Phinney-Walker 1962
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Number PULEAZE! Part Five:
- Thread starter Ultramatic
- Start date
Help Support :
Western Electric 1945
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone System 1955
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Western Electric 1974
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone 1941
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>@Unimatic - I suppose times change.
The technology's changing a lot, but I also think we're finally moving away from an interim stage of tech which was basically just a hack to reuse old copper networks and involved placing a lot of active equipment into cabinets located near to end users.
All the DSL technologies from ADSL through to VDSL (fibre to cabinet) have that issue. Cable modem services are better as the network was designed to carry high bandwidth TV signals, but it's still not exactly ideal and is a repurposing job.
Most rollouts of fibre-to-home (FTTP / FTTH) are using passive optical networks. In some ways this is more reminiscent of the classic PSTN, as you've no longer got active equipment out in boxes all over the place. The splitters and multiplexers are smaller and are just optical splitters. There's very little to go wrong in them as they're passive technology.
So, I think in a way we might be getting away from the reliability concerns and moving back to a solid public network again.
The biggest issues though are probably end user equipment - a lot of the ISP supplied routers / gateways are frankly, cheap rubbish. If you've decent equipment you'll get reliable service.
Local power interruptions are obviously going to be an issue, but in reality, how often does that happen ? I mean, I could count on the fingers of one hand how many times we've had a power outage since I was born and they were very short and usually caused by a tree falling on a local overhead line tripping out a circuit.
I appreciate in rural areas this is more of an issue due to long overhead lines and in places that are much more prone to lightening strikes etc, but you can overcome that with a UPS and the optical lines are completely lightening resistant and they are not conductive.
The old PSTN had the advantage of extremely simple end user equipment. There's very little can go wrong with a bog-standard telephone, unless you drop it down the stairs or something, but I think all in all we're looking at moving back to a far more reliable network as things progress. It's that interim era that gave VoIP and other techs a bad name. VoIP works wonderfully, if it's not being bolted onto some ropey broadband connection. When the network's built right, the quality of voice is actually drastically improved vs TDM based switching which only supported 8-bit channels and μ-law (US) or a-law (Europe) companding algorithms.
Some of the best audio quality you'd have ever heard on the phone networks was pre-digital, and only within your local exchange, as you could get copper-to-copper connections across the local switch be it crossbar, stepping, panel/rotary or even analogue electronic. Once it went outside the local switch, you were into multiplexing and trunks all of which squeezed the bandwidth using analogue techniques or later digital techniques, but they made things sound worse. Also the sound quality on old carbon microphones used in very old phones was quite poor and they used gate filters in switches to keep the frequencies used within certain bandwidths to prevent crosstalk in switches and bundles of cables.
As for removing my phone line, it was an option between digging up the lawn or attempting to pull the fibre with the old copper cable, so I just decided since I'm unlikely to ever need it again, it was worth a chance.
Realistically speaking though, landline service is now really just an access pathway for broadband and mobile phones really are not phones at all, they're ultra portable computers that happen to be able to make voice calls. The fact that we call them phones at all anymore is a bit of a stretch of the terminology.
It's sad to see some of these old techs disappear and be replaced, but I suppose without the evolution none of us would be posting on this forum either. Or, we'd have to have a party line for people interested in old washing machines with Ernestine listening in for gossip and ensuring we paid up lol[this post was last edited: 11/9/2021-11:04]
The technology's changing a lot, but I also think we're finally moving away from an interim stage of tech which was basically just a hack to reuse old copper networks and involved placing a lot of active equipment into cabinets located near to end users.
All the DSL technologies from ADSL through to VDSL (fibre to cabinet) have that issue. Cable modem services are better as the network was designed to carry high bandwidth TV signals, but it's still not exactly ideal and is a repurposing job.
Most rollouts of fibre-to-home (FTTP / FTTH) are using passive optical networks. In some ways this is more reminiscent of the classic PSTN, as you've no longer got active equipment out in boxes all over the place. The splitters and multiplexers are smaller and are just optical splitters. There's very little to go wrong in them as they're passive technology.
So, I think in a way we might be getting away from the reliability concerns and moving back to a solid public network again.
The biggest issues though are probably end user equipment - a lot of the ISP supplied routers / gateways are frankly, cheap rubbish. If you've decent equipment you'll get reliable service.
Local power interruptions are obviously going to be an issue, but in reality, how often does that happen ? I mean, I could count on the fingers of one hand how many times we've had a power outage since I was born and they were very short and usually caused by a tree falling on a local overhead line tripping out a circuit.
I appreciate in rural areas this is more of an issue due to long overhead lines and in places that are much more prone to lightening strikes etc, but you can overcome that with a UPS and the optical lines are completely lightening resistant and they are not conductive.
The old PSTN had the advantage of extremely simple end user equipment. There's very little can go wrong with a bog-standard telephone, unless you drop it down the stairs or something, but I think all in all we're looking at moving back to a far more reliable network as things progress. It's that interim era that gave VoIP and other techs a bad name. VoIP works wonderfully, if it's not being bolted onto some ropey broadband connection. When the network's built right, the quality of voice is actually drastically improved vs TDM based switching which only supported 8-bit channels and μ-law (US) or a-law (Europe) companding algorithms.
Some of the best audio quality you'd have ever heard on the phone networks was pre-digital, and only within your local exchange, as you could get copper-to-copper connections across the local switch be it crossbar, stepping, panel/rotary or even analogue electronic. Once it went outside the local switch, you were into multiplexing and trunks all of which squeezed the bandwidth using analogue techniques or later digital techniques, but they made things sound worse. Also the sound quality on old carbon microphones used in very old phones was quite poor and they used gate filters in switches to keep the frequencies used within certain bandwidths to prevent crosstalk in switches and bundles of cables.
As for removing my phone line, it was an option between digging up the lawn or attempting to pull the fibre with the old copper cable, so I just decided since I'm unlikely to ever need it again, it was worth a chance.
Realistically speaking though, landline service is now really just an access pathway for broadband and mobile phones really are not phones at all, they're ultra portable computers that happen to be able to make voice calls. The fact that we call them phones at all anymore is a bit of a stretch of the terminology.
It's sad to see some of these old techs disappear and be replaced, but I suppose without the evolution none of us would be posting on this forum either. Or, we'd have to have a party line for people interested in old washing machines with Ernestine listening in for gossip and ensuring we paid up lol[this post was last edited: 11/9/2021-11:04]
A.T.&T. 1970
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone Company 1929
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Tollometer 1914
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Western Electric 1959
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone 1982
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell System 1965
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Phone Center 1981
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone System 1949
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Coilette 1956
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone System 1962
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Bell Telephone System 1955
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Re: Reply#73
Now thats something I’ve never seen before! Back then Ma Bell charged extra for a coiled handset cord. I’m surprised that I never saw one of these on a handset cord in the 50’s. I wonder if it really worked very well?
Eddie
Now thats something I’ve never seen before! Back then Ma Bell charged extra for a coiled handset cord. I’m surprised that I never saw one of these on a handset cord in the 50’s. I wonder if it really worked very well?
Eddie
Bell Telephone System 1963
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Michigan Bell 1985
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
