GTD5 Bashing and Future
Jon Baker
ramblings of Mr. Higdon, but for the benefit of our more objective
readers ...
In article <telecom...@eecs.nwu.edu>, jo...@zygot.ati.com (John
Higdon) writes:
> This is the switch that put GTE out of the switch manufacturing
> business.
The GTD5 did not put GTE out of the switch manufacturing business. A
strategic decision was made by GTE Corporation to cease selling new
GTD5 Base Units, and instead encourage the local GTE telephone
companies to buy AT&T 5ESS switches. Any comment on WHY that decision
was made would be pure speculation; I am confident, though, that is
has nothing to do with the relative quality of the GTD5.
> It has wretched three-way,
If you are referring to the voice quality of three-way, I have
explained this to you in painful detail before. Our current three-way
conference bridge provides excellent voice quality. I have no idea
what three-way hardware your local CO is using, but it may well be
old, obsolete, or defective. I'm real sorry you find your local
three-way voice quality to be inadequate, but as I've said before,
take it up with your local telco. There's very little that I or
anyone else on this newsgroup can do about it.
> very clumsy feature implementation
Are you referring to feature operation from a subscriber's
perspective, or feature implementation from a switch-engineering
perspective? For the former, our features generally operate the same
as anyone else's (5ESS, DMS, etc.). As for the latter, you could not
possibly have any idea what you're talking about, but IMHO the
features on a GTD5 are FAR easier to engineer than on the competitor's
equipment.
> and more than likely will not be equipped for ISDN or SS7 (and CLASS).
John, John, John ... how many times do we have to repeat this mantra?
The GTD5 already has SS7 and CLASS, and has had them for many years.
We are still pursuing options for ISDN features.
> Frankly, until the telcos get it together and work out some standards
> of implementation
There ARE standards of implementation, LOTS of them. REAMS of them.
And, for the most part, we all (all manufacturers) follow them to the
best of our ability. Could the standards be better? Of course. They
could provide a lot more detailed information. Getting feature
operation standards through the various standards committees is a
long, arduous, expensive process, though. They do well enough. Could
the process be better? Of course, anything could be better and more
efficient.
> I would prefer that digital switches NOT be installed in end offices.
Now, on that, I'll have no argument.
> From where I stand (average telephone user), both the GTD-5 and 5ESS
> stink big time.
As has been pointed out here, they both have their good and bad
points. I'm served by a GTD5 at work, with which I've been very
pleased. I'm served by a 5ESS at home, with which I've been less than
pleased.
> Unless one can have IDSN (at reasonable rates, thank you), digital
> switches offer nothing but disadvantages to the end user.
This one could put me on a soapbox for days, but I'll keep it terse.
We're being required to offer more services to more people at reduced
costs. Digital switching has permitted the phone companies to keep
the cost of phone service at a reasonable level, while serving an
ever-increasing and always-demanding customer base.
As for ISDN, it's doubtful you'll get it at reasonable (to you) rates
any time soon. Regardless of what your switching platform is, it
requires expensive new hardware and software, and associated support
systems. That cost is NOT going to be spread among the entire
customer base (you'd have a field day with that one). The cost is
going to be borne primarily by the ISDN subscribers, which initially
will be fairly few in number. In time, the cost will come done.
Maybe ten years. I know, you'd like it tomorrow and you want it
cheap. Well, stop being such a crybaby. We can't always get what we
want when we want it.
*flame on*
John, you've consistently demonstrated your complete ignorance of
digital switching systems in this forum. I think the readers have
been generally polite in tolerating your annoying, misinformed tirades.
Now, for the benefit of us who do know two cents worth about digital
switching systems, and wish to carry on intelligent and relevant discussions
regarding those systems, will you please SHUT UP!
*flame off*
On that topic - Steven Lichter of GTECA asks:
> Something happened and I think it may have been govenment intervention
> and I hear that the GTD-5 will continue. Maybe someone from AGCS can
> answer that.
Steve, I haven't heard anything about government intervention.
