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.

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

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
on what license terms (hint: it's often on a per slot basis) - and
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.

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.

On 18/07/2019 09:19, wrote:
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.

Clearly not in core networks. That's obvious.

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.

So who does O2 etc buy their core network equipment from? How do they
charge the operator for their software, hardware and services?


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.

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
been profligate with number usage in the past and frankly we are running
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
subscriber basis. Those systems also have a finite capacity per
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.

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.

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.

In message , at 19:44:43 on Wed, 17 Jul
2019, remarked:

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.

Ah, the marginal costs fallacy rears its ugly head.

That's even assuming there's facilities which aren't charged to the
operator on a per-number basis.

Then there's a few phones which need a "5v" SIM, and don't work with a
3v one. Those SIMs are getting harder to find (some say that it's only
Pound-shop Orange SIMs these days, although I have a very old T-Mobile
SIM which is compliant).

Never realised there were 2 types of chips.

Apparently here are three.

Presumably the 5V are the early types of SIM?

Yes, the original ones. And it seems there are few people still making
very cheap phones with [old] chipsets that are also only 5v compatible.
--
Roland Perry

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

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