Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.mobile.android > #146096 > unrolled thread
| Started by | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-01-03 08:21 -0500 |
| Last post | 2025-01-04 02:51 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 89 — 11 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.android
texst to a landline micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-01-03 08:21 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-03 13:38 +0000
Re: texst to a landline micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-01-03 09:31 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 18:23 +0000
Re: texst to a landline micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> - 2025-04-02 18:24 -0400
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-04-03 09:49 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-03 15:48 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-03 20:52 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-03 22:24 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2025-01-04 10:21 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 12:55 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 15:06 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 17:33 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 00:48 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-01-05 22:56 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 19:41 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 20:01 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:43 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 22:56 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 11:00 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-03 20:06 -0500
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 02:47 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 09:42 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 08:20 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 13:39 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 15:12 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 11:24 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-01-04 15:22 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 11:32 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-01-05 17:08 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 18:54 +0000
Re: texst to a landline The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 12:25 -0800
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-05 15:32 -0500
Re: texst to a landline The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 13:42 -0800
Re: texst to a landline Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-01-05 22:35 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-03 22:17 +0100
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-03 22:37 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 09:31 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 12:19 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 12:46 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-03 22:34 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-03 20:07 -0500
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 02:48 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 09:08 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 08:37 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 17:36 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 09:07 +0100
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 12:47 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 08:52 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:19 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 00:39 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-05 03:50 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-05 13:00 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 08:35 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 08:25 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 14:01 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 11:38 -0500
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 23:02 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 17:42 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-04 17:40 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-05 10:28 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:24 +0000
Re: texst to a landline AJL <noemail@none.com> - 2025-01-04 09:40 -0700
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-04 18:32 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-04 15:47 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 00:19 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2025-01-05 09:12 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-05 10:31 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> - 2025-01-04 10:25 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 00:14 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-05 03:54 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 23:34 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-06 08:23 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-06 14:35 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-06 13:43 +0000
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-06 15:10 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-06 16:22 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-06 10:55 -0500
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-04 20:11 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2025-01-03 19:02 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-03 19:17 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-03 15:26 +0100
Re: texst to a landline The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-01-05 12:05 -0800
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-03 15:38 -0500
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-03 22:41 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2025-01-03 22:37 +0000
Re: texst to a landline Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> - 2025-01-04 09:10 +0100
Re: texst to a landline Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> - 2025-01-03 20:11 -0500
Re: texst to a landline "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-04 02:51 +0100
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 08:21 -0500 |
| Subject | texst to a landline |
| Message-ID | <rsofnjpf31014t083pd40ba8qhsi08hu69@4ax.com> |
When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it can't receive texts?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 13:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltq7iqF7jg1U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146096 |
micky wrote: > When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some > indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it > can't receive texts? Here in the UK, text messages *can* be delivered to landlines, either to text-capable phones using an extension of the caller-ID delivery mechanism, or via a robot voice ... don't you have similar over there?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 09:31 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <p2rfnjdck84fvjcg1oiqbu45pfvjjrqmpn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #146098 |
In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 3 Jan 2025 13:38:34 +0000, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>micky wrote:
>
>> When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some
>> indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it
>> can't receive texts?
>
>Here in the UK, text messages *can* be delivered to landlines, either to
>text-capable phones using an extension of the caller-ID delivery
>mechanism, or via a robot voice ... don't you have similar over there?
I don't know. I don't think so. For several years I have beeen the
contact person for the people who plow (plough?) our streets when it
snows. I saw the contract yesterday and it has my landline first, and
my cell number. I'm still living in the 1950's and I envisioned them
calling me on the phone, but now I see they send texts. I got one on
the cell a year ago and another yesterday. I've never gotten any
message from them on my landline, so I wonder if they tried and realized
it wasn't accepting texts and they switched to the other number. --- A
couple weeks ago they came out and salted the roads(not straight salt
but some better concoction) and then it didn't snow at all, but they
charged us 2000 dollars. Because of details in our favor in the
contract, we are refusing to pay. I'm trying to prevent a second
mix-up.
I googled your question and so-called AI says "Yes, US landlines can
accept text messages, but they are not designed to do so by default:
How it works
To receive texts, you need to set up your landline with a text to
landline service. When you send a text to a landline, the service
records your message in a female voice and calls the recipient's phone.