However, I do occasionally see reports of GTD5-related sales. Despite
a supposed moratorium from GTE Corp. on new GTD5 sites, we continue to
sell a couple GTD5 Base Units every year. Maybe they're to independents
-- I don't know who the actual customers are. We are certainly not
selling GTD5 Base Units by the hundreds, though! It was recently
announced (publicly) that AGCS will be shutting down the Northlake
manufacturing facility, outsourcing some functions and transferring
others to the nearby Genoa facility. With that, I don't see how we
could be selling any significant quantities of GTD5 Base Units. The
GTD5 will continue to be supported, with replacement hardware and
software upgrades, for quite some time though. (I hope).
> In time AGCS will become fully owned by AT&T and that I don't agree
> with as it will drive the price of switching equipment up since there
> will be one less manufacturer of it.
Do you really think the 5ESS could get any MORE expensive? As for the
loss of one competitor, remember you still have Ericsson, Siemens,
Alcatel, (all foreign-owned, mind you ...) Northern, and others.
While I certainly regret the loss of the GTD5 from the competitive
marketplace, I don't think there's a lack of competition in general.
J.Baker asuvax!gtephx!bakerj
DISCLAIMER : I am not an official representative of AG Communition Systems.
Jim Rees
Baker) writes:
[ in reply to John Higdon ]
> Unless one can have IDSN (at reasonable rates, thank you), digital
> switches offer nothing but disadvantages to the end user.
...
> As for ISDN, it's doubtful you'll get it at reasonable (to you) rates
> any time soon. Regardless of what your switching platform is, it
> requires expensive new hardware and software, and associated support
> systems. That cost is NOT going to be spread among the entire
> customer base (you'd have a field day with that one). The cost is
> going to be borne primarily by the ISDN subscribers, which initially
> will be fairly few in number. In time, the cost will come done.
You seem to be saying that the high cost of ISDN is related purely to
low volume. That's simply not true. If it were, why would my local
operating company only offer ISDN to Centrex customers? The phone
companies put up many barriers to ISDN. The reason is that they want
to protect their current overpriced digital offerings (leased line,
switched 56, etc). Technical advances have brought the cost of
digital services way down, and the phone companies will fight every
inch of the way to keep those cost savings to themselves rather than
pass them on to the customer. That would be fine in a free market,
but is intolerable for a state sanctioned (but unregulated, here in
Michigan) monopoly.
> John, you've consistently demonstrated your complete ignorance of
> digital switching systems in this forum ... will you please SHUT UP!
John, please keep it up. The phone companies have huge advertising
budgets and have no trouble getting across their side of the story. I
want to hear the other side. I'm quite capable of judging for myself
when Higdon is telling the truth and when he's gone off the deep end.
John Higdon
> Normally I wouldn't bother responding to the ignorant and inane
> ramblings of Mr. Higdon, but for the benefit of our more objective
> readers ...
But this struck a nerve, eh?
> The GTD5 did not put GTE out of the switch manufacturing business.
> Any comment on WHY that decision
> was made would be pure speculation;
Yes, indeed. I won't look a gift horse in the mouth. If you want to
insist that is was mysterious strategic considerations, fine. The fact
that it is discontinued is good enough for me.
> Our current three-way conference bridge provides excellent voice
> quality. I have no idea what three-way hardware your local CO is
> using, but it may well be old, obsolete, or defective.
What are you telling us? That the telco buys a GTD-5 and then goes to
the local "three-way hardware" store and buys some add-on equipment to
provide the features? If there is anything at the local telco that is
old, obsolete, or defective, it is the GTD-5. Doesn't the switch
provide its own three-way?
> Are you referring to feature operation from a subscriber's
> perspective, or feature implementation from a switch-engineering
> perspective? For the former, our features generally operate the same
> as anyone else's (5ESS, DMS, etc.). As for the latter, you could not
> possibly have any idea what you're talking about,
I am speaking from the customer's perspective. And if you claim that
the features operate the same as everyone else's, then it is you, sir,
that has not a clue about that which he speaks. Example (something you
gave not one of in your entire tirade against me): every feature
operates s-l-o-w-l-y to the point where the user is tempted to retry
the procedure. Sometimes he does and then things really get messed up.
