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 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 22:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vl9om6$3po4$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146125 |
Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote: > 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. There certainly is. > 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. Text to speech is trivially easy to accomplish computationally. I had freeware PC programme in the 90s which did it very well. In the UK receiving txt messages via landline is (was? I've not had one for ages) commonplace: texts are delivered as an automated voice message.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-03 20:07 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vla1j0$5a06$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146141 |
On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >> There's no such thing. > > There certainly is. I'm talking about the US.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 02:48 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <skgm4lxss3.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146148 |
On 2025-01-04 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: > On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: > >>> There's no such thing. >> >> There certainly is. > > I'm talking about the US. Is that in the third world, a disadvantaged country? (SCNR) -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 09:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vlaq98$26e7r$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146155 |
On 04.01.25 02:48, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-01-04 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: >> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >> >>>> There's no such thing. >>> >>> There certainly is. >> >> I'm talking about the US. > > Is that in the third world, a disadvantaged country? (SCNR) No doubt about that. *SCNR* either. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 08:37 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vlbdic$ftdv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146155 |
On 1/3/2025 8:48 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-01-04 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: >> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >> >>>> There's no such thing. >>> >>> There certainly is. >> >> I'm talking about the US. > > Is that in the third world, a disadvantaged country? (SCNR) > It's Rome to you, buddy boy. :) We're the seat of worldwide culture, while everyone else is in what we call the boondocks. Spongebob Squarepants? American. Cocoa Puffs? American. Taylor Swift? American. I rest my case. If they ever invent hot fudge sundae flavored Pepsi, that, too, will be American. What have you people got? Shakespeare. History. Literacy. The Renaissance. Big woop. If you're so smart, why did Spongebob and Lucky Charms originate in the US?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 17:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vlbo2f$1qbmu$2@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146187 |
On 04.01.25 14:37, Newyana2 wrote: > On 1/3/2025 8:48 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> On 2025-01-04 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: >>> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >>> >>>>> There's no such thing. >>>> >>>> There certainly is. >>> >>> I'm talking about the US. >> >> Is that in the third world, a disadvantaged country? (SCNR) >> > > It's Rome to you, buddy boy. :) We're the seat of > worldwide culture, while everyone else is in what we > call the boondocks. Spongebob Squarepants? > American. Cocoa Puffs? American. Taylor Swift? > American. I rest my case. If they ever invent hot > fudge sundae flavored Pepsi, that, too, will be American. > > What have you people got? Shakespeare. History. > Literacy. The Renaissance. Big woop. If you're so smart, > why did Spongebob and Lucky Charms originate in the US? Idiot. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 09:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vlaq7f$26e7r$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146148 |
On 04.01.25 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: > On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: > >>> There's no such thing. >> >> There certainly is. > > I'm talking about the US. As far as state of the art telecom services are concerned, they are one or two decades behind Europe. Not only with fixed line services. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 12:47 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <7njn4lxc3o.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146162 |
On 2025-01-04 09:07, Jörg Lorenz wrote: > On 04.01.25 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: >> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >> >>>> There's no such thing. >>> >>> There certainly is. >> >> I'm talking about the US. > > As far as state of the art telecom services are concerned, they are one > or two decades behind Europe. Not only with fixed line services. Which is weird, considering that they built very good PSTN hardware, state of the art, which was installed both sides of the pond. I'm thinking of the Lucent aka AT&T 5ESSS, for instance, witch which I worked. Of course, they charged per feature, so the operators would not activate all the features. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 08:52 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vlbed2$g21g$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146176 |
On 1/4/2025 6:47 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2025-01-04 09:07, Jörg Lorenz wrote: >> On 04.01.25 02:07, Newyana2 wrote: >>> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >>> >>>>> There's no such thing. >>>> >>>> There certainly is. >>> >>> I'm talking about the US. >> >> As far as state of the art telecom services are concerned, they are one >> or two decades behind Europe. Not only with fixed line services. > > Which is weird, considering that they built very good PSTN hardware, > state of the art, which was installed both sides of the pond. I'm > thinking of the Lucent aka AT&T 5ESSS, for instance, witch which I worked. > > Of course, they charged per feature, so the operators would not activate > all the features. > I'm not a history expert, but I think there are probably two main factors. One is that corporations have great power here. Patents, monopoly and scam marketing are rampant limitations. I get flyers from Verizon for their fiberoptic service that have maybe 500 words of disclaimers on them that I can't even read with my glasses on. It's absurd. That text lists the endless number of restrictions and gotchas that apply to their advertised sale price. And it doesn't even detail all of them. Which means it's not possible to actually find out the price of the service! Cellphones are similar. A few years ago I went around to each of 4 companies to find out what their rates were. All started at $39.99. Not one of them could tell me what the actual cost would be after they added in mickey mouse fees. A woman who was in one store to pay her bill was nice enough to show me hers. It was about $80 -- twice the advertised rate. We were forced to rent telephones until they broke up Bell Telephone. Long distance calls only became affordable much later. To this day I wouldn't call Europe. I have no idea what it would cost. The other difference in the US is that it's largely rural. I have a brother with no home cellphone access and who only recently got Internet via cable. That's common. It's expensive to run the wires. Companies don't want to maintain old wires and they don't want to put up towers in sparsely populated areas.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 20:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlc8kt.pa0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146189 |
Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
[...]
