|
Home > Archive > Voice Over IP in UK > September 2005 > The future of VOIP providers in the UK
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
The future of VOIP providers in the UK
|
|
|
| I am stuck inside with a ankle and bored out my brains and started having
thoughts about the future
Just wondering if anyone has any predictions for the residential VOIP in 12
months time?
My predictions :
VOIP will start to come into the mainstream like Internet did 8 years ago.
most users will just want a product which works and needs no hacking about
with port forwarding.
So people like Vonage who have advertising money behind them and offer a
simple box solution will
start to dominate.
Internet ISP who have been doing very little will get into VOIP big time,
they have customer base which they
can use and can premote better quality sound by having less latency to
servers
Internet Service Providers will start playing silly buggers with VOIP users
to ensure their VOIP solution is used
T&C clauses and degration of voip data
BT fightring hard againt anything to do with VOIP especially the ability to
have ADSL without a live telephone number
SIPGATE still having voicemail in beta, by this time sipgate would have lost
all the potential it has had / does have and other
companies would have passed it by.
Standard SIP sevice providers turning more to hosted PBX suppliers for the
same cost/ or very low fees, voipfone/voiptalk have already started
this
bickering still occuring on uk.telecome.voip
Regards,
Rolf
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-01, 7:45 am |
| On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:41:04 +0100, "RH"
<rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>SIPGATE still having voicemail in beta, by this time sipgate would have lost
>all the potential it has had / does have and other
>companies would have passed it by.
You are totally wrong with this statement OTHER companies HAVE passed
Sipgate by NOW !! other companies whoever they may be provide good
service and don't have services in beta for ever and a day .
| |
|
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vm6bh1tkicd8jth46r4nsbeq3etif5t4nu@
4ax.com...
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:41:04 +0100, "RH"
> <rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>
>
> You are totally wrong with this statement OTHER companies HAVE passed
> Sipgate by NOW !! other companies whoever they may be provide good
> service and don't have services in beta for ever and a day .
I agree on a technical scale they were left back some time ago,
but marketshare wise sipgate still seems most poplular, at least on the
phones I sell, I think only
because they offer free geographic number. and the look of the website etc
is user friendly, compeared to
people like voiptalk.
It seems pretty obvious sipgate just took their german product and gave it
an english translation and then gave up on it.
Don't get me wrong I think sipgate is a great product, where else can you
get a better value product for incoming calls
with a geographic number, but they had the potential to be the market leader
and they are just letting slip away
| |
| Mathew Curtis 2005-09-01, 7:45 am |
|
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:41:04 +0100, "RH"
> <rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>
>
> You are totally wrong with this statement OTHER companies HAVE passed
> Sipgate by NOW !! other companies whoever they may be provide good
> service and don't have services in beta for ever and a day .
Wow that was very reserved dex well done :-) and I do agree with you
100% there is a small handful of very good voip providers and more and
more people seem to be doing away with landlines and going the voip
route although I think there will be a much higher uptake as and when
naked DSL is introduced and already there is the likes of
http://www.itspa.org.uk/ who deal with regulatory issues surrounding
voip and bt plan to have an entire ip based network by 2009
Mat
| |
|
| >
> VOIP will start to come into the mainstream like Internet did 8 years ago.
> most users will just want a product which works and needs no hacking about
> with port forwarding.
> So people like Vonage who have advertising money behind them and offer a
> simple box solution will
> start to dominate.
>
I agree, But expect in the new couple of years
> Internet ISP who have been doing very little will get into VOIP big time,
> they have customer base which they
> can use and can premote better quality sound by having less latency to
> servers
>
They allready are, But I think very soon all ISPs will be offering VOIP
> Internet Service Providers will start playing silly buggers with VOIP
users
> to ensure their VOIP solution is used
> T&C clauses and degration of voip data
>
Yep, Allready happening over the pond
> BT fightring hard againt anything to do with VOIP especially the ability
to
> have ADSL without a live telephone number
>
Very wrong on this one, BT will be a driving force behind it, Remeber they
launched one of the first mainstream voip offerings
> SIPGATE still having voicemail in beta, by this time sipgate would have
lost
> all the potential it has had / does have and other
> companies would have passed it by.
Sipgate are allready passed by and in a few years will be gone, as will most
of the other small voip companies as the ISPs take over.
