5 ms·

AT&T: landline phone service must die; only question is when

25 points by tshtf 17y ago

nfnaaron 17y ago
"AT&T says it's time for POTS to die, and it wants the Federal Communications Commission to schedule its funeral." And then what will I do with my fax and answering machines?
- aaronbrethorst 17y ago
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5orss3fAEU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5orss3fAEU
bmj 17y ago
So does this mean AT&T will provide better cell coverage? As someone who builds data transfer tools for handheld products, there are people who cannot use GSM/GPRS solutions because they don't have coverage at their homes. Accommodating POTS modems is painful at times, but it means a larger majority of our users can actually transfer data when necessary.
- kscaldef 17y ago
  That's very much my thought. Even though I live in an urban area, I get sketchy cell coverage in most of my house. If I want to have a reliable conversation on my cell phone, I can't leave my living room. Moreover, I appreciate having the competition in internet access methods. Since I don't have a TV, it's cheaper for me to have DSL than a cable modem. If DSL service goes away, I would have no choice. Maybe landlines will truly be obsolete at some point, but we're not there yet.
  - gvb 17y ago
    Not only is cell coverage incomplete, but DSL reach is very limited compared to POTS http://www.dslreports.com/faq/4676 http://www.dslreports.com/faq/4676 (I cannot get DSL and I'm only three miles from my CO - apparently they don't support longer distance versions of DSL). There are vast swaths of the US that are not served by cable. The remaining option would be satellite, which is expensive.
  - grogers 17y ago
    Realistically wireless coverage inside your house will be spotty for a long time to come. And you will may never get service in your basement. I'm looking for femtocells to provide service in these situations.
- jonknee 17y ago
  UMA is what could solve this--you can switch calls between the GSM tower and over the internet through WiFi. Call passing is tricky, but the tech is here and it works. If you have WiFi at home and the office, it's game changing. T-Mobile is the only US carrier pushing it, mostly because they are the scrappy smaller player.
weegee 17y ago
VOIP doesn't approach landline quality yet. it's got a long way to go. you can't make a phone call over VOIP if the power is out. landline telephone service will continue regardless of what the marketing people say. fuck AT&T!
robotrout 17y ago
I'm not comfortable with this. If something's going to die, than let it die, but don't get the government involved, legislating it's death. AT&T has every right, I suppose, to attempt to maximize their profit by trying to get the FCC to use the power of government to change the playing field. I would hope the FCC isn't foolish enough to agree to it, however. Unfortunately, government likes power. The FCC, having recently orchestrated the death of analog television, is probably feeling a bit cocky, that they have the duty to kill all the old technologies. The two cases are different though. Analog television was not something that people's lives depended upon. It also was very obviously taking up bandwidth that was in finite supply. These things are not true for POTS. It's time will certainly come, but we're trying to move too quickly, for no reason, on the very flimsy premise that "more people could get broadband faster",
- tomjen2 17y ago
  You are quite right, the problem here is that the government has rules in place that prevents AT&T from closing down the network. Personally I am inclined to tell them to go to hell after the NSA thing, but who knows.
- zzleeper 17y ago
  Mobile costs are still too high for landlines to disappear (either as per call costs or as monthly fees). I think it's mainly because of competition issues (oligopoly) but I don't know the market that well. The second we are able to turn mobile lines into REAL dumb pipes, you'll see the end of most landlines.
- ars 17y ago
  You have it backwards. The government is preventing POTS from dying. AT&T wants the government to relax the rules so POTS can die or not die based on market forces.
  - robotrout 17y ago
    Hmm, you may be right, which puts me in a quandary, since I still want POTS to survive, and I generally dislike government intervention.
rick_2047 17y ago
I am surprised that a company would like to phase out a product which is still giving it some revenue. I am no expert but even after cutting the maintenance cost and other invisible overheads, Ma Bell's networks are still giving profit to AT&T.
- jherdman 17y ago
  VOIP margines must be high enough that urging such a move is even more profitable. It's likely, as mentioned in the article, the AT&T will push for legislative changes to improve their market position and control.
vaksel 17y ago
what the FCC should do is tell them...ok you no longer have to maintain the lines. But you can't remove them either, let the cables atrophy and die, but until they do, let the people have free phone service.
cpr 17y ago
I don't think we can rely on mobile services for emergency uses yet. I'd much rather depend on a copper wire to a central office with a multi-day battery backup system than on both a flakey cell phone and a flakey cell tower that will both quickly lose power.
- grogers 17y ago
  While your cell phone battery might be weak, why do you think that your wireless network doesn't have battery backups on all critical infrastructure? Uptime is just as big of a deal for wireless networks as it is for wired networks.
  - cpr 17y ago
    But what's the use of a robust cell tower infrastructure if my cell batteries run out? Only if I think ahead and have alternative charging methods for my cell phone (e.g., car charging, assuming my gas supply doesn't run out) does this make any sense.
- jonknee 17y ago
  We have hurricanes where I live and mobile is much better able to cope--phone lines get blown down. The carriers have done a good job with securing towers and providing onsite power. They even bring in extra capacity in critical areas on trucks: http://www.corp.att.com/ndr/images/2007Q4_1022_259_tch_satcolt.jpg http://www.corp.att.com/ndr/images/2007Q4_1022_259_tch_satco...
- russell 17y ago
  It's not so much reliability as spotty coverage. I can make calls only from my living room and not at all from many areas of town. There have been proposals for a new tower to give better coverage, but they have been shot down by all the NIMBYs. The firefighters dont want cancer. The greens dont want a fake tree in the large nature preserve (next to the giant water tanks). I will probably switch to VOIP of some sort.
HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago
What does this do to DSL? My local provider told me they could provide a dry line so I could have DSL without dialtone, but I've heard a lot of local telcos can't do this. In any case, AT&T needs to improve their service before this happens. I live out in the country and I can drop a cell signal (AT&T is my provider!) by simply walking across my living room. Cellular service is spotty at best in many locations on my small property.
- jonknee 17y ago
  DSL is being replaced by FTTP--all the major phone companies are switching to fiber. Verizon has FiOS, AT&T has U-Verse and Qwest has what they are calling "fiber optic" DSL but which isn't really DSL. It will take a while, but fiber is the future.
  - HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago
    I've been hearing that for over 10 years now. Wake me up when it's actually in my neighborhood :-)
  - bugs 17y ago
    Fiber is most definitely not the immediate future, I live in a semi-rural part of my state and dsl is available (though it is relatively slow and costs close to 50 dollars). I would be lucky to get 2Mbit internet in the next 10 years. Laying fiber is expensive, fixing and branching old phone lines... not so much.
    - Retric 17y ago
      Last I checked, it was profitable to replace mid sized bundles of copper wire with fiber and sell the copper. I don't think it works with a single strand, but it's less expensive to roll out above ground fiber than you might think.
      - bugs 17y ago
        Most of the people around here have underground power and phone lines with the land that their homes are on being from 4 to 20 acres.
Groxx 17y ago
Interesting how AT&T is saying we need to kill landlines... mayhaps they have a side-goal of getting more people onto their (expensive, like all other options) cell networks? I have no landline, but until we get nearly 100% cell coverage (far from it, currently), better networks, and better prices, no killing landlines. Oh, and significantly better upload rates on DSL, as VoIP will eat it up.

