUCP: {allegra, rutgers, cornell}!rochester!rocksanne!lee
DDN: +1 716 422 2496peggy@ddsw1.mcs.com (Peggy Shambo) (10/15/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0440m05@vector.dallas.tx.us> Lee_C._Moore.WBST128@ xerox.com writes: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 440, message 5 of 12 >Because of a service person who went wild in my house, I am now >shopping for a new answering machine. I am taking this opportunity to >by a top-of-the-line machine. Is there any machine that is currently >considered the best, hottest or most feature-full (consumer) answering >machine? >If there is sufficient interest, I will summarize for the group. Well, I don't know a heck of a lot about top-of-the-line answering machines, but my curiosity has been piqued as to the nature of this "service person" and what really happened to the old answering machine. Enquiring minds want to know. Does this qualify for the "sufficient interest" clause? :-) Peg Shambo | Anybody know of any IDMS/ADSO positions in peggy@ddsw1.mcs.com | the South of England? (London, Southampton, | Portsmouth, Bournemouth would all be nice)
crum%alicudi.usc.edu@usc.edu (Gary L. Crum) (10/19/89)
From reading literature, it seems to me that a "hot" answering system would be Teleflex, a "telephone handling system" that works with Macintosh computers to interact with callers using touch-tone, sound digitizing, voice synthesis and modem signaling. Teleflex costs about $3000 not including a host Macintosh. It is programmable using a graphical method -- a flow diagram with icons is created. I don't have one for my residence yet, but I would like to see such sophisticated systems in homes. You know, "Crum residence. To page Gary press 1. To leave a voice message press 2. To begin FAX transmission press 3. To connect with Gary's UNIX system press 4." Do you people think that things like UUCP and FAX machines can deal with pauses in their dialing sequences? I hope so. Call (818)700-0510 for more information about Teleflex, and please tell them that Gary Crum of USC referred you to them. I am not currently affiliated with the Magnum, the developer of Teleflex, but I would really like to work on such products. Gary
cy@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Cyril Bauer) (10/27/89)
I would sugest the Panasonic unit. I have tried a few and the easiest
and most reliable I have found is the Panasonic. They make models
that do most everthing that you could possibly want to do. Take your
pick, they work.
UUCP: {amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, crash}!orbit!pnet51!cy
ARPA: crash!orbit!pnet51!cy@nosc.mil
INET: cy@pnet51.orb.mn.orglangz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) (11/09/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0497m07@vector.dallas.tx.us> John Tsang <jgt@uhccux. uhcc.hawaii.edu> writes: >[The only "drawbacks" to certain Panasonic answering machines] >are the outgoing message seemingly is too short of 1/2 min., which may >not be enough for business operation announcement of operation hours >and introduction, and, the annoying beep during 2-Side-Conversation- >Recording. On most machines using two cassettes (not digital recorders) the outgoing message goes on a loop tape. While the manufacturer usually supplies a 30 second loop, you can buy longer and shorter ones at your local Radio Shack. As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be annoying, but in the United States it is the law. Be seeing you... Lang Zerner langz@asylum.sf.ca.us UUCP:bionet!asylum!langz ARPA:langz@athena.mit.edu "...and every morning we had to go and LICK the road clean with our TONGUES!" [Moderator's Note: I believe the law does not require the beep every few seconds. It merely requires that both parties be *aware* of the taping and consent to it. Therefore, if in the first few seconds of the recording I say to you, "I am recording all this, is that okay with you?" and you respond it is okay AND I have this consent itself recorded at the start of the conversation, then the law has been obeyed. The beeping every few seconds is of course one way to insure the other person in theory knows about and has consented to be taped. PT]
abh@pogo.camelot.cs.cmu.edu (Andrew Hastings) (11/11/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0501m07@vector.dallas.tx.us>, langz@asylum.SF.CA.US (Lang Zerner) writes: > As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be > annoying, but in the United States it is the law. The laws governing the recording of a telephone conversation vary from state to state. Some states require a beep. Some states require the consent of both parties. Some states require the consent of only one party. -Andy Hastings abh@cs.cmu.edu 412/268-8734
nobody@nowhere.UUCP (this is a bogus address) (11/13/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0504m05@vector.dallas.tx.us> abh@pogo.camelot.cs.cmu. edu (Andrew Hastings) writes: >> As for the beep while recording a conversation, well, it may be >> annoying, but in the United States it is the law. >The laws governing the recording of a telephone conversation vary from >state to state. Some states require a beep. Some states require the >consent of both parties. Some states require the consent of only one >party. In ALL states, the use of recording devices is governed by part of the federal Communications Act. The act, as ammended in the late '70s states that at least one party to a conversation must be aware of the recording. That party can be you. In other words, you can record any conversation you are a party to with no beep or notification. You CANNOT record conversations between third parties (the traditional tap). Federal law will preempt any local regulations to the contrary. I know these laws firsthand. I used taped conversations between Tennessee, Georgia and Nu Joysey :-) to bust a thieving ex-partner. BTW, the rules of evidence in Tenn and Ga say that such recordings are heresay and as such cannot be submitted as direct evidence. IT can, however, be used as rebuttal evidence. In other words, if the scum lies on the stand, you can used recordings to prove he's lying but you cannot use them to prove a point not otherwise in evidence. The skill of a good trial lawyer is to lead the recorded person into saying something that lets the tapes in. It's also amazing how cooperative to negotiation the other side gets when you pop a box of cassettes down on the table. Makes the perp relive every conversation over the last year or so :-) Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer - I've just bought them by the dozen. John De Armond, WD4OQC | Manual? ... What manual ?!? Radiation Systems, Inc. Atlanta, GA | This is Unix, My son, You emory!rsiatl!jgd **I am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!