But if Sipgate do hang on VM will be in Beta 2 , Ie, Emails now have no text
and the messages are in French. But they are working on it (honest)
>
> Standard SIP sevice providers turning more to hosted PBX suppliers for the
> same cost/ or very low fees, voipfone/voiptalk have already started
> this
>
I agree , The mainstream PBX makers will be launching CO systems to provide
this soon.
> bickering still occuring on uk.telecome.voip
>
Nah
>
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-01, 7:45 am |
| On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 13:21:30 +0100, "RH"
<rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>Don't get me wrong I think sipgate is a great product, where else can you
>get a better value product for incoming calls
>with a geographic number, but they had the potential to be the market leader
>and they are just letting slip away
>
>
If sipgate where/are giving their German customers the same level of
service and support that they give their UK customers I would think
they would have gone out of business long before they had ever had the
chance of moving into the UK market .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| On 1 Sep 2005 05:26:24 -0700, "Mathew Curtis"
<mathew.j.curtis@gmail.com> wrote:
>Wow that was very reserved dex well done :-) and I do agree with you
>100% there is a small handful of very good voip providers and more and
>more people seem to be doing away with landlines and going the voip
>route
I would think if NTL and Telewest where to spend a bit/lot of money
and had the same coverage that BT has with ADSL then they could easily
knock BT completely out of residential line provision, the way with
VOIP is not having to pay BT for line rental at all and having an
Internet and phone service combined for the price of a broadband
connection . Has it is shortly going to be possible to have a 10 Mb
connection with TW for 35.00 a month I would think people who can
get cable will be moving over and slinging out BT and their ADSL
ISP's .
| |
| Mathew Curtis 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On 1 Sep 2005 05:26:24 -0700, "Mathew Curtis"
> <mathew.j.curtis@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would think if NTL and Telewest where to spend a bit/lot of money
> and had the same coverage that BT has with ADSL then they could easily
> knock BT completely out of residential line provision, the way with
> VOIP is not having to pay BT for line rental at all and having an
> Internet and phone service combined for the price of a broadband
> connection . Has it is shortly going to be possible to have a 10 Mb
> connection with TW for 35.00 a month I would think people who can
> get cable will be moving over and slinging out BT and their ADSL
> ISP's .
yep i agree i done away with bt and i am with NTL Broadband now and not
looked back
Mat
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 13:30:29 +0100, "Ian" <spam"AT"bathfordhill.co.uk>
wrote:
>But if Sipgate do hang on VM will be in Beta 2 , Ie, Emails now have no text
>and the messages are in French. But they are working on it (honest)
This has got to be the next stage of their efforts to provide a worse
service than they are providing now Ian .
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:41:04 +0100, "RH"
<rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>BT fightring hard againt anything to do with VOIP especially the ability to
>have ADSL without a live telephone number
I don't think you're right with that part of your predictions. BT were
the first UK company to launch a VoIP service to consumers almost two
years ago. Far from not having anything to do with VoIP, BT are in the
process of converting their entire voice network to VoIP.
Chris
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:50:00 +0100, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>On 1 Sep 2005 05:26:24 -0700, "Mathew Curtis"
><mathew.j.curtis@gmail.com> wrote:
>I would think if NTL and Telewest where to spend a bit/lot of money
>and had the same coverage that BT has with ADSL then they could easily
>knock BT completely out of residential line provision, the way with
>VOIP is not having to pay BT for line rental at all and having an
>Internet and phone service combined for the price of a broadband
>connection . Has it is shortly going to be possible to have a 10 Mb
>connection with TW for 35.00 a month I would think people who can
>get cable will be moving over and slinging out BT and their ADSL
>ISP's .
I don't see how anything will change much. Most of the cost of a BT
phone line is for the provision of the physical copper pair into your
building. If you do away with that you'll still need to replace it
with something else to run an IP connection over, whether it be a
cable provided by BT or anyone else. Digging up the street to run
cables to individual buildings doesn't come cheap, whoever does it.
Chris
| |
| Nick Ward 2005-09-01, 5:45 pm |
| If by VoIP you mean literally 'voice over IP', then the short answer is
that the telcos will migrate their networks from being TDM-based to
voice over packet, i.e. the 'VoIP providers' in the UK in the future
will be the TDM providers we have now. The reason is quite prosaic -
TDM switches are getting more costly to make as they are based on old
technology. Softswitches are expensive to develop, but much cheaper to
make and use current technology.
