ISPs on TalkTalk's servers

[PeterC]

I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
Sky.
DirectSave Telecom is on TT's servers so my email addresses are OK (they are
also picked up by GMX but not reliably) and I'd like to keep them.
A lot of the ISPs must use the main ones, so how do I find out which they
are on?
Searching has not given any good results - this is because I don't know the
correct terms to use.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

[Woody]

On Tue 29/12/2020 16:47, PeterC wrote:
> I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
> increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
> The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
> Sky.
> DirectSave Telecom is on TT's servers so my email addresses are OK (they are
> also picked up by GMX but not reliably) and I'd like to keep them.
> A lot of the ISPs must use the main ones, so how do I find out which they
> are on?
> Searching has not given any good results - this is because I don't know the
> correct terms to use.
>

Post Office B/B is also TT BUT it has a UK call centre.

[Adrian Caspersz]

On 29/12/2020 16:47, PeterC wrote:
> I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
> increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
> The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
> Sky.

Why need LLU?

The wholesale BT service that others use isn't that bad in my experience.

Think it was from some time ago that folks specifically looked for LLU.
Reasons was possibly newer equipment (ADSL 2+), but that's probably past
now.

--
Adrian C

[cybuerke]

As is the Phone Co-op

<https://www.thephone.coop/personal/home-broadband/>

[Brian Gregory]

On 29/12/2020 16:47, PeterC wrote:
> I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
> increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
> The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
> Sky.
> DirectSave Telecom is on TT's servers so my email addresses are OK (they are
> also picked up by GMX but not reliably) and I'd like to keep them.
> A lot of the ISPs must use the main ones, so how do I find out which they
> are on?
> Searching has not given any good results - this is because I don't know the
> correct terms to use.
>

I don't understand what you mean about email addresses.

Are you email addresses provided by some service that only allows access
from talktalk ??

If so why on earth would they think that's acceptable?
Why on earth would you have chosen them?

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

[Roderick Stewart]

LLU means you only pay one bill for everything to one company and have
nothing to do with BT. I have no experience of TT or Sky, but Zen seem
to have more clout with Openreach when problems occur. I didn't know
that exchanges could restrict which companies could do this.

Rod.

[NY]

"Brian Gregory" <void-invalid...@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:i51b0n...@mid.individual.net...

TalkTalk used to (*) configure their email servers and their internet
connections so that:

- when connected by TT connection, you could only connect to a Talk Talk
email server (and not to any other email server)

- you could only connect to TalkTalk server if you were connected to a TT
connection (and not via any other connection)

I've forgotten whether it was the POP or the SMTP server that was configured
like this.

This made it impossible to set up a POP client to access both TT email and
third party email, either from a TT connection or a third party connection.
The ultimate you-are-locked-in situation. If you were prepared to use
webmail for one or both email addresses, you were OK.


(*) I don't know if this is still the case, but it was in the 2000-2010
decade.

[Chris]

Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 18:01:51 +0000, Adrian Caspersz
> <em...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 29/12/2020 16:47, PeterC wrote:
>>> I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
>>> increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
>>> The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
>>> Sky.
>>
>> Why need LLU?
>>
>> The wholesale BT service that others use isn't that bad in my experience.
>>
>> Think it was from some time ago that folks specifically looked for LLU.
>> Reasons was possibly newer equipment (ADSL 2+), but that's probably past
>> now.
>
> LLU means you only pay one bill for everything to one company and have
> nothing to do with BT.

You can pay line rental to other ISPs without needing LLU and get a single
bill. That info is out of date.

>I have no experience of TT or Sky, but Zen seem
> to have more clout with Openreach when problems occur. I didn't know
> that exchanges could restrict which companies could do this.

They don't

[Chris Green]

Yes, I was wondering the same/similar. The fact that ISP A is using
ISB B's servers doesn't mean that if you move to ISP C which also uses
ISP B's servers you will still have access to the same mail service.

It's much more down to how DNS resolves your E-Mail address and how
your 'old' ISP treats attempts to access the mail. Basically very
random and unpredictable.

