On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 18:43:09 +1200, Richard Malcolm-Smith
<> wrote:
>> Which cases are those ?
>
>Alarm system,
I wonder if this is easily avoided by hard wireing a normal filter in
BEFORE the alarm system, Instead of the expense of a Splitter
installation.
Additionally, if a splitter IS needed, the expense of this is in
ADDITION to the $99 fee.
>long way from the exchange,
As long as the line is capable of ADSL at all, I do not see your
point.
If the line is not capable - e.g. too far from the exchange - Telecom
do not charge you for the attempt. You do not need to pay the $99.
I have not heard of a Splitter fixing this problem.
Additionally, I understand that at 128kbit only, adsl is good for
around 10 kilometers.
>old 3 wire jackpoints installed in the house, 3 wire phones.
Had that 'problem' - it was no problem. Merely a matter of selecting a
filter that does 3 wire systems. IIRC, I got one from Dick Smiths for
about $30 2 years ago.
I did not need Telecom engineers at any point. I was well able to plug
the filter in myself.
BTW, the filter also works on two wire systems.
>> And I think 'a lot of cases' is very much wrong. A 'small minority' I
>> might accept, but not 'a lot'.
>
>Sounds like heaps to me. Other cases will largly work but have to drop the speed
>when the line is in use because the balancing is up the creek with the old 3
>wire system and most plug in filters only filtering one of the 2 legs, means
>that the ringer is sometimes not filtered.
Seems like Telecom is keeping the 3 wire filters 'secret'.
Great little scam.
>> I think most people could just install a filer on their phone jack for
>> the telephones. Sure, it cost about $30 to buy one, but it's a one off
>> cost.
>
>Per phone, and the sky box.
Well, if you are THAT hard up (and I was), you take your filter apart
and wire it in line where your phone line comes into the house. One
line goes to all the phones in the house; the other goes to your adsl
modem.
Fairly simple, but it might require people to get an engineer in,
granted.
But we are only talking about a strange group of people who can:
1. Afford a monitored alarm system.
2. But cannot afford a few $30 filters.
3. Are moving house.
>Alarms wired to capture the phoneline will not be
>able to be filtered simply by plugging in.
Well, that may be so. I'd like to know WHY though. Has anyone actually
tried it ?
And does this justify $99 to the rest of us ? Why not just charge
those people who are moving AND require a splitter to be put in ?
The rest of us - the majority surely - can just buy a couple of
filters.
>> But it's all acedemic: Telecom charge the $100 because they know they
>> have stifled any competition.
>
>Someone has to make the request for the contracter, they have to do some work at
>the exchange. Try to get any cabling contractor to go onsite somewhere for $100
>and do similar work.
The charges of the contractors are not in debate.
The need for the contractor EVERY time is.
>>>The line has to be re-jumpered to go thru the dslam equipment, this involves
>>>some work at the exchange.
>>
>> Sounds like they could computerise that.
>>
>> I assumed they did - I guess I overestimated Telecom's desire to
>> modernise.
>
>The cable has to be de-patched from the exchange, moved over to one side of the
>dslam equipment, another cable put back between the exchange and the dslam to
>carry the dialtone phone service, the line has to be tested and the job signed
>off, sure, if they have several to do at the same exchange at once then the $100
>is prob a bit over the top, but im sure there are cases where there costs are
>greater then the $99 they charge you.
Seems like a 3rd world system...
>How can you computerise the relocation of cables?
Is that a trick question ?
You use transistors. Like integrated circuits do.
E.g. you hook it up to a computer. The computer manages a bank of
electronic switches, switching things in and out as appropriate.
They used to do it with relays. Nowdays you get millions on a single
bit of silicon the size of your fingernail.
I think the tasks regularly performed by a $5 electronic calculator
chip dwarf the complexity of a archaic switch board arragement like
you describe...
>What I think is more interesting is that they can provision a 128k circuit
>nationwide for $30 to one set of customers, but to another set of customers to
>get essentially the same thing costs several times that.
Exactly. It's not as if their excuses are valid, or even superficially
valid.
They're not even attempting to make up GOOD excuses now days... Soon
it'll be 'we're doubling the rate we charge you because, well, it's
Wednesday."...
Brendan (Avatar)
--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸
Check out my cool Water Cooling Project!
http://www.computerman.orcon.net.nz/WaterCooling1.html
Email: corum.usenet@myrealbox (dot com). No Timewasters. No UCE.
My comments are IMHO, IIRC, FYI, and Copyright.
Similar Threads
