John Levine wrote:

notably McCaw Cellular, they were new specialist carriers.

You mean the guy who purchased MCI's wireless business and deployed
AT&T's technology in the license areas he bought? You're right. He's not
an ILEC, but he wasn't independent. Did the guy deploy any technology on
his own, or was he merely a speculator in radio spectrum licenses?

He built some, he bought some including MCI's. He was a cable guy,
not an ILEC guy.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_M...phone_industry

Thanks.

"Phil" wrote in message
...
Graham Nye writes:

On 30/03/2012 21:17, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Right. Callers from outside your country sure appreciate that
caller pays surcharge on top of the charge for international
long distance,
as it's not readily apparent to foreigners that caller pays
applies.

Anyone dialling from outside the UK can spot a UK mobile
number as
it will start +44 7... (where + is 011 for NANP countries).

Almost always true, there is a nasty group of numbers in this
range that
look like mobile numbers, this is +44 70xxx (070xxx) range
which are
charged at far higher rates than mobiles and are not included
in bundled
minutes. They are called Personal Numbers and no doubt catch a
lot of
people out.


I have a Personal Number. I use it as my contact number on things
like "surveys", store cards / credit cards, and utilities
companies. Most on-line forms accept it as a mobile number. It
helps to prevent marketing calls, and as a bonus, it won't
receive text messages (so no chance of premium rate messages that
are paid for on receipt).

--
MatSav

On Apr 1, 1:08*am, wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:37*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

The biggest problem with the Excel was that the battery was wired in and
not a user-changeable item. Nor did they accept that it was covered by
the product's 5yr maintenance contract. (They finally settled on the
courtroom steps).

My two prior cellular phone units (both made by Motorola) had
replaceable batteries, but that didn't matter since the batteries
themselves were no longer made when I needed replacements. *In both
units (one analog, one digital), the battery could only hold a charge
for a short time, making the phone cumbersome to use.

My carrier was happy to give me a free new phone. *To me, that seems
wasteful, but I think they're hoping the replacement units, with their
added features, will encourage me to do more and thus run up a bigger
bill. *For me, it was a pain to transition from one unit to another
since it worked differently.

For our British posters, I have a question about telephone dials. *Did
the letters* on British telephone dials always correspond to those of
US dials? *How about those of other European countries?

1
2=ABC
3=DEF
4=GHI
5=JKL
6=MNO
7=PRS (Q added later.)
8=TUV
9=WXY (Z added later)
0 operator *(US dials had a Z before 1950 but rarely used).

I heard some countries may have had the Q and O in different
positions.

*Letters on dials were originally to aid in dialing exchange names, eg
PEnnsylvania 6-5000 instead of 736-5000. *The US gradually
transitioned to "All Number Calling" by 1980.

I wrote a reply to this, but for some reason Google Groups won't allow
me to send it. I'll try to send it as a reply just to you, which may
be better since it's quite long, and off-topic for this group.

On Apr 1, 1:08*am, wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:37*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

The biggest problem with the Excel was that the battery was wired in and
not a user-changeable item. Nor did they accept that it was covered by
the product's 5yr maintenance contract. (They finally settled on the
courtroom steps).

My two prior cellular phone units (both made by Motorola) had
replaceable batteries, but that didn't matter since the batteries
themselves were no longer made when I needed replacements. *In both
units (one analog, one digital), the battery could only hold a charge
for a short time, making the phone cumbersome to use.

My carrier was happy to give me a free new phone. *To me, that seems
wasteful, but I think they're hoping the replacement units, with their
added features, will encourage me to do more and thus run up a bigger
bill. *For me, it was a pain to transition from one unit to another
since it worked differently.

For our British posters, I have a question about telephone dials. *Did
the letters* on British telephone dials always correspond to those of
US dials? *How about those of other European countries?

1
2=ABC
3=DEF
4=GHI
5=JKL
6=MNO
7=PRS (Q added later.)
8=TUV
9=WXY (Z added later)
0 operator *(US dials had a Z before 1950 but rarely used).

I heard some countries may have had the Q and O in different
positions.