Why people don't just register a domain of their own and use that for
E-Mail I don't understand, it's easy, and cheap and you have an easy
to remember, easy to type and easy to tell others E-Mail address.

--
Chris Green
·

[PeterC]

I didn't choose TT. I started with Homecall and that morphed into another
ISP then it happened again and then it became TT. My email addresses are
.homecall.
I'd set up GMX (FSVO set up) and then found that DirectSave retained the TT
service. I'm not too keen on GMX as there's no differentiation between
addresses - all seem to come from the primary address.
It'd be the easiest method to stay with DS, so I'll see what it can offer.

[Adrian Caspersz]

On 30/12/2020 08:11, PeterC wrote:

> I'd set up GMX (FSVO set up) and then found that DirectSave retained the TT
> service. I'm not too keen on GMX as there's no differentiation between
> addresses - all seem to come from the primary address.
> It'd be the easiest method to stay with DS, so I'll see what it can offer.
>

Or escape email prison by registering a domain name, and informing
folks/organisations of the change. Doesn't cost a lot but time, and you
could also weed out weak passwords and implement 2FA while sorting that
out. New years res?

--
Adrian C

[Roderick Stewart]

On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 20:02:41 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>> LLU means you only pay one bill for everything to one company and have
>> nothing to do with BT.
>
>You can pay line rental to other ISPs without needing LLU and get a single
>bill. That info is out of date.

You mean, the line remains the property of BT, but instead of me
paying BT separately, Zen pay for it out of the single bill I pay to
them? I didn't know that, but now that I do, it still seems to amount
to more or less the same thing from the customers' point of view. In
the event of any problem with the line, I speak to one company (my
ISP) and they alert whoever needs to be alerted to fix it, whoever it
belongs to.

Rod.

[Theo]

PeterC <giraffe...@homecall.co.uk> wrote:
> I didn't choose TT. I started with Homecall and that morphed into another
> ISP then it happened again and then it became TT. My email addresses are
> .homecall.
> I'd set up GMX (FSVO set up) and then found that DirectSave retained the TT
> service. I'm not too keen on GMX as there's no differentiation between
> addresses - all seem to come from the primary address.
> It'd be the easiest method to stay with DS, so I'll see what it can offer.

There is a service called TalkTalk Mail Plus where you can pay to retain a
TT email address. Perhaps it's worth doing that for a year or whatever to
give you time to migrate?

(an alternative would be TT dialup but not idea if they still offer that)

I suppose you could also try haggling with DS - 'BT are offering XYZ deal,
can you beat it?'

Theo

[Martin Brown]

But you have been able to do that for a *very* long time. I am with EE
and pay my line rental to them. I haven't paid BT for nearly a decade.
They had an offer when it became possible which gave you a discount if
you have mobile phone, fixed line rental and broadband all with them.

There is no LLU on my exchange it is far too small for that.
The only choice for ADSL here is BT stock kit or nothing.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Chris]

Correct. Except that the lines belong to OpenReach. All complaints have to
go via your ISP who then contact OR. That's why it can make a difference
who your ISP is as some are proactive than others.

[Chris]

Yep. My FIL is doing this with his old Tiscali email address. He's hoping
to ditch it soon. He's been with plusnet for years.

[Mike Humphrey]

On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 17:09:10 +0000, Chris wrote:

> Roderick Stewart <rj...@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>> You mean, the line remains the property of BT, but instead of me paying
>> BT separately, Zen pay for it out of the single bill I pay to them? I
>> didn't know that, but now that I do, it still seems to amount to more
>> or less the same thing from the customers' point of view. In the event
>> of any problem with the line, I speak to one company (my ISP) and they
>> alert whoever needs to be alerted to fix it, whoever it belongs to.
>
> Correct. Except that the lines belong to OpenReach. All complaints have
> to go via your ISP who then contact OR. That's why it can make a
> difference who your ISP is as some are proactive than others.

Note that this is true even if you have "BT" broadband and phone - the
retail parts of BT (that provide the broadband and phone service) are
prohibited from talking to Openreach other than by the same channels that
all other providers use, despite them being owned by the same company.

