3 ms·
On POTS, call quality was arguably better, calls didn't get dropped, a handset and physical dialpad are ergonomically better, and the system in a region was les
by extra88 11y ago
On POTS, call quality was arguably better, calls didn't get dropped, a handset and physical dialpad are ergonomically better, and the system in a region was less likely to go down because of a power outage. There many ways in which POTS is worse but there is no inherent reason why the good things about it had to be lost.
- thaumasiotes 11y agoHas any of that changed? The fact that people aren't using telephones doesn't mean they've gotten worse. What was better before the internet and is worse now?
- extra88 11y agoI was mainly comparing landlines to cell phones and VOIP but even the traditional landlines may be a bit worse as they've gone from a switched to packetized infrastructure.
- ambulancechaser 11y agoWell, comparing cell phones to landlines and calling it worse seems to miss the addition of a key feature: mobility. It's kinda like comparing a home kitchen to one in an airplane and finding the airplane version woeful and without any improvement over what the microwave brought us in the 50's, all while neglecting to mention that one version is able to fly...
- doctorshady 11y agoAt the moment, the traditional phone network largely runs on a circuit switched architecture. Different companies have different plans for it; some seem perfectly content with it the way it is, others can't get out of it fast enough.
- sneak 11y agoYes, there absolutely is: packet switching is vastly more efficient than circuit switching. Almost all of the good things of the PSTN directly equate to circuit switching; almost everything that sucks about VoIP: packet switching.