5 ms·

> anyone who remembers true analog telephony knows what we have left behind in terms of synchronicity and natural flow of dialogue. You mean yelling into the p

> anyone who remembers true analog telephony knows what we have left behind in terms of synchronicity and natural flow of dialogue. You mean yelling into the phone really loud and than also knowing your paying $0.29 a minute? The technology was bad and the quality was bad unless you were calling locally. I think what your missing is people not talking to you and not being distracted by the internet or some other diversion?

ksenzee 9y ago
Long-distance audio quality in the 80s and 90s was excellent everywhere I lived in the US, no matter where I called. Remember the pin drop commercial?
- baldfat 9y ago
  YES, 100% right that was when they switched to digital from analog. The OP was saying that prior to the digital conversion it was better.
lostlogin 9y ago
No. Local calls were always free here. The conversation could flow. The calls were of relatively poor audio quality but perfectly adequate for conversation. No delays, no distortion and no dropped calls. I’d have a call with quality so poor that meaning is lost requiring a “sorry, what was that.... are you there?” about half the time now.
interfixus 9y ago
No. What I miss is telephone conversations without anyone constantly interrupting each other because we automatically interpret even tiny delays as pauses inviting us to speak.
- klibertp 9y ago
  That seems more like a matter of culture though? It's not that hard to wait several seconds before starting to speak, right?
  - interfixus 9y ago
    Unright. That is not how humans talk to each other.
    - klibertp 9y ago
      Two things: 1. I'm not sure if people are universally incapable of talking like that, ie. with a bit of self-restraint and without cutting in at every opportunity. I'm not sure, but I strongly suspect that this is related to the culture of people involved. As an example (or an anecdote) I work remotely full-time and participate in a lot of conference calls, yet I was interrupted just a couple of times. Never twice by the same person, though. 2. People are able to talk (and communicate) in so many different circumstances and environments, like over the radio, on a boat during a storm, on paper, with a flashlight and Morse code... that I don't think it's that hard for them to assimilate yet another protocol to follow when talking. It really shouldn't be impossible, I think. I really strongly suspect it's a matter of culture. I was taught, from a very young age, that interrupting someone when they're speaking is simply rude, and that if you respect someone enough to talk to them, you should also respect them enough to let them say whatever they wished to say. It's also true for many of my acquaintances, at least those from my generation and older. People who talk too much, too often and are unable to let others finish what they're saying are regarded as hyperactive, perhaps with ADHD, or really bad marketers, sect recruiters and such. This is still just an anecdote, but it at least shows that it's possible for groups of people to use a different mode of talking. An honest question: listening what the person has to say from start to finish is so tightly correlated (in my mind) with respect for that person, that I never considered that you can get interrupted, possibly many times in a row, and not feel offended. What do you think about this notion? Do you think that it's a speaker fault if he's out of words for a few seconds, and is responsible for maintaining a steady stream of speech from start to finish? In other words, how do you justify people cutting in? Or is that simply a non-issue to you?
      - gatmne 9y ago
        Your argument sounds awfully like a "you're holding it wrong" argument. Demanding that people adapt to newer technology with more restrictions than previous iterations of the technology is a tall order that many will not entertain. Rude people with poor manners is orthogonal to this issue.
nothrabannosir 9y ago
You know how I can tell that I accidentally use the normal phone app, instead of voip, when I call my family internationally? Because the sound quality is good. Low latency, no dips, no buffering, smooth. To the point that my reflex is now: “hmm , the quality is too good, this must be the normal phone.”
- ribosometronome 9y ago
  Really? My experience has been the opposite. I can tell I'm not on a Facetime audio call or what have you when the call is clearly undergoing the super lackluster compression used by the traditional system.
  - baldfat 9y ago
    Not prior to 1990. Also, you are on digital with your mobile phone, the OP I was responding to was talking about old analog lines.
- abbe_k 9y ago
  How do you tell if it's voip or not? A lot of phone operators use voip for calls. So choosing the default phone app doesn't necessarily mean that you are not using voip. And the phone operators infrastructure for voip is probably way ahead of most other call apps.
  - pfranz 9y ago
    > A lot of phone operators use voip for calls. I think the problem is that with "analogue" each jump can use a hodgepodge of their own voip going from Analog -> Digital -> Analog. So you can get multiple, lossy compressions with varying settings multiplied together. With user-initiated voip, it's a single compression over the whole connection. So it could be better than user-initiated voip, or a lot worse. At least that's my laymen's understanding of legacy phone systems.
    - abbe_k 9y ago
alxlaz 9y ago
Frankly, all I miss from the pre-VoIP world is being able to start with "Hey, how are you" instead of "Hey, can you hear me".
27182818284 9y ago
I have an old fashioned landline at work. The Sound quality vs my cell phone is night and day.
- twothamendment 9y ago
  I'm tired of these so called "phones" that do everything well - except being a phone. My "phone" is a great camera, plays games,etc. - but how I hate talking on them. I suppose a good part of the problem is the network, not my specific phone.
stronglikedan 9y ago
> yelling into the phone really loud and than also knowing your paying $0.29 a minute This does not describe any landline I've ever used ever, either locally or long distance, even to this day, even at 00:00:01 on any given New Year's Day.