Mike

[Woody]

I think it was 2017 that OfCom ordered BT to make Openreach an
independent operation with their own management hierarchy and board. How
much of that BT actually did I know not!

[PeterC]

Co-op is expensive; PO is OK but goes to £37 pcm after 12 months.
DirectSave would be £25, so £2 increase, but the option for 'free' w/e calls
is £3 and can't be deselected.
DS' 'phone no. went from free to 03 some time agao - bit worrying for a
supposed telecoms co. The free number still worked last time that I used it.
BTW, what is it with these sites? Enter PC' exsample sows PC with a gap -
then PC with gap isn't valid. Others show no gap then need the gap. A few
simply accept either.
Similarly with 'phone no. but very rare.

[NY]

"Pamela" <pamela...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:XnsACA599C3...@144.76.35.252...

>> TalkTalk used to (*) configure their email servers and their
>> internet connections so that:
>>
>> - when connected by TT connection, you could only connect to a
>> Talk Talk email server (and not to any other email server)
>>
>> - you could only connect to TalkTalk server if you were connected
>> to a TT connection (and not via any other connection)
>>
>> I've forgotten whether it was the POP or the SMTP server that was
>> configured like this.
>>
>> This made it impossible to set up a POP client to access both TT
>> email and third party email, either from a TT connection or a
>> third party connection. The ultimate you-are-locked-in situation.
>> If you were prepared to use webmail for one or both email
>> addresses, you were OK.
>>
>> (*) I don't know if this is still the case, but it was in the
>> 2000-2010 decade.
>

> My experience (on TT ISDN broadband) suggests it's no longer the
> case. I can ...
>
> POP3 from non-TT servers including Gmail.
> Post using SMTP on non-TT servers including Gmail.

Good. They've evidently finally removed that restriction. As it used to be,
I think in one direction (maybe TT broadband accessing non-TT POP/SMTP
server) there was no response from the server, so traffic was being filtered
out; and in the opposite direction (maybe non-TT broadband accessing TT
POP/SMTP server) there was an explicit error message/code returned.

Most POP and SMTP servers don't care, as long as you can supply the logon
credentials for the server. Plusnet allows anonymous connection to their
SMTP server for sending mail from their own broadband connection, but
requires username/password (the same one as for receiving POP mail) if
connected by a non-Plusnet connection when away from home. I initially used
to set my laptop to anonymous SMTP, but changed it to "use same credentials
as POP server" when I started to take my laptop on holiday and may be
connecting from any old connection in a hotel etc. Likewise for my phone.

No idea what the situation is for IMAP because I don't use it: I prefer to
explicitly transfer a copy of incoming mail to my computer where I can keep
it for as long as I like and can back it up, rather than leaving it on the
server and then finding that it's been deleted automatically when the server
cleans up archaic mail.

For POP, I normally set "delete after 30 days" for *one* computer (my main
desktop PC) and "never delete" for all other laptops and phones. That way,
if I first read an email on my phone, it will still be there for me to read
(and maybe keep) on my desktop PC when I get home, but will *eventually* be
deleted from the server and so not accumulate over the years.

[PeterC]

On Tue, 29 Dec 2020 16:47:39 +0000, PeterC wrote:

> I'm currently with DirectSave Telecom but, in a week or so, the price
> increases to getting on for 10 quid more than some other ISPs.
> The local exchange seems to have only TT and Sky as LLU and I'm not going to
> Sky.
> DirectSave Telecom is on TT's servers so my email addresses are OK (they are
> also picked up by GMX but not reliably) and I'd like to keep them.
> A lot of the ISPs must use the main ones, so how do I find out which they
> are on?
> Searching has not given any good results - this is because I don't know the
> correct terms to use.

I looked at TTs prices - went through the usual rigaramole - and OK at £22
pcm; could apparently get 67Mbps for £24, but a). not to sure that it's
available (how accurate are these line check?) and b). the biggest d/l for a
month was today when updating the AV's db - only 400MB so <2 min.
Rang DirectSave and renewed for 12 months at £24.95. OK, so ~£36 more than
TT but no hassle and don't have to suffer TT!