When I drop the second call on a three-way, I expect it to happen a
little faster than three seconds later. Call waiting goes to limbo land
and one typically loses one or the other party. Oh, yeah, I know, my
telco is using some off-shore pirate brand of GTD-5.
> but IMHO the features on a GTD5 are FAR easier to engineer than on the
> competitor's equipment.
Well that sure means a lot to me as a customer. Since I write software
for custom digital switches (oh, you didn't know that, eh?) I think I
could judge that for myself if I could ever get my hands on the
material.
> John, John, John ... how many times do we have to repeat this mantra?
> The GTD5 already has SS7 and CLASS, and has had them for many years.
> We are still pursuing options for ISDN features.
Name one in California. To my knowledge, the FIRST GTD-5 in California
to run SS7 will do so later this month AS AN EXPERIMENT! Talks are
scheduled in August with Pac*Bell to discuss the possibility of SS7
interconnection.
> There ARE standards of implementation, LOTS of them. And, for the
> most part, we all (all manufacturers) follow them to the best of our
> ability.
Got some bad news for you. The GTD-5 is the worst of the lot, exceeding
even the crumminess of a 5ESS.
> I'm served by a 5ESS at home, with which I've been less than pleased.
No argument there. One cannot help but wonder if perhaps you might have
some axe to grind about the GTD-5 and its supposed wonderfulness. Naw!
> John, you've consistently demonstrated your complete ignorance of
> digital switching systems in this forum. I think the readers have
> been generally polite in tolerating your annoying, misinformed tirades.
> Now, for the benefit of us who do know two cents worth about digital
> switching systems, and wish to carry on intelligent and relevant dis-
> cussions regarding those systems, will you please SHUT UP!
I'm afraid I will not shut up. When people such as yourself come on
this forum and sound like a press release in defense of an
indefensible product such as the GTD-5, someone who is not employed by
the manufacturer and does not have a financial stake one way or the
other needs to balance comment with some objectivity. I do not claim
to sport complete objectivity, but my quailifications as an unbiased
observer certainly exceed yours by a country mile.
Your innuendos about my lack of technical knowledge are going to draw
smiles from many of those polite readers to which you refer since many
are well aware of my general knowledge and experience. And I certainly
have far more than enough of that to know the difference between good
and bad telephone service, which IS what we are talking about, is it
not? And for your information, my experiences with GTD-5 come from
many places around California, not just my local telco. Your attempts
to pass it off as "one of a kind" will just not fly.
Don't try to come off as "Mr. Digital Switching" to me! I am
intimately familiar with the concept at the most basic level and
implementation at the design level. Your attitude is so typical GTE:
we the company know far more than you the customer. You have never
addressed any of my points in any way other than to just dismiss me as
ignorant and then claim that the opposite of what I say is true. Are
you sure you never worked on the front line of GTE repair? Your
training was excellent.
Sometime I'll have to show you the many letters of support from those
readers who are "tired" of my tirades. Oh, by the way, why did you
wait until now to object to my blaterings? Or do you only care about
digs to your employer's product? Answering your "press releases" is a
great bit of fun; they are so transparent. But seriously, attempting
to bolster and justify a product by personally attacking a detractor
is not something to which people generally take kindly.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
jo...@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
Kevin W. Williams
> bak...@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker) writes:
>> Normally I wouldn't bother responding to the ignorant and inane
>> ramblings of Mr. Higdon, but for the benefit of our more objective
>> readers ...
> But this struck a nerve, eh?
>> The GTD5 did not put GTE out of the switch manufacturing business.
>> Any comment on WHY that decision
>> was made would be pure speculation;
> Yes, indeed. I won't look a gift horse in the mouth. If you want to
> insist that is was mysterious strategic considerations, fine. The fact
> that it is discontinued is good enough for me.
Actually, Mr. Baker and Mr. Higdon are both right. There was no
particular flaw in the GTD-5 that drove GTE out of the switching
business. It was, and still is, a good switch, and quite cost
effectively provides most analog based features. The cost of modifying
it to provide ISDN terrified GTE. The money AT&T spent on providing
the 5-ESS with ISDN would have also terrified GTE. Ditto NTI and the
DMS-100.