With regard to current UK VoIP service providers, my impression is that
we are in about the same position as the US market was in 2000. At
that time, companies such as ITXC offered low-cost international calls
over the Internet. The customer base was dominated by expatriots
calling their relatives back home. The current UK market seems to
comprise those who are interested in the technology and/or those who
want cheaper phone calls, i.e. innovators and early adopters. I gather
that Vonage is now up to about 1M subscribers in the US, so this gives
an idea of how long it's taken for the VoIP market to grow there.
The challenge for the telcoms industry is to identify applications
which are going to drive deployment of a true broadband network. Given
that 7M homes in the UK have a satellite dish, do we want/need TV over
the phone line (whether it's copper or fibre)? If we have multi-MB
access to our homes, will we all buy videophones? We didn't when we
had ISDN2. Or are we going to start swapping our DVDs on-line? To sum
up, what's the golden application for mass-market broadband? If it's
TV >> Sport >> Football then why change the telephone network to do
something which Sky does already?
Nick
| |
|
| In article <df6pci$r15$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>,
rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com says...
> I am stuck inside with a ankle and bored out my brains and started having
> thoughts about the future
>
> Just wondering if anyone has any predictions for the residential VOIP in 12
> months time?
> My predictions :
>
> VOIP will start to come into the mainstream like Internet did 8 years ago.
> most users will just want a product which works and needs no hacking about
> with port forwarding.
> So people like Vonage who have advertising money behind them and offer a
> simple box solution will
> start to dominate.
>
> Internet ISP who have been doing very little will get into VOIP big time,
> they have customer base which they
> can use and can premote better quality sound by having less latency to
> servers
>
> Internet Service Providers will start playing silly buggers with VOIP users
> to ensure their VOIP solution is used
> T&C clauses and degration of voip data
>
> BT fightring hard againt anything to do with VOIP especially the ability to
> have ADSL without a live telephone number
>
> SIPGATE still having voicemail in beta, by this time sipgate would have lost
> all the potential it has had / does have and other
> companies would have passed it by.
>
> Standard SIP sevice providers turning more to hosted PBX suppliers for the
> same cost/ or very low fees, voipfone/voiptalk have already started
> this
>
> bickering still occuring on uk.telecome.voip
>
VOIP will be for a few people, most people will stay with the bog
standard phone line, unless they can get cable.
Until BT drops the line rental (it will never happen) it is not worth
all the hassle and cost to use VOIP.
People will use some sort of VOIP on their computer, with AIM, MSN
messenger and even Skype, but as a replacement for their normal
telephone system, I don't think so.
It is not cost affective and people will only do things if it is going
to cost them less money or they are going to get something out of it.
If you want extra lines, or you don't pay a line rental, then VOIP will
be ideal, but no VOIP supplier are going to Dominate, even if Dex thinks
thay are.
| |
|
| In article <1125577584.898934.195320@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
mathew.j.curtis@gmail.com says...
> Wow that was very reserved dex well done :-) and I do agree with you
> 100% there is a small handful of very good voip providers and more and
> more people seem to be doing away with landlines and going the voip
> route although I think there will be a much higher uptake as and when
> naked DSL is introduced and already there is the likes of
> http://www.itspa.org.uk/ who deal with regulatory issues surrounding
> voip and bt plan to have an entire ip based network by 2009
>
BT will not get rid of their line rental, after all, someone will still
have to pay for the lines to be fixed.
I suppose we could have the system they got in the U.S.A, where no one
knows who ownes what line and pass the buck when things go wrong.
It took my cousin 2 weeks to he line fixed and cost her a fortune in
mobile phone calls to AT&T and some other company.
I know I like to get rid of BT, but I don't think we will get rid of the
line rental.
| |
| Adam Aglionby 2005-09-01, 8:45 pm |
| Well mebbe wires going way of telegrams and telegraph.
Got WiFi, GSM, satellite and coming soon, for next few years, WiMax.
None of them a one size fits all solution in themselves but combined
get rid of some of reasons for having wires or fibres.
Interesting that Skype has taken off as seems least elegant VOIP
solution plus really tired of seeing Ezula and Bargain Buddy, Skype
shows its heritage from Sharmann Networks developers of Kazaa.
Hadn`t heard of SIP protocol at all before started looking around at
Skype phones and discovered SIP phones that don`t need a PC running all
the time.
