daemon@ucbvax.UUCP (08/28/84)
From @MIT-MC:Telecom-Request@MIT-MC Mon Aug 27 18:50:20 1984
TELECOM Digest Tuesday, 28 Aug 1984 Volume 4 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #73
long distance service quality
Fiber optics query
Personal Locator Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri 24 Aug 84 17:42:26-CDT
From: Clive Dawson <CC.Clive@UTEXAS-20.ARPA>
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #73
The latest issue of Consumer Reports has done an evaluation of Long
Distance Services. I haven't had a chance to read the article myself,
and don't have it with me at the moment, but it looked pretty
comprehensive. There was one clear winner, and it was NOT ATT, MCI or
SPRINT. I'm trying to remember the name--I think it was Skyline.
More later.
CLive
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 18:12:07 PDT
From: Lauren Weinstein <vortex!lauren@RAND-UNIX.ARPA>
Subject: long distance service quality
The joke with the so-called "cheap" services of Sprint and MCI (etc.)
is that it often takes multiple calls to carry on a simple
conversation. I occasionally have to make both MCI and Sprint calls
using numbers provided to me by various of my clients for my use when
calling them or their associates. My reaction to both services is the
same: TERRIBLE.
Maybe some people just don't CARE how bad a connection sounds, how
much echo or hiss is present, or how often you have to repeat yourself
to be heard. Often connections are especially bad in ONE direction,
but sometimes the person you called never bothers to tell you that he
can hardly hear you, he just struggles along. Then there are the
connections that just suddenly drop, or that switch you to another
caller. I get both of these regularly. REALLY professional on
business calls. People actually say (and I say it too), "How about
calling back FOR REAL using AT&T next time?" And how about call
blocking? Just TRY to get a call through from L.A. to New Jersey in
mid-afternoon on Sprint or MCI. Good luck. I hope you like an hour
of all trunk busy signals.
When I have my choice, I always use AT&T. In a couple of years, once
the access issues settle down, the artificial price differentials will
vanish and AT&T should be as cheap, if not cheaper, than the other
services. At which point, anybody who hassles with the "toy" carriers
is getting what he or she deserves. Even now, if a call if valuable
enough to pay for, it's valuable enough to hear the other person and
have stable connections. As far as I'm concerned, the non-AT&T
carriers are jokes. But then, P.T. Barnum predicted that such
services would prosper to some extent: "There's a sucker born every
minute."
--Lauren--
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24-Aug-84 18:34:31 PDT
From: Richard Shuford <vortex!richard@RAND-UNIX.ARPA>
Subject: Fiber optics query
Hello. I'm doing some research on fiber optics, and I'd like to know
what experience readers of this digest have had with fiber-optic-based
computer communication. Short comments on how cost effective a
particular local-area network (or other communication link) has been
are fine, though if you have more details they'll be appreciated.
Thank you.
.............Richard Shuford..............
------------------------------
Date: 25 August 1984 00:56-EDT
From: Eliot R. Moore <ELMO @ MIT-MC>
Does anyone have experience, good or bad, with ITT Private Line
Service? Regards, Elmo
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 84 00:29:47 pdt
From: sun!gnu@Berkeley (John Gilmore)
Subject: Personal Locator Service
A few years ago I was hearing all about how CCIS would make it
possible to offer "Personal Locator Service". In this service, you
would have a phone number which could be called from anywhere and the
calls would follow you around to wherever you happened to be. (You
had to check in with the machines to tell them where you were going,
of course.)
I recently heard a rumor that Bell filed with the FCC to propose this
service but the FCC would not let them offer it.
Anybody know what really happened and why?
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
*********************