>> Our current three-way conference bridge provides excellent voice
>> quality. I have no idea what three-way hardware your local CO is
>> using, but it may well be old, obsolete, or defective.
> What are you telling us? That the telco buys a GTD-5 and then goes to
> the local "three-way hardware" store and buys some add-on equipment to
> provide the features? If there is anything at the local telco that is
> old, obsolete, or defective, it is the GTD-5. Doesn't the switch
> provide its own three-way?
Sure it does. Our original three-way bridge circuit had some real
problems. We released new versions in 1984. Eight years from then,
your operating company apparently has the old one. What's your NPA and
exchange? I'll let you know.
>> Are you referring to feature operation from a subscriber's
>> perspective, or feature implementation from a switch-engineering
>> perspective? For the former, our features generally operate the same
>> as anyone else's (5ESS, DMS, etc.). As for the latter, you could not
>> possibly have any idea what you're talking about,
> I am speaking from the customer's perspective. And if you claim that
> the features operate the same as everyone else's, then it is you, sir,
> that has not a clue about that which he speaks. Example (something you
> gave not one of in your entire tirade against me): every feature
> operates s-l-o-w-l-y to the point where the user is tempted to retry
> the procedure. Sometimes he does and then things really get messed up.
> When I drop the second call on a three-way, I expect it to happen a
> little faster than three seconds later. Call waiting goes to limbo land
> and one typically loses one or the other party. Oh, yeah, I know, my
> telco is using some off-shore pirate brand of GTD-5.
I have a GTD-5 phone here on my desk. I get three-way set up so fast I
don't perceive a delay. I cannot comment on your particular office
engineering for professional reasons, but I can state that when the
GTD-5 is properly engineered, dial-tone should be returned roughly 350
milliseconds after flash for three-way. Overloading a TCU will result
in unreliable flash detection. Overloading a TPC will result in delays
for feature operation.
>> but IMHO the features on a GTD5 are FAR easier to engineer than on the
>> competitor's equipment.
> Well that sure means a lot to me as a customer. Since I write software
> for custom digital switches (oh, you didn't know that, eh?) I think I
> could judge that for myself if I could ever get my hands on the
> material.
I'll second Jon's vote on this one. It is a pretty controversial issue
even with people who use both switches, however. The GTD-5 engineering
is more flexible than the 5-ESS, and requires fewer commands. It
doesn't provide any menus, so it is easier for a service clerk to srew
up royally.
>> John, John, John ... how many times do we have to repeat this mantra?
>> The GTD5 already has SS7 and CLASS, and has had them for many years.
>> We are still pursuing options for ISDN features.
> Name one in California. To my knowledge, the FIRST GTD-5 in California
> to run SS7 will do so later this month AS AN EXPERIMENT! Talks are
> scheduled in August with Pac*Bell to discuss the possibility of SS7
> interconnection.
This you can take up with GTECA. SS7 has been alive and well in the
GTD-5 for years. GTE even provides some services to the RBOCs for
credit card validation because SS7 is so much more widely implemented
in GTE than in the RBOCs (and Judge Green doesn't make them buy so
many STPs, so they are able to do it more cost effectively).
Some of the things you blame on the GTD-5 you can blame on GTECA. As
Pat has pointed out, there are lots of GTEs. All have their strengths
and weaknesses. From my perspective, NORTH (previously MTO) has the
best customer service, but trouble with transmission. Florida is
pretty good with both, as is most of SE. GTECA is technically ahead of
the others, with the most widespread fiber, but lags in SS7 and leads
in sheer customer irritation.
>> There ARE standards of implementation, LOTS of them. And, for the
>> most part, we all (all manufacturers) follow them to the best of our
>> ability.
> Got some bad news for you. The GTD-5 is the worst of the lot, exceeding
> even the crumminess of a 5ESS.
>> I'm served by a 5ESS at home, with which I've been less than pleased.