> We were forced to rent telephones until they broke up Bell
> Telephone. Long distance calls only became affordable much
> later. To this day I wouldn't call Europe. I have no idea what
> it would cost.
Well, you could install Skype on your computer (or smartphone ("Yeah,
*right*!")) and call European landlines for a few cents per minute (if
that 'much') and mobile numbers for a bit more.
And, as Carlos mentioned, you can tell beforehand whether a number is
a landline number or a mobile number.
If you can give me an example target country, I can lookup the rates
for you (or you could do it yourself).
BTW, Skype is owned by Microsoft, the company we all, and you
especially, love so much.
[...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 00:39 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlckc2$mmqa$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146217 |
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> We were forced to rent telephones until they broke up Bell
>> Telephone. Long distance calls only became affordable much
>> later. To this day I wouldn't call Europe. I have no idea what
>> it would cost.
>
> Well, you could install Skype on your computer (or smartphone ("Yeah,
> *right*!")) and call European landlines for a few cents per minute (if
> that 'much') and mobile numbers for a bit more.
Or simply use whatsapp. Large swathes of the European population use
whatsapp and calls only require data; i.e. free using home wifi.
> And, as Carlos mentioned, you can tell beforehand whether a number is
> a landline number or a mobile number.
You need to know the rules, however, as each country is different. In
France, for example, mobiles start 06/07 and landlines start 01/02/03/04/05
depending on the region.
> If you can give me an example target country, I can lookup the rates
> for you (or you could do it yourself).
>
> BTW, Skype is owned by Microsoft, the company we all, and you
> especially, love so much.
>
> [...]
>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 03:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5l8p4lx866.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146231 |
On 2025-01-05 01:39, Chris wrote: > Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote: >> Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote: ... >> And, as Carlos mentioned, you can tell beforehand whether a number is >> a landline number or a mobile number. > > You need to know the rules, however, as each country is different. In > France, for example, mobiles start 06/07 and landlines start 01/02/03/04/05 > depending on the region. There are websites that say. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-05 13:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vle3ak.k20.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146231 |
Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> > Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >> We were forced to rent telephones until they broke up Bell
> >> Telephone. Long distance calls only became affordable much
> >> later. To this day I wouldn't call Europe. I have no idea what
> >> it would cost.
> >
> > Well, you could install Skype on your computer (or smartphone ("Yeah,
> > *right*!")) and call European landlines for a few cents per minute (if
> > that 'much') and mobile numbers for a bit more.
>
> Or simply use whatsapp. Large swathes of the European population use
> whatsapp and calls only require data; i.e. free using home wifi.
Yes, but that applies to normal people in non third-world countries.
That doesn't apply here! :-) Expecting the caller to accept to use Skype
is already a big ask and probably a too big one.
But yes, we use WhatsApp with our relatives in Australia, all the
time.
[...]