But Skype, Babble and now Google are getting the coverage,VOIP phones
are still off the publics radar.
Adam
| |
|
| On Thu, 01 Sep 2005 21:50:57 +0800, Chris Blunt
<chris_blunt@despammed.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 1 Sep 2005 12:41:04 +0100, "RH"
><rh@nospicedhamhybrid-tech.demon.com> wrote:
>
>
>I don't think you're right with that part of your predictions. BT were
>the first UK company to launch a VoIP service to consumers almost two
>years ago. Far from not having anything to do with VoIP, BT are in the
>process of converting their entire voice network to VoIP.
The BT 21CN voice solution will be baseband POTS to the customer, as
we have now, i.e. VoIP only as far as the MSAN for the majority of
lines.
BT was half-hearted with BBV in 2003 and IMHO still is. It is hardly
leading the end-end VoIP services market. It's possible that BT could
get to the grand PSTN switch-off date and find that a sizeable
proportion of its former customer base has deserted it along the way,
especially when 'naked DSL' comes along in the interim.
--
Mark
| |
|
| In article <1125622616.815145.64040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
ledlight@gmail.com says...
> Well mebbe wires going way of telegrams and telegraph.
>
Not for a long time.
> Got WiFi, GSM, satellite and coming soon, for next few years, WiMax.
> None of them a one size fits all solution in themselves but combined
> get rid of some of reasons for having wires or fibres.
wi-fi have got problems with distance, GSM is too expensive and also got
blackspots. Satellite hyas too much of a delay and most of the time it
is only one way, so you still need a phone line to transmitt the data.
>
> Interesting that Skype has taken off as seems least elegant VOIP
> solution plus really tired of seeing Ezula and Bargain Buddy, Skype
> shows its heritage from Sharmann Networks developers of Kazaa.
>
skype is easy to use and do not require any other hardware, I did not
see Barain buddy or Ezula with Skype.
Hadn`t heard of SIP protocol at all before started looking around at
> Skype phones and discovered SIP phones that don`t need a PC running all
> the time.
>
> But Skype, Babble and now Google are getting the coverage,VOIP phones
> are still off the publics radar.
Only minority of the public will bother with VOIP.
| |
|
| In article <o8ufh1hfcdivu7kc09g8fvfte8j4bl03fi@4ax.com>,
codvimyst@yahoo.co.uk says...
> The BT 21CN voice solution will be baseband POTS to the customer, as
> we have now, i.e. VoIP only as far as the MSAN for the majority of
> lines.
>
> BT was half-hearted with BBV in 2003 and IMHO still is. It is hardly
> leading the end-end VoIP services market. It's possible that BT could
> get to the grand PSTN switch-off date and find that a sizeable
> proportion of its former customer base has deserted it along the way,
> especially when 'naked DSL' comes along in the interim.
>
>
I don't know where you get this idea that we are going to have naked
DSL. Since most lines in this country are owned by BT, they are not
going to do away with their line rental as it is easy money.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-02, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 22:05:10 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>I don't know where you get this idea that we are going to have naked
>DSL. Since most lines in this country are owned by BT, they are not
>going to do away with their line rental as it is easy money.
It is wrong for BT to force someone to have a phone line when all they
need it for is an ADSL connection, if adsl can be split from the line
in your house it can be spilt at the exchange and I think before long
Offcom will force BT to do this and also charge a very small line
rental if all you need is adsl .
| |
| JuliusP 2005-09-02, 5:45 pm |
|
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 22:05:10 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
> wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> It is wrong for BT to force someone to have a phone line when all they
> if adsl can be split from the line
> in your house it can be spilt at the exchange
xDSL is already spilt out at the exchange, it is combined again over
your loop
I Agree that no-one should be forced to accept telephone service in
order to get xDSL
I also think that low-cost services from B.T. should not bar anyone
from getting access to Broadband.
JP
and I think before long
> Offcom will force BT to do this and also charge a very small line
> rental if all you need is adsl .
| |
| Paul Cupis 2005-09-02, 8:45 pm |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 22:05:10 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> It is wrong for BT to force someone to have a phone line when all they
> need it for is an ADSL connection, if adsl can be split from the line
> in your house it can be spilt at the exchange and I think before long
> Offcom will force BT to do this and also charge a very small line
> rental if all you need is adsl .
What makes you think such a line rental would be "very small"? They've
still got to cover the cost of maintain the network.