[Chris]

Did you try and haggle? ISPs will always offer you a better deal if you
ask. Done that the last two times and have the better price *plus* no
hassles :)

[PeterC]

Didn't work - it was almost take it or leave it. There was a lot of stress
in her voice and no background noise, so she might have been at home.
I'm not really too worried about the price - no point in saving up for a
grand funeral!

[Abandoned_Trolley]

Thats a suggestion which I would recommend anyway.

I have a domain registered with LCN and they chuck in a couple of email
addresses even if you dont have a hosting deal with them - and theres no
need to bother with a web site or home page at all, unless / until you
want to.

I contact the server in the normal IMAP / SMTP way and use Thunderbird
as a client - its no problem at all.

Alternatively, you can redirect your incoming mail to another address,
knowing that you might need to change that address if you move to
another ISP. When / if that happens, you just set up to redirect to
another address, but your "external" email address can remain the same
as long as you renew the domain registration. Theres no need to tell
anybody anything, and no need for them to even know who is hosting your
mail.

AT

[Abandoned_Trolley]

On 01/01/2021 15:06, Pamela wrote:

> My experience (on TT ISDN broadband) suggests it's no longer the
> case. I can ...
>
> POP3 from non-TT servers including Gmail.
> Post using SMTP on non-TT servers including Gmail.
>

Am I the only person wondering what "ISDN broadband" is ?

AT

[Jeff Gaines]

On 11/02/2021 in message <s03679$bp3$1...@dont-email.me> Abandoned_Trolley
wrote:

>Am I the only person wondering what "ISDN broadband" is ?

You are obviously a child :-)

ISDN bonded 2 'phone lines together to give a constant 124 Kb/s and was
clever enough to allow use of 1 line for 'phone and 1 for broadband if
necessary.

When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a piece
of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many years now.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
All things being equal, fat people use more soap

[Andy Burns]

Jeff Gaines wrote:

> Abandoned_Trolley wrote:
>
>> Am I the only person wondering what "ISDN broadband" is ?
>
> You are obviously a child :-)
>
> ISDN bonded 2 'phone lines together to give a constant 124 Kb/s and was
> clever enough to allow use of 1 line for 'phone and 1 for broadband if
> necessary.
>
> When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a
> piece of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many
> years now.

It was only made unavailable for new supply last year.

I don't think the "B" in B-ISDN feels very broad nowadays though...

[Woody]

On Thu 11/02/2021 13:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 11/02/2021 in message <s03679$bp3$1...@dont-email.me> Abandoned_Trolley
> wrote:
>
>> Am I the only person wondering what "ISDN broadband" is ?
>
> You are obviously a child :-)
>
> ISDN bonded 2 'phone lines together to give a constant 124 Kb/s and was
> clever enough to allow use of 1 line for 'phone and 1 for broadband if
> necessary.
>
> When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a
> piece of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many
> years now.
>

128Kb.......

[Jeff Gaines]

Goodness me, another old codger like me, you're right of course :-)

[Adrian Caspersz]

On 11/02/2021 15:19, Jeff Gaines wrote:

> On 11/02/2021 in message <s03eiq$i4c$1...@dont-email.me> Woody wrote:
>>>
>>> When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a
>>> piece of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many
>>> years now.
>>>
>>
>> 128Kb.......
>
> Goodness me, another old codger like me, you're right of course :-)
>

I remember setting ISDN internet for a business, 128Kb - excitedly
switching it on, doing our first download at 4'ish times the speed of
dial-up, and then falling off our chairs at the improvement ...

Little did we know how broad the band would get :)

--
Adrian C

[Woody]

Nay lad, not specific to ISDN. AoD (analogue over digital) has been in
use on private wire landlines for at least 30 years and they are all
64Kb, ergo an ISDN2 is 128Kb and ISDN30 is 2Mb - the latter being the
international data rate in telecommunications ever since they started
going digital maybe 40 or more years ago.