If the recipient answers, they can choose to accept the message. If the
call goes to voicemail, the recording is delivered there."
I use Verizon landline but it's VOIP. VErizon is a very big company
here.
Hmmm. This came up just a couple nights ago also. I'm been sick and
wanted my food delivered. I set that up during the pandemic, and it
worked, but now it's changed and wants to send me a code and it only has
my landline, so I get no code. I can't change the phone number, because
they want to send a text to the original number telling me I'm changing
it. LOL Maybe if I can set up text to landline, I won't have to open
a new account.
OTOH, heres a message from last April:
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/how-can-i-receive-a-text-on-a-landline/0bd1f02d-904e-4585-9a50-1d7b3091e4f6
I'm trying to log in into my account. I had this phone number linked to
my account back in the 2017 or 2018 when I first made it and I could
receive a call. Now I don't know why they removed this option. I just
want to log in back to my account to reset my PIN because I'm receiving
an error message.
Microsoft answers "Landlines are not eligible for verification codes.
The landline is also a landline phone, which can only make and receive
calls, and does not have the function of sending and receiving text
messages." So you seem to know more than they do!
One VErizon page which doesn't say if it's talking about true landline
or voip / FIOS landline says it can be set up and will cost me 25 cents
for each text I get, and I w9ll probably get spam The page also has no
date . How can a responsible company print date dependent information
and not give the date ? I don't know but i see it often .
Trying to find how to allow texts to a Verizion FIOS line has been
suprisingly unsuccessful.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 18:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl9df3.238.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146102 |
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: > In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 3 Jan 2025 13:38:34 +0000, Andy Burns > <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > > >micky wrote: > > > >> When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some > >> indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it > >> can't receive texts? > > > >Here in the UK, text messages *can* be delivered to landlines, either to > >text-capable phones using an extension of the caller-ID delivery > >mechanism, or via a robot voice ... don't you have similar over there? > > I don't know. I don't think so. For several years I have beeen the > contact person for the people who plow (plough?) our streets when it > snows. I saw the contract yesterday and it has my landline first, and > my cell number. I'm still living in the 1950's and I envisioned them > calling me on the phone, but now I see they send texts. I got one on > the cell a year ago and another yesterday. I've never gotten any > message from them on my landline, so I wonder if they tried and realized > it wasn't accepting texts and they switched to the other number. Sigh! As you have a landline, why don't *you* try/test it, instead of asking here for an impossible to give answer (because it depends on your and their telco and setups). If it works for you, it will also work for them, because in that test your landline telco and their setup is the deciding factor. If it does not work for you, it doesn't mean it doesn't work for them, so it's undecided and the only things you can do is ask them to test it or remove your landline number from their contact list. In most cases, the 'customer', i.e. you, should be able to do that themselves, but that depends on how customer-friendly their IT is. [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-02 18:24 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pcjlnjtmi1c7593qhik9benm3kqnkl18hn@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #146111 |
In comp.mobile.android, on 3 Jan 2025 18:23:22 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: >micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: >> In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 3 Jan 2025 13:38:34 +0000, Andy Burns >> <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >> >> >micky wrote: >> > >> >> When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some >> >> indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it >> >> can't receive texts? >> > >> >Here in the UK, text messages *can* be delivered to landlines, either to >> >text-capable phones using an extension of the caller-ID delivery >> >mechanism, or via a robot voice ... don't you have similar over there? >> >> I don't know. I don't think so. For several years I have beeen the >> contact person for the people who plow (plough?) our streets when it >> snows. I saw the contract yesterday and it has my landline first, and >> my cell number. I'm still living in the 1950's and I envisioned them >> calling me on the phone, but now I see they send texts. I got one on >> the cell a year ago and another yesterday. I've never gotten any >> message from them on my landline, so I wonder if they tried and realized >> it wasn't accepting texts and they switched to the other number. > > Sigh! As you have a landline, why don't *you* try/test it, instead of >asking here for an impossible to give answer (because it depends on your >and their telco and setups). It never occurred to me that one could get texts on a landline until someone here, I think, suggested it. And I couldn't find any information on how to do it. > > If it works for you, it will also work for them, because in that test >your landline telco and their setup is the deciding factor. > > If it does not work for you, If what works for me? > it doesn't mean it doesn't work for them, >so it's undecided and the only things you can do is ask them to test it >or remove your landline number from their contact list. In most cases, >the 'customer', i.e. you, should be able to do that themselves, but that >depends on how customer-friendly their IT is. > >[...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-04-03 09:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vslsks.40c.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #147521 |
micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: > In comp.mobile.android, on 3 Jan 2025 18:23:22 GMT, Frank Slootweg > <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: > > >micky <NONONOmisc07@fmguy.com> wrote: > >> In comp.mobile.android, on Fri, 3 Jan 2025 13:38:34 +0000, Andy Burns > >> <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > >> > >> >micky wrote: > >> > > >> >> When someone unknowingly sends a text to a landline, does he get some > >> >> indication back that the text did not reach the destination, because it > >> >> can't receive texts? > >> > > >> >Here in the UK, text messages *can* be delivered to landlines, either to > >> >text-capable phones using an extension of the caller-ID delivery > >> >mechanism, or via a robot voice ... don't you have similar over there? > >> > >> I don't know. I don't think so. For several years I have beeen the > >> contact person for the people who plow (plough?) our streets when it > >> snows. I saw the contract yesterday and it has my landline first, and > >> my cell number. I'm still living in the 1950's and I envisioned them > >> calling me on the phone, but now I see they send texts. I got one on > >> the cell a year ago and another yesterday. I've never gotten any > >> message from them on my landline, so I wonder if they tried and realized > >> it wasn't accepting texts and they switched to the other number. > > > > Sigh! As you have a landline, why don't *you* try/test it, instead of > >asking here for an impossible to give answer (because it depends on your > >and their telco and setups). > > It never occurred to me that one could get texts on a landline until > someone here, I think, suggested it. And I couldn't find any > information on how to do it. Sigh! Use your mobile phone and (try to) send a 'text' (SMS message) to your own landline number. You have everything needed for such a test, so you can test it yourself instead asking others: <repeat> > > Sigh! As you have a landline, why don't *you* try/test it, instead of > >asking here for an impossible to give answer (because it depends on your > >and their telco and setups). </repeat> > > If it works for you, it will also work for them, because in that test > >your landline telco and their setup is the deciding factor. > > > > If it does not work for you, > > If what works for me? Your 'text'/SMS test from your mobile phone to your landline. > > it doesn't mean it doesn't work for them, > >so it's undecided and the only things you can do is ask them to test it > >or remove your landline number from their contact list. In most cases, > >the 'customer', i.e. you, should be able to do that themselves, but that > >depends on how customer-friendly their IT is. > > > >[...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 15:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vl9ide$2l66$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146102 |
On 1/3/2025 9:31 AM, micky wrote: > Trying to find how to allow texts to a Verizion FIOS line has been > suprisingly unsuccessful. > There's no such thing. Think it through. Where could the text display even if it did come through? If the sender converts it to voice then that's a recorded audio message, not a text. You can't convert it to voice on your end because you can't receive it in the first place. I've occasionally come across websites that offer an audio recording for 2FA. The robot voice calls and recites a code. But even with that, as I recall, they refused to provide the service once I had an account set up, so I could no longer use my account! Apparently they thought I was just kidding about not having a cellphone. Most people live on their cellphones, so it's highly unlikely that anyone is going to take the trouble to set up a text-to-speech conversion just for you. I've found this repeatedly. I fill out a form giving my home phone, but somehow they record it as my cellphone... It's got to a point where many people refuse to even understand the concept of a landline.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 20:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltr0vlFbk0uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146125 |
Newyana2 wrote: > micky wrote: > >> Trying to find how to allow texts to a Verizion FIOS line has been >> suprisingly unsuccessful. > > There's no such thing. Think it through. Where could the text display > even if it did come through? Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability when on a PSTN/POTS line.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 22:24 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vl9kip$25ste$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146126 |
On 03.01.25 21:52, Andy Burns wrote: > Newyana2 wrote: > >> micky wrote: >> >>> Trying to find how to allow texts to a Verizion FIOS line has been >>> suprisingly unsuccessful. >> >> There's no such thing. Think it through. Where could the text display >> even if it did come through? > > Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability > when on a PSTN/POTS line. In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 10:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <elen4l-teih.ln1@q957.zbmc.eu> |
| In reply to | #146131 |
Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: > On 03.01.25 21:52, Andy Burns wrote: > > Newyana2 wrote: > > > >> micky wrote: > >> > >>> Trying to find how to allow texts to a Verizion FIOS line has been > >>> suprisingly unsuccessful. > >> > >> There's no such thing. Think it through. Where could the text display > >> even if it did come through? > > > > Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability > > when on a PSTN/POTS line. > > In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist > anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > There are still **some** POTS lines in the UK, but they are being phased out. -- Chris Green ·
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 12:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltspeiFk8ulU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146131 |
Jörg Lorenz wrote: > Andy Burns wrote: > >> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability >> when on a PSTN/POTS line. > > In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist > anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 15:06 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <2srn4lxduj.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146184 |
On 2025-01-04 13:55, Andy Burns wrote: > Jörg Lorenz wrote: > >> Andy Burns wrote: >> >>> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability >>> when on a PSTN/POTS line. >> >> In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist >> anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries > are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only > Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and > even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... In Spain Telefónica claims to have done it. Users that have not been switched to fibre have radio now. I don't know about other companies, but for example the old ONO, currently Vodafone, installed fibre to the block, coaxial to the home, then copper pair to the room. I don't know what exact technology. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 17:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vlbntb$1qbmu$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146184 |
On 04.01.25 13:55, Andy Burns wrote: > Jörg Lorenz wrote: > >> Andy Burns wrote: >> >>> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability >>> when on a PSTN/POTS line. >> >> In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist >> anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries > are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only > Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and > even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... Nonsense. Switzerland ended POTS/PSTN 2017. Scandinavia and Switzerland are at least 5 year rather 10 ahead of Germany which is massively underdeveloped compared to Switzerland and Scandinavia. Worse so in mobile telecommunication. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 00:48 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlckta$mpa1$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146201 |
Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: > On 04.01.25 13:55, Andy Burns wrote: >> Jörg Lorenz wrote: >> >>> Andy Burns wrote: >>> >>>> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability >>>> when on a PSTN/POTS line. >>> >>> In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist >>> anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. >> I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries >> are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only >> Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and >> even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... > > Nonsense. Switzerland ended POTS/PSTN 2017. > > Scandinavia and Switzerland are at least 5 year rather 10 ahead of > Germany which is massively underdeveloped compared to Switzerland and > Scandinavia. Worse so in mobile telecommunication. > The UK only *started* phasing out POTS at the end of 2023...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 22:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <zSw*doS3z@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> |
| In reply to | #146232 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote: > Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> wrote: > > On 04.01.25 13:55, Andy Burns wrote: > >> Jörg Lorenz wrote: > >> > >>> Andy Burns wrote: > >>> > >>>> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability > >>>> when on a PSTN/POTS line. > >>> > >>> In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist > >>> anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > >> I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries > >> are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only > >> Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and > >> even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... > > > > Nonsense. Switzerland ended POTS/PSTN 2017. > > > > Scandinavia and Switzerland are at least 5 year rather 10 ahead of > > Germany which is massively underdeveloped compared to Switzerland and > > Scandinavia. Worse so in mobile telecommunication. > > > > The UK only *started* phasing out POTS at the end of 2023... 2020, although it was only for new connections initially - ie you could order VDSL broadband without a phone line, and got a VOIP service instead. Forced replacement of POTS with VOIP only started to roll out in 2021. ( https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/tag/voip for the timeline) Theo
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 19:41 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlc6dc.pa0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146184 |