Don't get me wrnog, I'd love it if they did do it.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-02, 8:45 pm |
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:35:58 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
>What makes you think such a line rental would be "very small"? They've
>still got to cover the cost of maintain the network.
Your comments above could also apply to LUS but LUS is here and is
being allowed by BT I would be happy to be paying the same line rental
has lus customers are paying there is basically no difference in
usage.
| |
|
| AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> Satellite hyas too much of a delay and most of the time it is only
> one way, so you still need a phone line to transmitt the data.
Only if the satellite is in geostationary orbit. Iridium uses a large
number of near-earth satellites some 450 miles above the Earth. The
back of a fagpacket calculation suggests that this contributes a delay
of just 4ms.
[...]
> skype is easy to use and do not require any other hardware, I did
> not see Barain buddy or Ezula with Skype.
My main objection to Skype is that it *does* require hardware - a PC.
Leaving that running 24/7 so you can receive calls will cost you 60
quid a year or so just in electricity. So much for it being free.
My SPA-2000 doesn't use anything like that much juice, allows me to
leave my desk (with the handy addition of a cheap DECT phone) and
isn't a magnet for every worm and virus out there.
I do have a Skype account, but find that call quality isn't very good,
because people are using lash-ups of PC speakers and cheap
omnidirectional mics instadl of properly-designed telephone handsets.
What usually seems to happen is that initial contact will be made over
Skype, and then the call switched to PSTN when the drop-outs or echo
get too irritating.
[...]
> Only minority of the public will bother with VOIP.
The usual test as to whether technology has gone mainstream is when my
mostly computer-ignorant 60 year old mother starts asking me about it.
She doesn't have a computer or broadband, but it seems that quite a
few relatives are now using VoIP-to-PSTN gateways to call her from all
over the world.
That it doesn't sound naff suggests that it's something other than
Skype 
--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger abuse@mooli.org.uk for full key
/:.*posting.google.com.*/HX-Trace:+j
| |
|
| <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> It is wrong for BT to force someone to have a phone line when all
> they need it for is an ADSL connection,
If you don't have a phone line, how on earth are BT supposed to
deliver ADSL? RFC1149 avian carrier? Telepathy?
--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger abuse@mooli.org.uk for full key
/:.*posting.google.com.*/HX-Trace:+j
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-02, 8:45 pm |
| On 03 Sep 2005 00:50:17 GMT, abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk (Peter) wrote:
><Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>[...]
>
>If you don't have a phone line, how on earth are BT supposed to
>deliver ADSL? RFC1149 avian carrier? Telepathy?
A "phone" line carries both voice traffic and ADSL data one could or
should be able to have use of just the data side of the line without
having to have and be charged for the voice side of the line to put it
simply .
| |
| Adam Aglionby 2005-09-03, 2:45 am |
| >Since most lines in this country are owned by BT
Local loop lines, so called last mile, are majorly BT, whole lot of
other trunk fibre owners down the side of railways, motorways , canal
tow paths and wrapped round powerlines.
Wireless connections could possibly start filling in that last mile.
Mebbe its one way of getting a return on those 3G licence costs ;-)
| |
|
| In article <8ereh19lfuoadj07qtpm7qje7va7vdjnod@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> It is wrong for BT to force someone to have a phone line when all they
> need it for is an ADSL connection, if adsl can be split from the line
Yes, I kind of agree, but then even lines need replacing or fixing.
> in your house it can be spilt at the exchange and I think before long
> Offcom will force BT to do this and also charge a very small line
> rental if all you need is adsl .
>
Offcom won't do a thing, they are B.T friends, come to think of it they
are everyones friend, apart from the public.
Maybe in years to come it will happen, but I can't see it happening
anytime soon. It would be nice if I was wrong.
| |
|
| In article <4318f349$0$32690$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>,
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
>
> If you don't have a phone line, how on earth are BT supposed to
> deliver ADSL? RFC1149 avian carrier? Telepathy?
>
>
Telepathy, now that is a good diea, why would we want broadband at all,
if we could do that?
| |
|
| In article <4318f278$0$32690$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>,=20
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
> AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
>=20
> Only if the satellite is in geostationary orbit. Iridium uses a large
> number of near-earth satellites some 450 miles above the Earth. The
> back of a fagpacket calculation suggests that this contributes a delay
> of just 4ms.