I used to do a lot of a radcomms process called quasi-sync on (mostly)
police UHF radio systems. I used to love the AoD circuits because the
audio response was near enough flat 300Hz-2K5Hz and the group delay
curve was almost always near identical. (Group delay for other readers
is the variation of time delay over a circuit against frequency. In most
cases it was something like a parabolic curve with the shortest delay at
around the standard PTT test frequency of 800Hz.) It made matching the
circuits (which QS operation demanded) really quite easy. The downside
was that the routing of the circuit could change automatically and cock
up the QS operation in a microsecond!

[Abandoned_Trolley]

On 11/02/2021 13:55, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> On 11/02/2021 in message <s03679$bp3$1...@dont-email.me> Abandoned_Trolley
> wrote:
>
>> Am I the only person wondering what "ISDN broadband" is ?
>
> You are obviously a child :-)
>
> ISDN bonded 2 'phone lines together to give a constant 124 Kb/s and was
> clever enough to allow use of 1 line for 'phone and 1 for broadband if
> necessary.
>
> When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a
> piece of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many
> years now.
>

Well, obviously a very old child then - and the proud owner of a Compaq
Microcom 808 ISDN router, which was once used on my BT Home Highway system.

I used to dial up to a Virgin PAYG number to get my first "non modem"
connection to the outside world - Virgin being chosen because they
offered channel bonding for the dial on demand.

I thought the service was discontinued years ago in favour of ADSL
solutions, mostly on the grounds of cost - IIRC you paid 2 lots of line
rental to BT ? They allocated you a 2nd analogue phone number, and
another for digital use only.


I think it may have been 128Kbit rather than 124, as there was a 16kbit
"D" channel ? - I have heard the system referred to as "2B+1D"

Anyway, I dont think I have ever heard of the service referred to as
"ISDN broadband" and I can hardly believe that anybody is still using it

Also, getting back to the original point of the post, at the time Virgin
prevented direct access to their mail servers from anything other than a
Virgin connection, although they did have a web mail service.

AT

[notya...@gmail.com]

A little over-simplified IMO.

ISDN gave you two B (64kbps) and one D (16kbps) channels over a single analogue line. One could use the B channels for data and / or voice, and effectively bond them together for 128kbps up and down. The D channel was for signalling and also handy for low data rate things, like background email, but was never really developed.

What WAS possible was ISDN and DSL over the same line. BT actually used to falsely claim that was not technically possible whilst Deutsche Telekom was actively selling it in Germany (late 1990's).

[Woody]

I was also a beta tester for NTL (as then was) around the millennium
initially on 56K dial-up over a BT line then on one of the first TV-box
circuits giving a 2Mb output data rate. I'm now on 100Mb. How times
change eh?
8-))

[Andy Burns]

notya...@gmail.com wrote:

> What WAS possible was ISDN and DSL over the same line. BT actually
> used to falsely claim that was not technically possible whilst
> Deutsche Telekom was actively selling it in Germany (late 1990's).

Annexe A vs Annexe B

Shhhh or we'll have Mr Super-Euro-ISDN2/e back again...

[Roderick Stewart]

I remember setting up an ISDN connection for a cybercafe (with help
from an expert at our ISP because I didn't know much about it at the
time). The two 64kb/s circuits were not "always on" like a modern DSL
service but were dialed like phone calls, and paid for at the same
rate. If it used both circuits at once (for 128kb/s) that was counted
as two simultaneous phone calls.

For a phone call, as well as the cost per minute, there was a
connection charge of a few pence every time a new connection was made,
so that would occur the first time somebody clicked on a web link, and
the connection would time out after a delay that could be set in the
modem/router. We did our best to keep costs down by trying to choose a
timeout interval that would minimise the number of new connection
charges without ending up costing more on the pence per minute
charges, which was tricky because normal usage would depend on how
many people were in the cafe at any time. It was also possible to set
the router to limit usage to just one of the 64kb/s channels, which I
think we did most of the time.

The local BBC radio station once did a feature on us (because
cybercafes were a new thing then) bringing with them a little digital
mixing desk, which they were able to plug into our router to use the
other ISDN channel simultaneously and without any interruption to our
computers, which I thought was pretty neat. My memory is a litle
unclear on this but I think it was just an ethernet cable from the
mixing dest to a socket that we weren't using on the router. Their
connection gave them a broadcast quality voice channel back to the
station, plus a talkback or comms channel (which also sounded pretty
clear to me on the headphones) from the station to us.

