I don't think that anyone offers this any more.
The second phone was identified in the SBMS switch and when an incoming call
happened both phones would ring. First one to answer got the call.
No, you could not transfer the call to the other phone and yes, the both phones
could mke calls at the same time.
My wife and I had this setup for a number of years. Only the primary phone on
the account could roam and when it was roaming the other one couldn't receive
any calls, only make them.
We got where we needed to both be able to roam so canceled that plan.
--
John S.
e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net
Well, it was more than a coupla years ago, but yes, at one time there
was a pre-Cingular service offering that allowed two handsets to share
the same number. Each had it's own ESN, they could each originate calls
independently, inbound calls were answered by the first send button
pressed, one was main, the other the extension. Only the main ESN could
roam, the extension was home-only, no transer of calls or conferencing
between the two.
That service has gone the way of the dodo bird.
--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'
"All that we do is touched with ocean, yet we remain on the shore of
what we know." -- Richard Wilbur
> I don't think that anyone offers this any more.
AFAIK, you're correct.
> The second phone was identified in the SBMS switch and when an incoming call
> happened both phones would ring. First one to answer got the call.
The service, which ran $19.99/month, was called "Flexphone" by SBMS.
It was really designed to allow someone with a car-mounted phone to
also take calls on a handheld when out of the car. When the
conversion to digital came along, flexphone went away, since it lost
it's "raison d'etre".
> No, you could not transfer the call to the other phone and yes, the both phones
> could mke calls at the same time.
But the two phones couldn't call each other, IIRC, since by calling
"yourself" the call would go right to voicemail.
> My wife and I had this setup for a number of years. Only the primary phone on
> the account could roam and when it was roaming the other one couldn't receive
> any calls, only make them.
I've got to hand it to you, John- you solved the mystery of the ages-
you figured out how to give your wife the safety and security of
wireless, yet render her incapable of calling you! Kudos! ;-)
> We got where we needed to both be able to roam so canceled that plan.
I always wondered about the roaming restriction. I suspect since
other carriers didn't support flexing, they could only authenticate
one ESN with a given number?
While it's sad that flexphone went away, the advent of cheap family
plans makes the limitations of flexphone less desirable. Flexing can
be pretty much simulated with a family plan and conditional call
forwarding, without the roaming limitations or inability to call each
other.
This is correct, the the two phones couldn't call each other, a limitation that
we also had to do away with as time passed.
>I've got to hand it to you, John- you solved the mystery of the ages-
>you figured out how to give your wife the safety and security of
>wireless, yet render her incapable of calling you! Kudos! ;-)
I sometimes wish that this was still the case!!! :-)
Back in those days, call forwarding didn't cost anything either. Then they
started charging for it - 10¢ on a mobile phone and 2¢ for forwarding to a land
line.
Now of course they charge the same for all forwarded calls when (IMHO) they
should be free.
Well, not having the service for myself, I can see where I misunderstood
that point. And now, having allowed my left brain cell to communicate
coherently with my right brain cell, this makes sense. The ESN that
answered the system page (first) would be the one to get the ring signal
on the reverse control channel of the appropriate cell - the other ESN
would get dusted. Holy cow, no wonder that service died. Thank you for
your clarification.