About price? I know someone who have satellite broadband and it costs a=20
fortune, they are getting rid of it soon, because Bt have now decided=20
that they will put ADSL into the village.
> [...]
> My main objection to Skype is that it *does* require hardware - a PC.
> Leaving that running 24/7 so you can receive calls will cost you 60
> quid a year or so just in electricity. So much for it being free.
My computer is on 24/7 and it don't cost me =A360 a year, in fact I got 2=
=20
computers on 24/7 and it don't cost me =A360 a year.
But I do know what you mean about needing a computer, but most people=20
who use Skype, do not use it as their main phone.
I use the audio part on MSN messenger to chat with people in other=20
countries, but only because it is free. which you will find out is what=20
most people use Skype for, I doubt very much if many people use Skype=20
out.
>=20
> My SPA-2000 doesn't use anything like that much juice, allows me to
> leave my desk (with the handy addition of a cheap DECT phone) and
> isn't a magnet for every worm and virus out there.
But not everyone wants to go to that trouble just to have cheaper calls=20
to other countries, which is what people will use Skype for most of the=20
time. TBH, I have been looking at some of the call costs on these VOIP=20
services and most of them are more expensive than what my landline phone=20
is. Apart from maybe Vonage, because you pay a fixed cost, but that=20
would not pay people who uses a BT line.
>=20
> I do have a Skype account, but find that call quality isn't very good,
> because people are using lash-ups of PC speakers and cheap
> omnidirectional mics instadl of properly-designed telephone handsets.
Sometimes the cheaper Mics are better for thisa sort of thing, than one=20
you pay a lot of money for. I have got a panasonic microphone, which=20
cost me nearly =A3100 last year, which I use for the video camera, I tried=
=20
that on MSN once and it was awful, I stuck in my old Trust Microphone,=20
which is about 7 years old and cost me a tenner and it works great. I=20
always use head phones. I am thinking about getting a USB=20
microphone/headset, they are suppose to be pretty good, for things like=20
that, and voice recognition.
The cheap trust mic also works ok in the camera, but it souls a bit=20
hollow, due to it being cheap plastic I suppose.
But I do understand where you are coming from, a mate of mine has a=20
cheap microphone which is naff, very quiet and really horrid sound.
We play quake 3 only the net and we put MSN on in the back ground, so we=20
can talk to each other, I works well.
Well it did work well, he is changing his ISP, so is only on dial up at=20
the moment, so the games are off, until next week.
> What usually seems to happen is that initial contact will be made over
> Skype, and then the call switched to PSTN when the drop-outs or echo
> get too irritating.
I talk to my cousin in the states using Skype, no dropout at all. In=20
fact sometimes it is clearer than my normal phone. MSN is better mind=20
you and we do use MSN more than Skype.
>=20
> [...]
>=20
> The usual test as to whether technology has gone mainstream is when my
> mostly computer-ignorant 60 year old mother starts asking me about it.
> She doesn't have a computer or broadband, but it seems that quite a
> few relatives are now using VoIP-to-PSTN gateways to call her from all
> over the world.
People ask me about it, but since everyone here is on a BT line, they=20
decide that it is not worth it, since they would not be gaining. which=20
is going to be the problem.
I do know two people who are thinking about it.
One of them because she is at uni and they broadband and it would be=20
cheap to call her parents and friends, instead of using the mobile.
The other person is looking at it for a separate fax line, if that can=20
be done. He was using ISdn until a few weeks back, but have now gone=20
back a single line as he have had ADSL installed, so have lost a line.
>=20
> That it doesn't sound naff suggests that it's something other than
> Skype
>=20
But Skype is not really the same thing.
I like the idea of VOIP, but costs is what put me off. If I did not have=20
the BT line, then I would use VOIP, the only thing that worries me is=20
reliability, since the internet is not 100%, come to think of it, the=20
Internet is not even 60%. But things are getting better.
I also thing the heavens are going to open up, because it have gone=20
really dark here. OH well, I did not really want to cut those trees down=20
today anyway.
=20
| |
| Paul Cupis 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:35:58 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> Your comments above could also apply to LUS but LUS is here and is
> being allowed by BT I would be happy to be paying the same line rental
> has lus customers are paying there is basically no difference in
> usage.
Do you think that BT make LUS available through choice?
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 08:58:06 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>My computer is on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year, in fact I got 2
>computers on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year.