Rod.

[Graham J]

Roderick Stewart wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 16:03:05 +0000, Adrian Caspersz
> <em...@here.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/2021 15:19, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>> On 11/02/2021 in message <s03eiq$i4c$1...@dont-email.me> Woody wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> When you live in a small village with 'phone services delivered on a
>>>>> piece of damp string it was a life saver. Not been available for many
>>>>> years now.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 128Kb.......
>>>
>>> Goodness me, another old codger like me, you're right of course :-)
>>>
>>
>> I remember setting ISDN internet for a business, 128Kb - excitedly
>> switching it on, doing our first download at 4'ish times the speed of
>> dial-up, and then falling off our chairs at the improvement ...
>>
>> Little did we know how broad the band would get :)
>
> I remember setting up an ISDN connection for a cybercafe (with help
> from an expert at our ISP because I didn't know much about it at the
> time). The two 64kb/s circuits were not "always on" like a modern DSL
> service but were dialed like phone calls, and paid for at the same
> rate. If it used both circuits at once (for 128kb/s) that was counted
> as two simultaneous phone calls.
>
> For a phone call, as well as the cost per minute, there was a
> connection charge of a few pence every time a new connection was made,

[snip]

I remember reolving a problem with an inappropriately configured ISDN
router at a solicitor's office - it dropped the line after about 30
seconds of non-use. But with about 5 people using computers in that
office never more than a couple of minutes went by before somebody
brought up the line again. So their bill was horrendous with connection
charges.

By making the router "nail-up" the circuit the bill was a predictable
and reasonable cost. I think my 10 minutes work saved them about £500
per month.

ISDN was a severely undersold product in the UK. The Germans had it
from about 1980 and it cross-subsidised their analog PSTN - something
which BT should have done. The Germans could also have ISDN and DSL on
the same phone line (Annex B rather than the UK's Annex A).


--
Graham J

[Abandoned_Trolley]

It may have looked like an ethernet cable, but actually been a ISDN cable ?

IIRC the "Home Highway" box supplied by BT had a couple of normal phone
jacks, and 2 RJ45 sockets - but they were NOT ethernet ports.

The picture at https://www.ispreview.co.uk/broadband_isdn.php looks
familiar to me.

There must have been some sort of standard for it because I remember
connecting from one of them direct in to my ISDN router. Its possible
that I still have the original cable laying about somewhere.

AT

[Adrian Caspersz]

On 12/02/2021 13:04, Graham J wrote:
>
> ISDN was a severely undersold product in the UK.

Around the time, some wag coined the phrase

"ISDN - Innovations Subscribers Don't Need"

Googling that phrase now, seems this was a common sentiment felt all
over the planet!

Except ...

  The Germans had it
> from about 1980 and it cross-subsidised their analog PSTN - something
> which BT should have done.  The Germans could also have ISDN and DSL on
> the same phone line (Annex B rather than the UK's Annex A).

The Germans like their technical stuff. For the rest of the world, it
needed more marketing effort.

AVM, a German company, were in there with ISDN with their Fritz brand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVM_GmbH

"The name Fritz was chosen "because a non-technical name has been sought
which should indicate winking German workmanship and abroad."

vorsprung durch technik a'la modem ....


--
Adrian C

[Roderick Stewart]

On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:35:19 +0000, Adrian Caspersz
<em...@here.invalid> wrote:

>On 12/02/2021 13:04, Graham J wrote:
>>
>> ISDN was a severely undersold product in the UK.
>
>Around the time, some wag coined the phrase
>
>"ISDN - Innovations Subscribers Don't Need"

Also - "It Still Does Nothing".

Rod.

[Jeff Gaines]

On 12/02/2021 in message <i8nego...@mid.individual.net> Adrian

Caspersz wrote:

>AVM, a German company, were in there with ISDN with their Fritz brand.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVM_GmbH
>
>"The name Fritz was chosen "because a non-technical name has been sought
>which should indicate winking German workmanship and abroad."

