Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#71
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 10:35:20 +0100
"tim..." wrote: wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Jul 2019 07:42:38 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 12:29:56 on Sun, 14 Jul 2019, Clank remarked: Roland Perry Wrote in message: That's where the albeit fairly rare dual-SIM phone has a role. Only, for some reason, rare in the UK. The reason is obvious: so many phones are either SIM-locked to one provider, or are fitted with SIMs on non-rollover tariffs, that the opportunities for fitting a second true-Pay-as-you-go SIM are quite limited. Of course back when 2G phones first came out the SIM was on a card you could switch cards easily in seconds but presumably that was deemed too convenient for users it mitigated against the demand for ever smaller phones, but I'm sure you knew that really. Engineers didn't like creating designs for these ever smaller SIMs. It was a real PITA. But it was what Marketing wanted whereupon inserting the SIM was changed to require removing the battery IIRC for the the phone that I had that took a full credit card size SIM you still had to fit it in under the battery I had a motorola M400. The card was a seperate slot and the battery could stay connected while you changed them. The instruction booklet said you should switch the phone off before swapping SIM cards but I did it with it switched on for years and the phone was no worse for wear. I've still got it in a cupboard, could probably get a few quid from a museaum for it now. An interesting thing about these early 2G phones were the fake antennas. Apparently users expected a "proper" antenna so they added in a plastic pull out one that actually did nothing. |
#72
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 17/07/2019 16:15, David Walters wrote: On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 15:59:49 +0100, MissRiaElaine wrote: On 17/07/2019 10:30, Recliner wrote: Roland Perry wrote: I just went to Amazon to look, for my LG phone. A choice of 13 products, every single one "Currently unavailable". Presumably because your phone is ancient? The assumption is that people buy accessories when they first buy a phone, not when they unearth one in an archaeological dig. Ooh, that's a bit strong..! What's wrong with old phones, anyway..? For a 'dumbphone', not a lot. Using a smartphone once it no longer receives security patches isn't something I would do personally. I've given up on 'smart' phones, I don't like the potential for tracking and the likes of Google et al knowing where I am 24/7, nor having to charge it every day at minimum. I still use the one I have (Samsung S5 mini) as a portable data terminal for things like 2-factor authorisation etc. but there isn't a SIM in it any more and it never leaves the house. In 'flight' mode the battery lasts almost a week, good enough for me. As for phones, the Nokia 6310i reigns supreme..! I also recently unearthed my old Nokia 6150, which still works on its 18yr old battery, which although it uses the battery faster than the 6310i, still lasts a week on standby. Whereas I’m the opposite end of the phone user spectrum, I rarely use my phone for voice calls (I have done more often in the past week or so arranging car servicing etc however) or SMS (most of my contacts prefer WhatsApp), but I use my phone for everything I used to use a computer for; my laptop gets used once a month if that. Anna Noyd-Dryver |
#73
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#74
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 07:02:07 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote: On 17/07/2019 20:44, wrote: Ones where the credit rolls over and you don't have to make a regular calls to keep them alive, aren't quite as common as you claim. The networks hate them because they tend to get used in "glovebox" phones were they have all the costs of maintaining the number and the billing records, for virtually no revenue. Oh come on, its costs them precisely £0.00 to maintain a number, its simply data in a database. And you are qualified to say that how? Who supplies the database, and I've work in IT and I've worked for a telecoms company in the past. on what license terms (hint: it's often on a per slot basis) - and What license? If its a virtual network then yes, there may be a cost to maintain a number though I doubt it because they're assigned in blocks anyway. But otherwise no. that's before we get to the overall costs where there may not be a net gain per subscriber, but they have to be paid anyway - the radio network, the data centres, the backhaul, the support staff, customer services, Ofcom, etc etc etc. And how is that affected in the slightest by having unused numbers in a database? By definition if its unused there will be zero support staff and customer service costs. Perhaps you're not aware that there are no fixed circuits with cellphone systems, a phone number is just a number, nothing more and its not as if numbers are scarce. |
#76
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 10:13:30 +0100
Someone Somewhere wrote: On 18/07/2019 09:19, wrote: What license? If its a virtual network then yes, there may be a cost to maintain a number though I doubt it because they're assigned in blocks anyway. But otherwise no. So who does O2 etc buy their core network equipment from? How do they charge the operator for their software, hardware and services? Feel free to explain how any of that is relevant to individual phone numbers. And O2 *are* an operator, they own the base station equipment. Oh dear. Firstly I am well aware of how mobile networks work, but to answer your specific points numbers *are* scarce - look at the Ofcom number list - there are very few unallocated ranges. Operators have Ofcom are quite capable of making more. There are potentially 999,999,999 numbers available in the UK. We had this argument 20 years ago when IP4 was "scarce". Suddenly a lot more addresses were found when needed. Its only in the last few years they actually ran out. Off the top of my head, it's also not just a number, there will be entries in the billing system, AuC/AAA, HLR/HSS, CRM, voicemail, VoLTE TS, etc. Many of those vendors will be charging the operator on a per Which vendors will be charging O2 then? subscriber basis. Those systems also have a finite capacity per Oh FFS, you can buy terabyte consumer drives for a few hundred quid now, never mind the ones used by large corps. instance, so at some point an additional subscriber will cause the need for a large capital expenditure for a new instance, plus the data centre, power, cooling etc to host it. Yes, I'm sure unused numbers means a new data centre would be required. |
#77
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:03:26 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:15:25 on Wed, 17 Jul 2019, David Walters remarked: Ooh, that's a bit strong..! What's wrong with old phones, anyway..? For a 'dumbphone', not a lot. Using a smartphone once it no longer receives security patches isn't something I would do personally. What's the main threat you are trying to avoid? Mostly some malware getting installed via a remote or drive-by vulnerability. There are undoubtedly other unpatched vulnerabilities in my smartphone but I'd rather have protection from the known ones. I also don't run Windows Vista anymore. |
#78
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#79
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 09:28:17 on Thu, 18 Jul
2019, remarked: O2 *are* an operator, they own the base station equipment. Sure about that? It's not uncommon for it to be outsourced to people like Ericsson. -- Roland Perry |
#80
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 11:07:01 on
Thu, 18 Jul 2019, David Walters remarked: On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:03:26 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:15:25 on Wed, 17 Jul 2019, David Walters remarked: Ooh, that's a bit strong..! What's wrong with old phones, anyway..? For a 'dumbphone', not a lot. Using a smartphone once it no longer receives security patches isn't something I would do personally. What's the main threat you are trying to avoid? Mostly some malware getting installed via a remote or drive-by vulnerability. What kinds of drive-by malware has been known to be delivered via apps like Facebook and Twitter? What is the malware trying to achieve. There are undoubtedly other unpatched vulnerabilities in my smartphone but I'd rather have protection from the known ones. I also don't run Windows Vista anymore. A Windows PC is a completely different environment. Even though it's also more likely to be running anti-malware than a typical phone. -- Roland Perry |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Sim-L-Bus | London Transport | |||
HS2 expected to run alongside a dual carriageway in the Chilterns | London Transport | |||
The little git tube worker fired! | London Transport | |||
Big Brother | London Transport | |||
Oyster=Big Brother ?? | London Transport |