*Letters on dials were originally to aid in dialing exchange names, eg
PEnnsylvania 6-5000 instead of 736-5000. *The US gradually
transitioned to "All Number Calling" by 1980.

Did the reply just to you get through, of is Google still playing up?
If you didn't receive it let me know, and I'll send it to you by other
means.

On 31/03/2012 19:10, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Stephen wrote:
On 31-Mar-12 10:48, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Graham wrote:
On 30/03/2012 21:17, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Right. Callers from outside your country sure appreciate that
caller pays surcharge on top of the charge for international long distance,
as it's not readily apparent to foreigners that caller pays applies.

Anyone dialling from outside the UK can spot a UK mobile number as
it will start +44 7... (where + is 011 for NANP countries).

+ is the international instruction to dial the routing digits to make
an international call. I believe we all recognize it.

You'd be surprised. Many Americans probably don't know what our int'l
dialing prefix is since they've never used it--and it's not necessary
for int'l calls to other countries in the NANP.

I have a GSM handset. Every call is dialed with country code, although
I can dial 10 digits domestically. I have to dial a literal + for
international dialing outside NANP.

Also, on some mobile phones, the int'l prefix is actually "01", which
many people may not distinguish from the "1" that sometimes precedes
NANP calls (including Caller ID, on some carriers).

I wonder why that is, as that would get you operator assistance on a
land line call.

It's up to your calltime provider to advise you how much calls will
cost. (Who else can say?)

My service won't know in advance under all circumstances.

Can you provide an example? I can't think of one.

I haven't had a little surprise on my bill in a while. Next time it happens,
I'll let you know.

I do note that several countries in NANP have surcharged numbers, I
assume mainly for caller pays mobile. That should be a surprise to
anyone.

I'm not aware of any surcharged numbers other than the well-known
(within the NANP, at least) 900 and 976 numbers.

Look at the list our friend pointed out. That's where I noticed it.

There are several countries in the NANP that charge ridiculous int'l
toll rates for numbers, hoping that clueless Americans can be enticed
into dialing them, but that's it.

You're talking about that fraud. Calls didn't even terminate there. The
telecom was splitting the long distance settlement fees with those
call centers.

Also, there are new countries in the NANP.

The newest one that I can think of is St. Maarten, which joined NANP on
30 September with the 721 area code, from its previous country code of +599.

I know that Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands
switched their respective country codes to area codes in the late 90s.

Has there been or anybody else as of late will there be? Does St. Pierre
et Miquelon plan to eventually join NANP? (I can't see that happening,
to be honest.)

On 31/03/2012 21:58, Phil wrote:
Graham writes:

On 30/03/2012 21:17, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Right. Callers from outside your country sure appreciate that
caller pays surcharge on top of the charge for international long distance,
as it's not readily apparent to foreigners that caller pays applies.

Anyone dialling from outside the UK can spot a UK mobile number as
it will start +44 7... (where + is 011 for NANP countries).

Almost always true, there is a nasty group of numbers in this range that
look like mobile numbers, this is +44 70xxx (070xxx) range which are
charged at far higher rates than mobiles and are not included in bundled
minutes. They are called Personal Numbers and no doubt catch a lot of
people out.

Phil

German mobiles always start with +49 17X XXX XXXX, whereas Italians are
always +39 3XX XXX XXXX.

I wonder what San Marino's mobile prefixes are?

On Mar 31, 9:29*pm, "Michael R N Dolbear" wrote:

AT&T had radiophones working in St Louis (and later other cities) in
1946, so likely that zero generation technology. I understand that
local calls could be dialed - no operator. I recall a early Ed McBain
where this is a plot point. A radio link to a central exchange just
replaced the normal landline.

The original mobile phone system was strictly manual. An improvement
in the 1960s allowed dialing.

As to "zero generation", I strongly suspect AT&T's experience in
wartime military communications contributed to making mobile phones
practical. They (and others) had to rush to develop improved two-way
radios for tanks and jeeps.