> No argument there. One cannot help but wonder if perhaps you might have
> some axe to grind about the GTD-5 and its supposed wonderfulness. Naw!
Admittedly, Jon is biased. However, a statement like "exceeding even
the crumminess of the 5ESS" looks like it has a bias as well. You can
put your dreams of analog switches aside, John. No operating company
is going to ever deploy an analog switch again. I will agree with you,
I like them better. The "Strowgerworld" April Fools joke really
appealed to me.
>> John, you've consistently demonstrated your complete ignorance of
>> digital switching systems in this forum. I think the readers have
>> been generally polite in tolerating your annoying, misinformed tirades.
>> Now, for the benefit of us who do know two cents worth about digital
>> switching systems, and wish to carry on intelligent and relevant dis-
>> cussions regarding those systems, will you please SHUT UP!
> I'm afraid I will not shut up. When people such as yourself come on
> this forum and sound like a press release in defense of an
> indefensible product such as the GTD-5, someone who is not employed by
> the manufacturer and does not have a financial stake one way or the
> other needs to balance comment with some objectivity. I do not claim
> to sport complete objectivity, but my quailifications as an unbiased
> observer certainly exceed yours by a country mile.
I have a hard time considering either of you unbiased. Jon derives his
livelihood from the GTD-5. John has stated that he doesn't think
digital switches should be used as end offices.
For the record, I also derive my livelihood from the GTD-5. Is it the
best switch on the market? No. Is it the worst switch on the market?
No. Its uptime is roughly identical to the DMS-100 and 5ESS (all three
will take first place within GTE's network (where I have access to
statistics) roughly 1/3 or the time). It exceeds those from any other
switch manufacturer. Its range of features (excluding ISDN) is
comparable to the DMS-100 and 5-ESS. Its capacity is lower than the
DMS-100 or 5-ESS, but that is by design: there is not much need for
170,000 line switches in GTE. Is it easier for a telco to screw up the
engineering on a GTD-5 than the DMS-100 or 5-ESS? Emphatically yes.
Kevin Wayne Williams UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!williamsk
Michael F Eastman
> Sometime I'll have to show you the many letters of support from those
> readers who are "tired" of my tirades. Oh, by the way, why did you
> wait until now to object to my blaterings? Or do you only care about
> digs to your employer's product? Answering your "press releases" is a
> great bit of fun; they are so transparent. But seriously, attempting
> to bolster and justify a product by personally attacking a detractor
> is not something to which people generally take kindly.
You can add this to your letters of support. I started reading and
(somewhat participating) in this forum a long time ago. What I learned
early on is that this forum is one of the best ways to find out what
the customer wants. And believe me, the customer can be difficult to
identify. Sometimes it takes John (or others) to touch that raw nerve
to make us (the producers of the product) go back and take a harder
look at what we're doing. So I learned to be patient and listen, not
to jump in defensively, and take it all in with an open mind.
I work on and off on 5ESS and 4ESS, and this forum helps me to do a
better job (within the bounds set by my management, of course :=) ). I
don't want to imply that an employee shouldn't take pride in the
product on which they work. However, in order to make that product (or
its replacement) better, learn to take criticism gracefully and FOR
GOD'S SAKE don't kill the messenger/customers! In defense of the GTD-5
developer, it's still good to see that there are some AMERICAN workers
who really do give a damn.
Mike Eastman att!ihlpm!mfe (708) 979-6569
AT&T Bell Laboratories Rm. 4F-328 Naperville, IL 60566
t...@hoserve.att.com
> Normally I wouldn't bother responding to the ignorant and inane
> ramblings of Mr. Higdon, but for the benefit of our more objective
> readers ...
John> Sometime I'll have to show you the many letters of support from those
John> readers who are "tired" of my tirades.
Sheesh, some flame ...
When I haven't been able to keep up with comp.dcom.telecom, I just
scan for interesting subject or messages from the few posters I
recognize as informed and interesting. jo...@zygot.ati.com is in that
category, and it looks like I can speed up my news reading by putting
bak...@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker) in my kill file ...