Probably easier to market than "Goons" which is what my dad called them in
Stalag 8b!

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK

The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant

[Abandoned_Trolley]

I Still Dont kNow ?

AT

[Woody]

That puzzles me a bit. Unless the mixer had some sort of compansion
system in it - I doubt it would have had +AAC in those days - I don't
see how it could have had 'broadcast quality' sound over a 64Kb circuit
since that would limit the audio to 4KHz tops. Mind you I suppose if the
mic was good quality and specifically designed for speech its response
and distortion levels could have been that low that the perceived result
might have sounded better than it really was?

[Adrian Caspersz]

Realaudio?

--
Adrian C

[Peter Johnson]

On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:33:53 +0000, Abandoned_Trolley
<fr...@fred-smith.uk> wrote:


>
>It may have looked like an ethernet cable, but actually been a ISDN cable ?
>
>IIRC the "Home Highway" box supplied by BT had a couple of normal phone
>jacks, and 2 RJ45 sockets - but they were NOT ethernet ports.
>
>The picture at https://www.ispreview.co.uk/broadband_isdn.php looks
>familiar to me.
>
>There must have been some sort of standard for it because I remember
>connecting from one of them direct in to my ISDN router. Its possible
>that I still have the original cable laying about somewhere.
>

I had Home Highway. I remember having two numbers and an ISDN card in
the PC but I don't remember the nature of the BT interface. Ran a fax
machine on the second line.

[notya...@gmail.com]

On Friday, 12 February 2021 at 13:04:33 UTC, Graham J wrote:
> Roderick Stewart wrote:
SNIP

>
> I remember reolving a problem with an inappropriately configured ISDN
> router at a solicitor's office - it dropped the line after about 30
> seconds of non-use. But with about 5 people using computers in that
> office never more than a couple of minutes went by before somebody
> brought up the line again. So their bill was horrendous with connection
> charges.
>
> By making the router "nail-up" the circuit the bill was a predictable
> and reasonable cost. I think my 10 minutes work saved them about £500
> per month.

After a while BT had a number that was free to call depending on the service you had subscribed - something like 0800 64000 for ISDN, and 0800 56000 for V34bis and 0800 128000 for two lines bonded, but you were charged lots for that.

>
> ISDN was a severely undersold product in the UK. The Germans had it
> from about 1980 and it cross-subsidised their analog PSTN - something
> which BT should have done.

Mis sold more like. The particular PITA was BT wanted another line installation charge to convert POTS to ISDN, the same as a new ISDN installation. In Manchester Norweb telecom announce free installation ~1996, so I ordered for my office. It took them a year to do it, however they had to dig up Piccadilly, another street, Back Piccadilly, run up several floors in a riser and installed an optical concentrator somewhere, with the result that there was no S-Bus power and my ISDN phone would not work [till I got an adapter]. OTOH it really was free and Norweb bundled several calling features including CLIPS and the extremely useful COLP (which revealed the real number behind 08xx ones unless they called party had supressed it).

Eventually BT relented so I ordered ISDN from them for my home office, which worked well especially when the hub was upgraded to one with a USB B port on it.

> The Germans could also have ISDN and DSL on
> the same phone line (Annex B rather than the UK's Annex A).
>

Leading to those "not technically possible lies".

>
> --
> Graham J

[Trolleybus]

On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:04:15 +0000, Graham J <nob...@nowhere.co.uk>
wrote:

>Roderick Stewart wrote:
>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 16:03:05 +0000, Adrian Caspersz
>> <em...@here.invalid> wrote:

>
>I remember reolving a problem with an inappropriately configured ISDN
>router at a solicitor's office - it dropped the line after about 30
>seconds of non-use. But with about 5 people using computers in that
>office never more than a couple of minutes went by before somebody
>brought up the line again. So their bill was horrendous with connection
>charges.

I had ISDN installed and my work laptop replaced at about the same
time. One day the postman knocked with a box for me. It contained
several hundred pages of my itemised phone bill.

The laptop had IPX/SPX enabled and was sending some packet or other
continuously. I don't know why each transmission was in a separate
call: perhaps the protocol stack was clearing down?