25 points by tshtf 17y ago

"AT&T says it's time for POTS to die, and it wants the Federal Communications Commission to schedule its funeral." And then what will I do with my fax and answering machines?

aaronbrethorst 17y ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5orss3fAEU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5orss3fAEU

bmj 17y ago

So does this mean AT&T will provide better cell coverage? As someone who builds data transfer tools for handheld products, there are people who cannot use GSM/GPRS solutions because they don't have coverage at their homes. Accommodating POTS modems is painful at times, but it means a larger majority of our users can actually transfer data when necessary.

kscaldef 17y ago
That's very much my thought. Even though I live in an urban area, I get sketchy cell coverage in most of my house. If I want to have a reliable conversation on my cell phone, I can't leave my living room. Moreover, I appreciate having the competition in internet access methods. Since I don't have a TV, it's cheaper for me to have DSL than a cable modem. If DSL service goes away, I would have no choice. Maybe landlines will truly be obsolete at some point, but we're not there yet.
- gvb 17y ago
  Not only is cell coverage incomplete, but DSL reach is very limited compared to POTS http://www.dslreports.com/faq/4676 http://www.dslreports.com/faq/4676 (I cannot get DSL and I'm only three miles from my CO - apparently they don't support longer distance versions of DSL). There are vast swaths of the US that are not served by cable. The remaining option would be satellite, which is expensive.
- grogers 17y ago
  Realistically wireless coverage inside your house will be spotty for a long time to come. And you will may never get service in your basement. I'm looking for femtocells to provide service in these situations.
jonknee 17y ago
UMA is what could solve this--you can switch calls between the GSM tower and over the internet through WiFi. Call passing is tricky, but the tech is here and it works. If you have WiFi at home and the office, it's game changing. T-Mobile is the only US carrier pushing it, mostly because they are the scrappy smaller player.

weegee 17y ago

VOIP doesn't approach landline quality yet. it's got a long way to go. you can't make a phone call over VOIP if the power is out. landline telephone service will continue regardless of what the marketing people say. fuck AT&T!