ksenzee 9y ago

Long-distance audio quality in the 80s and 90s was excellent everywhere I lived in the US, no matter where I called. Remember the pin drop commercial?

baldfat 9y ago
YES, 100% right that was when they switched to digital from analog. The OP was saying that prior to the digital conversion it was better.

lostlogin 9y ago

No. Local calls were always free here. The conversation could flow. The calls were of relatively poor audio quality but perfectly adequate for conversation. No delays, no distortion and no dropped calls. I’d have a call with quality so poor that meaning is lost requiring a “sorry, what was that.... are you there?” about half the time now.

interfixus 9y ago

No. What I miss is telephone conversations without anyone constantly interrupting each other because we automatically interpret even tiny delays as pauses inviting us to speak.

klibertp 9y ago
That seems more like a matter of culture though? It's not that hard to wait several seconds before starting to speak, right?
- interfixus 9y ago
  Unright. That is not how humans talk to each other.
  - klibertp 9y ago
    Two things: 1. I'm not sure if people are universally incapable of talking like that, ie. with a bit of self-restraint and without cutting in at every opportunity. I'm not sure, but I strongly suspect that this is related to the culture of people involved. As an example (or an anecdote) I work remotely full-time and participate in a lot of conference calls, yet I was interrupted just a couple of times. Never twice by the same person, though. 2. People are able to talk (and communicate) in so many different circumstances and environments, like over the radio, on a boat during a storm, on paper, with a flashlight and Morse code... that I don't think it's that hard for them to assimilate yet another protocol to follow when talking. It really shouldn't be impossible, I think. I really strongly suspect it's a matter of culture. I was taught, from a very young age, that interrupting someone when they're speaking is simply rude, and that if you respect someone enough to talk to them, you should also respect them enough to let them say whatever they wished to say. It's also true for many of my acquaintances, at least those from my generation and older. People who talk too much, too often and are unable to let others finish what they're saying are regarded as hyperactive, perhaps with ADHD, or really bad marketers, sect recruiters and such. This is still just an anecdote, but it at least shows that it's possible for groups of people to use a different mode of talking. An honest question: listening what the person has to say from start to finish is so tightly correlated (in my mind) with respect for that person, that I never considered that you can get interrupted, possibly many times in a row, and not feel offended. What do you think about this notion? Do you think that it's a speaker fault if he's out of words for a few seconds, and is responsible for maintaining a steady stream of speech from start to finish? In other words, how do you justify people cutting in? Or is that simply a non-issue to you?
    - gatmne 9y ago
      Your argument sounds awfully like a "you're holding it wrong" argument. Demanding that people adapt to newer technology with more restrictions than previous iterations of the technology is a tall order that many will not entertain. Rude people with poor manners is orthogonal to this issue.

nothrabannosir 9y ago

You know how I can tell that I accidentally use the normal phone app, instead of voip, when I call my family internationally? Because the sound quality is good. Low latency, no dips, no buffering, smooth. To the point that my reflex is now: “hmm , the quality is too good, this must be the normal phone.”

ribosometronome 9y ago
Really? My experience has been the opposite. I can tell I'm not on a Facetime audio call or what have you when the call is clearly undergoing the super lackluster compression used by the traditional system.
- baldfat 9y ago
  Not prior to 1990. Also, you are on digital with your mobile phone, the OP I was responding to was talking about old analog lines.
abbe_k 9y ago
How do you tell if it's voip or not? A lot of phone operators use voip for calls. So choosing the default phone app doesn't necessarily mean that you are not using voip. And the phone operators infrastructure for voip is probably way ahead of most other call apps.
- pfranz 9y ago
  > A lot of phone operators use voip for calls. I think the problem is that with "analogue" each jump can use a hodgepodge of their own voip going from Analog -> Digital -> Analog. So you can get multiple, lossy compressions with varying settings multiplied together. With user-initiated voip, it's a single compression over the whole connection. So it could be better than user-initiated voip, or a lot worse. At least that's my laymen's understanding of legacy phone systems.
  - abbe_k 9y ago

alxlaz 9y ago

Frankly, all I miss from the pre-VoIP world is being able to start with "Hey, how are you" instead of "Hey, can you hear me".

27182818284 9y ago

I have an old fashioned landline at work. The Sound quality vs my cell phone is night and day.

twothamendment 9y ago
I'm tired of these so called "phones" that do everything well - except being a phone. My "phone" is a great camera, plays games,etc. - but how I hate talking on them. I suppose a good part of the problem is the network, not my specific phone.

stronglikedan 9y ago

> yelling into the phone really loud and than also knowing your paying $0.29 a minute This does not describe any landline I've ever used ever, either locally or long distance, even to this day, even at 00:00:01 on any given New Year's Day.