RS%AI.AI.MIT.EDU@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Robert E. Seastrom) (10/27/89)
In TELECOM Digest V9 #472, J. Philip Miller writes: > While speaking of Caller-ID implementations, I have wondered whether paging > services utilize Caller-ID to send to digital pagers so that the callers do > not need to key their number in for display on the pager. In TELECOM Digest V9 #472, Patrick Townson (Telecom Moderator) comments: > Regards using Caller-ID to feed digital pagers, I think it is a great > idea. I wonder if anyone has thought of it? PT] I would be really unhappy if the pager companies were to do this and not allow for an override. To give a few examples: At Worldcon '89, I would page my roommate to see about plans for dinner. Since it wasn't terribly urgent, I didn't include a priority code (see below) and paged him with *my* pager number. Then, I didn't have to stay right next to a particular pay phone and keep other people from using it (I'd stay in the vicinity, so that I could call back promptly, when he returned my page. This would not be possible if Caller-ID automatically ID'ed my phone for me... In the main circle that I associate with, we have a set of agreed-upon three-digit codes that can be appended to a phone number. The 100 series identifies specific people; other codes mean specific things (411=need information, 611=something's broken, 911=run, don't walk, to the nearest phone and call immediately), unallocated 3-digit codes are priority codes that tell how urgent it is that the call be returned, 200s meaning at your leisure, 800s meaning call ASAP. If there weren't an override on the number that Caller-ID sent out, it would be impossible to add these codes to the end of the number we were paging with. ---Rob [Moderator's Note: Granted, it might be better to have the switch answer and say, 'To default, press # now; else enter the desired digits.' PT]
ckd%bu-pub.BU.EDU@bu-it.bu.edu (Christopher K Davis) (10/27/89)
>>>>> On 25 Oct 89 20:22:57 GMT, The Moderator (Patrick Townson) said:
PT> [Moderator's Note: [...] Regards using Caller-ID to feed digital
PT> pagers, I think it is a great idea. I wonder if anyone has thought of
PT> it? PT]
It's not really that great. For example, I often used my mother's
pager to tell her things she didn't need to call for -- (or couldn't, as
with pay phones that won't take incoming calls) like "The track meet's
over, come pick me up" or the like. Usually I'd punch in my birthday
so she'd know it was me, and the "context" would make the message
clear.
Neat idea, but in practice, it's more useful to use arbitrary numbers.dave@uunet.uu.net (Dave Levenson) (10/28/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0474m05@vector.dallas.tx.us>, RS%AI.AI.MIT.EDU@ mintaka.lcs.mit.edu (Robert E. Seastrom) writes: > In TELECOM Digest V9 #472, J. Philip Miller writes: > > While speaking of Caller-ID implementations, I have wondered whether paging > > services utilize Caller-ID to send to digital pagers so that the callers do > > not need to key their number in for display on the pager. > In TELECOM Digest V9 #472, Patrick Townson (Telecom Moderator) comments: > > Regards using Caller-ID to feed digital pagers, I think it is a great > > idea. I wonder if anyone has thought of it? PT] ... > [Moderator's Note: Granted, it might be better to have the switch > answer and say, 'To default, press # now; else enter the desired > digits.' PT] No!!! Use the Caller-Id default if the caller enters nothing at all. Otherwise, let the caller enter the digital message to be displayed. Believe it or not, there are still a few telephone subscribers who use pulse-dial equipment. Some smart business telephone systems prevent their users from dialing extra digits for end-to-end signalling -- primitive but effective toll-diversion. With the present radio paging equipment, they cannot send any message at all! Automatically-generated Caller*Id would be better than no ID at all, wouldn't it? Dave Levenson Voice: (201) 647 0900 Westmark, Inc. Internet: dave@westmark.uu.net Warren, NJ, USA UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave [The Man in the Mooney] AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave
john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/29/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0476m07@vector.dallas.tx.us>, westmark!dave@uunet.uu. net (Dave Levenson) writes: > No!!! Use the Caller-Id default if the caller enters nothing at all. > Otherwise, let the caller enter the digital message to be displayed. This would solve one of the most frustrating problems a pager user can face. How many times have you suddenly found your pager going off repeatedly with no number in the display? Someone mistakenly gets your pager number thinking it is perhaps an ordinary telephone number or even someone else's pager number. Sometimes this can go on for days and it renders your pager useless. If the caller's number was put in the display as the default, you could call them and inform them that they have a wrong number. As it is now, you can only hope that they will figure out that the number they have isn't doing them any good. And find it out soon! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Of course John, your plan, which sort of hints at using a self-remedy to cure the problem would likely be rejected by those who dislike or hate Caller-ID. They would say you have no right to know the identity of the caller, particularly since the call was not intended for you anyway. They would probably suggest you should be asking the telco to trace those calls; and that the telco would then, in their good time deal with the problem. Are you sure that finding out the identity of the caller not-intending-to-reach you wouldn't be a violation of their privacy or (ahem!) an 'illegal wire tap'? PT]