robotrout 17y ago

I'm not comfortable with this. If something's going to die, than let it die, but don't get the government involved, legislating it's death. AT&T has every right, I suppose, to attempt to maximize their profit by trying to get the FCC to use the power of government to change the playing field. I would hope the FCC isn't foolish enough to agree to it, however. Unfortunately, government likes power. The FCC, having recently orchestrated the death of analog television, is probably feeling a bit cocky, that they have the duty to kill all the old technologies. The two cases are different though. Analog television was not something that people's lives depended upon. It also was very obviously taking up bandwidth that was in finite supply. These things are not true for POTS. It's time will certainly come, but we're trying to move too quickly, for no reason, on the very flimsy premise that "more people could get broadband faster",

tomjen2 17y ago
You are quite right, the problem here is that the government has rules in place that prevents AT&T from closing down the network. Personally I am inclined to tell them to go to hell after the NSA thing, but who knows.
zzleeper 17y ago
Mobile costs are still too high for landlines to disappear (either as per call costs or as monthly fees). I think it's mainly because of competition issues (oligopoly) but I don't know the market that well. The second we are able to turn mobile lines into REAL dumb pipes, you'll see the end of most landlines.
ars 17y ago
You have it backwards. The government is preventing POTS from dying. AT&T wants the government to relax the rules so POTS can die or not die based on market forces.
- robotrout 17y ago
  Hmm, you may be right, which puts me in a quandary, since I still want POTS to survive, and I generally dislike government intervention.

rick_2047 17y ago

I am surprised that a company would like to phase out a product which is still giving it some revenue. I am no expert but even after cutting the maintenance cost and other invisible overheads, Ma Bell's networks are still giving profit to AT&T.

jherdman 17y ago
VOIP margines must be high enough that urging such a move is even more profitable. It's likely, as mentioned in the article, the AT&T will push for legislative changes to improve their market position and control.

vaksel 17y ago

what the FCC should do is tell them...ok you no longer have to maintain the lines. But you can't remove them either, let the cables atrophy and die, but until they do, let the people have free phone service.

cpr 17y ago

I don't think we can rely on mobile services for emergency uses yet. I'd much rather depend on a copper wire to a central office with a multi-day battery backup system than on both a flakey cell phone and a flakey cell tower that will both quickly lose power.

grogers 17y ago
While your cell phone battery might be weak, why do you think that your wireless network doesn't have battery backups on all critical infrastructure? Uptime is just as big of a deal for wireless networks as it is for wired networks.
- cpr 17y ago
  But what's the use of a robust cell tower infrastructure if my cell batteries run out? Only if I think ahead and have alternative charging methods for my cell phone (e.g., car charging, assuming my gas supply doesn't run out) does this make any sense.
jonknee 17y ago
We have hurricanes where I live and mobile is much better able to cope--phone lines get blown down. The carriers have done a good job with securing towers and providing onsite power. They even bring in extra capacity in critical areas on trucks: http://www.corp.att.com/ndr/images/2007Q4_1022_259_tch_satcolt.jpg http://www.corp.att.com/ndr/images/2007Q4_1022_259_tch_satco...
russell 17y ago
It's not so much reliability as spotty coverage. I can make calls only from my living room and not at all from many areas of town. There have been proposals for a new tower to give better coverage, but they have been shot down by all the NIMBYs. The firefighters dont want cancer. The greens dont want a fake tree in the large nature preserve (next to the giant water tanks). I will probably switch to VOIP of some sort.

HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago

What does this do to DSL? My local provider told me they could provide a dry line so I could have DSL without dialtone, but I've heard a lot of local telcos can't do this. In any case, AT&T needs to improve their service before this happens. I live out in the country and I can drop a cell signal (AT&T is my provider!) by simply walking across my living room. Cellular service is spotty at best in many locations on my small property.

jonknee 17y ago
DSL is being replaced by FTTP--all the major phone companies are switching to fiber. Verizon has FiOS, AT&T has U-Verse and Qwest has what they are calling "fiber optic" DSL but which isn't really DSL. It will take a while, but fiber is the future.
- HeyLaughingBoy 17y ago
  I've been hearing that for over 10 years now. Wake me up when it's actually in my neighborhood :-)
- bugs 17y ago
  Fiber is most definitely not the immediate future, I live in a semi-rural part of my state and dsl is available (though it is relatively slow and costs close to 50 dollars). I would be lucky to get 2Mbit internet in the next 10 years. Laying fiber is expensive, fixing and branching old phone lines... not so much.
  - Retric 17y ago
    Last I checked, it was profitable to replace mid sized bundles of copper wire with fiber and sell the copper. I don't think it works with a single strand, but it's less expensive to roll out above ground fiber than you might think.
    - bugs 17y ago
      Most of the people around here have underground power and phone lines with the land that their homes are on being from 4 to 20 acres.

Groxx 17y ago

Interesting how AT&T is saying we need to kill landlines... mayhaps they have a side-goal of getting more people onto their (expensive, like all other options) cell networks? I have no landline, but until we get nearly 100% cell coverage (far from it, currently), better networks, and better prices, no killing landlines. Oh, and significantly better upload rates on DSL, as VoIP will eat it up.