*The concepts of frequency reuse and handoff as well as a number of
other concepts that formed the basis of modern Cell Phone technology
are first described in Patent Number 4152647, issued **May 1, 1979** to
Charles A. Gladden and Martin H. Parelman, both of Las Vegas, Nevada . . ..

The Bell System Technical Journal has an issue devoted to explaining
original cellular technology. As mentioned, the Penn Central
Metroliner train phones had an early method of automatic seamless
handoffs from one tower to the next and selecting an empty channel,
including special provisions for the Baltimore Tunnels.

On Apr 1, 6:20*am, wrote:

*Letters on dials were originally to aid in dialing exchange names, eg
PEnnsylvania 6-5000 instead of 736-5000. *The US gradually
transitioned to "All Number Calling" by 1980.

I wrote a reply to this, but for some reason Google Groups won't allow
me to send it. *I'll try to send it as a reply just to you, which may
be better since it's quite long, and off-topic for this group.-

The above came through fine. Not sure why google rejected your other
reply.

An email won't work. This thread has already gone way off topic, so
it probably won't hurt to post it publicly. Others may find it of
interest. Maybe break it up into parts. Thanks.

(Trains and telecommunications have many 'connections' in that they're
both common carriers, some of telephone technology is used for
signalling, and trains always have been heavy users of
telecommunications, including development of their own networks.)

On Apr 1, 6:53*am, "
wrote:

Also, there are new countries in the NANP.
The newest one that I can think of is St. Maarten, which joined NANP on
30 September with the 721 area code, from its previous country code of +599.
I know that Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands
switched their respective country codes to area codes in the late 90s.
Has there been or anybody else as of late will there be? Does St. Pierre
et Miquelon plan to eventually join NANP? (I can't see that happening,
to be honest.)-

Originally Mexico was to have an area code, but that was changed to a
separate country code. Not sure why, it would seem to make sense to
make it part of NANP.

As to St. Pierre and Miquelon, there are so few people living there it
probably doesn't matter. It is amazing that there is a French colony
embedded within the US and Canada. Very few people know about it.

wrote:
On 31/03/2012 19:10, Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Also, there are new countries in the NANP.

The newest one that I can think of is St. Maarten, which joined NANP on
30 September with the 721 area code, from its previous country code of +599.

Ah, yes. Looking at Planning Letter 434 http://nanpa.com/pdf/PL_434.pdf ,
+1 721 has been in effect since that date. Use of +599 ends September 30,
2012. However, +599 remains in effect for Curacao, Sint Eustatius, Saba,
and Bonaire. Is this about Sint Maarten promoting closer association with
the United States, or does it reflect long, lingering hard feelings about
the decades-long dissolution of Netherlands Antilles? Both Sint Maarten
and Curacao are now independent of the Netherlands, but the other three
aren't. Those four continue to share the old Netherlands Antilles +599
numbering plan.

I know that Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands
switched their respective country codes to area codes in the late 90s.

Hah! You had no idea that those Pacific Oceana islands were in North America,
did you (or Hawaii for that matter)?

American Samoa 10/2/2004
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) and Guam 7/1/1997

I don't think I'm forgetting any other expansion.

AT&T created the numbering plan in 1947, and it took effect in 1951. It's
said that they intended to number all the world's countries within it, but
I don't see how there could have possibly been sufficient numbering space.

If anyone cares, NANP members are United States, Canada, Bermuda, parts
of the Caribbean, and parts of Pacific Oceana.

Caribbean portions include Bahamas, Barbados, Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda,
British Virgin Islands, US Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Grenada at the
very edge of the Caribbean Sea, Turks and Caicos Islands, Montserrat,
Sint Maarten as we've discussed, St. Lucia, Puerto Rico, Dominica,
St. Vincent and Grenadines, Dominican Republic (one of the few countries
in NANP that were neither British nor US), Trinidad and Tobago, St. Kitts
and Nevis, and Jamaica. Pacific Oceana includes CNMI, Guam, and American
Samoa.

Has there been or anybody else as of late will there be? Does St. Pierre
et Miquelon plan to eventually join NANP? (I can't see that happening,
to be honest.)

Ah. France's last stand in North America. Haven't heard anything about it.