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 08:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vlarsv$cqas$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146148 |
Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote: > On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: > >>> There's no such thing. >> >> There certainly is. > > I'm talking about the US. So what? Doesn't change the facts.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 08:25 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vlbcr6$fpbd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146165 |
On 1/4/2025 3:35 AM, Chris wrote: > Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote: >> On 1/3/2025 5:34 PM, Chris wrote: >> >>>> There's no such thing. >>> >>> There certainly is. >> >> I'm talking about the US. > > So what? Doesn't change the facts. > Yes, it does. I also didn't know that the systems were different, but what Andy described does not exist in the US. We have basic telephone lines, first installed by Al Bell. And we now have cellphones, which require transmission towers. About 1/3 of the US still doesn't even have cell access. I'm not sure, but I think Micky is in the US. Is so then he cannot receive texts over his landline He can only receive audio.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 14:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltst95Fl0dtU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146186 |
Newyana2 wrote: > what Andy described does not exist in the US. > We have basic telephone lines, first installed by Al Bell. > And we now have cellphones Until recently DECT phones plug into basic phone lines. Since the introduction of VoIP, the DECT base may connect to an analogue adapter, or the adapter may be built-in to the ISP router, or the base may connect to your router via ethernet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 11:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vlbo4a$ho33$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #146190 |
On 1/4/2025 9:01 AM, Andy Burns wrote: > Newyana2 wrote: > >> what Andy described does not exist in the US. >> We have basic telephone lines, first installed by Al Bell. >> And we now have cellphones > > Until recently DECT phones plug into basic phone lines. > > Since the introduction of VoIP, the DECT base may connect to an analogue > adapter, or the adapter may be built-in to the ISP router, or the base > may connect to your router via ethernet. > The more we talk about this, the more it seems that DECT merely refers to having a wired base station with wireless extensions. That's common in the US. So maybe texting to landlines is really a separate issue. In general it seems silly, anyway. Most people now use cellphones, and landline displays are very poorly suited to texting. There would be no reason to add the functionality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 23:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0ono4lxpf3.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #146203 |
On 2025-01-04 17:38, Newyana2 wrote: > On 1/4/2025 9:01 AM, Andy Burns wrote: >> Newyana2 wrote: >> >>> what Andy described does not exist in the US. >>> We have basic telephone lines, first installed by Al Bell. >>> And we now have cellphones >> >> Until recently DECT phones plug into basic phone lines. >> >> Since the introduction of VoIP, the DECT base may connect to an >> analogue adapter, or the adapter may be built-in to the ISP router, or >> the base may connect to your router via ethernet. >> > > The more we talk about this, the more it seems that DECT > merely refers to having a wired base station with wireless > extensions. That's common in the US. Yes, but the US use typically a different non standard method, each brand its own. Some might actually use DECT. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jörg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 17:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <vlbocq$1qbmt$1@solani.org> |
| In reply to | #146190 |
On 04.01.25 15:01, Andy Burns wrote: > Newyana2 wrote: > >> what Andy described does not exist in the US. >> We have basic telephone lines, first installed by Al Bell. >> And we now have cellphones > > Until recently DECT phones plug into basic phone lines. DECT has absolutely nothing to do with the backend of the telefon-system in a house. It is simply a radio standard. > Since the introduction of VoIP, the DECT base may connect to an analogue > adapter, or the adapter may be built-in to the ISP router, or the base > may connect to your router via ethernet. Exclusively internet routers are used. DECT Digital enhanced cordless telecommunications Digital Enhanced Cordless Telecommunications (DECT) is a cordless telephony standard maintained by ETSI. It originated in Europe, where it is the common standard, replacing earlier standards, such as CT1 and CT2.[1] Since the DECT-2020 standard onwards, it also includes IoT communication. Beyond Europe, it has been adopted by Australia and most countries in Asia and South America. North American adoption was delayed by United States radio-frequency regulations. This forced development of a variation of DECT called DECT 6.0, using a slightly different frequency range, which makes these units incompatible with systems intended for use in other areas, even from the same manufacturer. DECT has almost completely replaced other standards in most countries where it is used, with the exception of North America. DECT was originally intended for fast roaming between networked base stations, and the first DECT product was Net3 wireless LAN. -- "Roma locuta, causa finita." (Augustinus)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-04 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ltta59FlkaoU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #146206 |
Jörg Lorenz wrote: >> Andy Burns wrote: > >> Until recently DECT phones plug into basic phone lines. > > DECT has absolutely nothing to do with the backend of the telefon-system > in a house. It is simply a radio standard. Nevertheless, it is common for DECT phones to plug into analogue phone lines. Why is everything seen as an opportunity for an argument with you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.android
csiph-web