Death to POTS ? !

[freeradical]

rgG wrote:
Getting rid of wire, completely is not a good idea.

That wire also represents an enormous investment. I've read that something like 80% of AT&T's capital is in the last wire. This is why they were so desperate to milk that investment by providing DSL. The dirty little secret about AT&T is that expensive long distance phone call charges were used to subsidize local phone service...

[hal]

Ever since I moved my 20 year land line to my iPhone, I've regretted it...

I've been thinking about getting a new landline just to have the service when the cell tower goes down, when the power goes down. When the sheet really hits the fan, the only thing that works is a landline.

That and a truly clear call was such a wonderful thing...

[Bill in NC]

Copper's going away everywhere.

Cheaper to replace it with fiber when there are problems, e.g. there are fewer worries about an underground trunk full of water when it's carrying unpowered fiber instead of copper.

The question is how much of the more expensive, rural system goes wireless to cut costs (we'll still be wired here in the city) - and can AT&T get close to current PUC reliability requirements with wireless?

Personally I'd love to see everyone have fiber to the home, but who pays for that deployment, especially out in Hooterville?

[Mike Johnson]

Paul F. wrote:
Try reading the sentence as a whole, you arrogant jacckass.

That's uncalled for.

[Acer]

We have the lowest-cost, bare-bones Verizon "digital" POTS over fiber. It's defacto VOiP, at ten times the cost with none of the perks. I looked into dropping the voice and keeping the FiOS internet bare for OOMA, and it costs just as much for FiOS alone as it does in a bundle.

[deckeda]

Everything's in a bundle, and every player wants to provide you with it all and incentivise just enough so that it's the least objectionable way to buy from them, the lessor of all evils.

It's all watered down and branded and overpriced and the costs are hidden behind words like "choice", "preference" and of course, "competition." Food for successful lobbyists.

[mrlynn]

Interesting. My grown kids rely on cell phones (one has a land line, but rarely uses it). I think cellular service is spotty and poor enough, even in relatively urban areas, that I do not want to be without a land line. But our main 'household' land line is through RCN cable, now 'digital', so probably something like VOIP.

I do still have my two business lines (though I don't really need them any more), through One Communication, now part of Earthlink. These lines are leased from Verizon, and I believe are still entirely legacy copper. When RCN goes down, they still work. My wife uses the fax line to call patients, so they won't get a usable number (they can page her).

/Mr Lynn

[testcase]

rgG wrote:
Getting rid of wire, completely, is not a good idea.

:agree:

[kj4btkljv]

hal wrote:
I've been thinking about getting a new landline just to have the service when the cell tower goes down.

How often does that happen?

Jeff

[Speedy]

Some states have already eliminated universally available POTS. The rural areas get dumped. The little guy gets screwed by the big corporations and certain states let this happen.