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > Jörg Lorenz wrote: > > > Andy Burns wrote: > > > >> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability > >> when on a PSTN/POTS line. > > > > In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist > > anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries > are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only > Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and > even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... And even if it's IP telephony, the user end, i.e. the 'last mile' can still be POTS, i.e. local copper wire and *analog* telephones. For example my neighbour (in The Netherlands) still has that and she doesn't want to change and she doesn't have to change. OTOH, AFAIK her base-station/handset combination is DECT, so the very last bit is partly digital, but not IP. Confusing, isn't it!? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 20:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltticaFo72iU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146213 |
Frank Slootweg wrote: > the 'last mile' can > still be POTS, i.e. local copper wire andanalog telephones. For > example my neighbour (in The Netherlands) still has that and she doesn't > want to change and she doesn't have to change. BT here are going to have an option for non-broadband users to continue with a "POTS-like" service for a few years beyond the supposed PSTN retirement date. There has been concern over phone lines stopping working during power cuts, has your PTT made provision for that?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 20:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlca0u.pa0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146215 |
Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: > Frank Slootweg wrote: > > > the 'last mile' can > > still be POTS, i.e. local copper wire andanalog telephones. For > > example my neighbour (in The Netherlands) still has that and she doesn't > > want to change and she doesn't have to change. > > BT here are going to have an option for non-broadband users to continue > with a "POTS-like" service for a few years beyond the supposed PSTN > retirement date. Our relatives in Australia had a complete - quite bulky - NBN (National Broadband Network) fibre broadband setup, complete with battery backup power, just for their landline. Never mind that the phone was DECT, so it would be dead anyway if the power failed. (Now they've moved and are mobile phone only.) > There has been concern over phone lines stopping working during power > cuts, has your PTT made provision for that? "power cuts"!? What are those!? Just kidding. Our grid has been very, very reliable, but now with the energy transition that has/will become worse, because there's too much power (both supply and demand), but too little grid. But to answer your question, I have no idea how that will be addressed. Currently probably one of the two (mobile/landline) will be up when the other is down, but in severe cases, both might be down. In our case, during a power cut, we also don't have water, because the pump which has to pump the water up in our appartment building runs on power and has no battery backup.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 22:56 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <udno4lxpf3.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146213 |
On 2025-01-04 20:41, Frank Slootweg wrote: > Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote: >> Jörg Lorenz wrote: >> >>> Andy Burns wrote: >>> >>>> Aren't DECT phone common over there? Many of them have SMS capability >>>> when on a PSTN/POTS line. >>> >>> In Europe IP-Telephone Services are standard. POTS/PSTN does not exist >>> anymore. This dates back to 2017 in the case of Switzerland. > > >> I think you are overstating the facts, I'm sure most European countries >> are in the process of migrating to VoIP, as far as I can tell only >> Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden claim to have completed this, and >> even then, does "completed" mean absolutely 100%, I doubt it ... > > And even if it's IP telephony, the user end, i.e. the 'last mile' can > still be POTS, i.e. local copper wire and *analog* telephones. For > example my neighbour (in The Netherlands) still has that and she doesn't > want to change and she doesn't have to change. Depends on the country. Here, those people that did not want to change, have been forced to change, or service would be simply stopped. On Telefónica, which I think it is still the major provider, it is fibre or radio for the landline. Copper, no way. Same thing for those providers that simply rented the service from Telefónica. > > OTOH, AFAIK her base-station/handset combination is DECT, so the very > last bit is partly digital, but not IP. Confusing, isn't it!? :-) -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 11:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlds99.11bs.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146224 |
Carlos E.R. <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote: > On 2025-01-04 20:41, Frank Slootweg wrote: [...] > > And even if it's IP telephony, the user end, i.e. the 'last mile' can > > still be POTS, i.e. local copper wire and *analog* telephones. For > > example my neighbour (in The Netherlands) still has that and she doesn't > > want to change and she doesn't have to change. > > Depends on the country. Here, those people that did not want to change, > have been forced to change, or service would be simply stopped. On > Telefónica, which I think it is still the major provider, it is fibre or > radio for the landline. Copper, no way. As I mentioned in another response, in Australia my relatives were indeed forced to a fibre NBN (broadband) setup with battery backup just for their landline. AFAIK, we're not yet at this stage in The Netherlands. Anyway, as I said, only the last part is copper and theoretically it could stay that way. I.e. like my HFC (Hybrid Fiber Coaxial) Internet/TV connection: Nearly all of it is fiber, but the last part is coaxial cable. [...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 5 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web