We have two running 24/7 and if they where costing so much to run they
would run out the front door quicker than they came in )) .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 09:32:09 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
>Do you think that BT make LUS available through choice?
No but I feel that they will also be forced to sort out the line
rental regarding customers who only require a line for ADSL only .
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| what about the potential risk of fir dex, why do you need 2 pcs just out of
curiosity and also how much is your averag monthly electric bill ?
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
|
"UKHierarchy" <UK@Hierarchy.uk> wrote in message
news:GSfSe.1019$7p1.870@newsfe7-win.ntli.net
> what about the potential risk of fir dex, why do you
> need 2 pcs just out of curiosity and also how much is
> your averag monthly electric bill ?
The fire risk from a PC is relatively small. The biggest risk is from the
monitor, although that is less now that flat screens are becoming common.
I once had an old CRT monitor burst into flames in front of my eyes, that
plug got pulled out pretty quick..!!
My systems are usually on 24 hours, I just switch the screens off if I'm
going to be away for any length of time. The PC's themselves only get
switched off if I'm going way on holiday for more than 2 or 3 days.
Ivor
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 12:34:45 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>I once had an old CRT monitor burst into flames in front of my eyes, that
>plug got pulled out pretty quick..!!
The one that we had a few years ago didn't burst into flames but it
started smoking like hell we never leave monitors switched on when
we cannot keep an eye on them .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 11:33:58 GMT, "UKHierarchy" <UK@Hierarchy.uk>
wrote:
>what about the potential risk of fir dex,
Never seen one go up in flames yet or even heard of one doing so.
> why do you need 2 pcs just out of curiosity
We actually have 4 with 2 running 24/7 why 2 mailservers .
> and also how much is your averag monthly electric bill ?
That's the question I can't answer haven't seen a bill since October
last year the electricity company is being stupid and has been for a
couple of years now and I just got sick of ringing them and pointing
out their mistakes,it isn't only Sipgate that is incapable of running
and maintaining a business .
If they don't want to send out a bill or even send anyone round to
read the meter than that is ok by me, I reckon about 25.00 a month
covers it and the cash is waiting for them if they decide to wake up
it isn't my job to go chasing after them .
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| what they havent sent a bill, wow, make sur eyou keep an appropriate amount
to one side when they send it,if they send it.
what do they say when you contact about your missing bill dex?
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 7:45 am |
| i run several utility accounts online with powergen and if anything, they
send more bills than they should
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
<
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 12:46:02 GMT, "UKHierarchy" <UK@Hierarchy.uk>
wrote:
>what do they say when you contact about your missing bill dex?
I don't pester any company regarding bills if they want paying they
send a meter reader round and send a bill if they don't do these
things then they don't get paid it isn't my problem now is it .
| |
|
| AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk wrote:
[...]
> About price? I know someone who have satellite broadband and it
> costs a fortune, they are getting rid of it soon, because Bt have
> now decided that they will put ADSL into the village.
Iridium is a propietary mobile phone system, not a broadband system.
Similar technology *could* be used to provide broadband, but Iridium
concentrate more on voice.
[...]
> My computer is on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year, in fact I
> got 2 computers on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year.
Are you sure of that?
I've put a power meter on various of my machines. The power
consumption varies on all sorts of factors, but the readings varied
between 90-180W at idle. The newer the machine, the more power it
tends to draw.
Let's take 120W as a reasonable average. So over an hour, it will
consume 0.12kWh of energy. Multiply by 24 and 365.25 and you discover
that it will consume 1052kWh over a year.
The cost per kWh varies depending on your supplier and tariff, but it
averages around 6p/kWh. 1052kWh * 0.05p/kWh = 6312p, or slightly over
60 quid.
[...]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> But not everyone wants to go to that trouble just to have cheaper
> calls to other countries, which is what people will use Skype for
> most of the time.
Strange. I took one look at X-Lite and found it lacking, and a pain to
use. The Sipura mostly just works.
> TBH, I have been looking at some of the call costs on these VOIP
> services and most of them are more expensive than what my landline
> phone is. Apart from maybe Vonage, because you pay a fixed cost, but
> that would not pay people who uses a BT line.
Well, yes, you don't actually save any money on the VoIP services
offered to consumers. That end of the market seems to be mostly
chancers preying on customers who have heard that "VoIP is cheap" and
don't look too closely at the prices.
Check out Gradwell's price list for a WTF? moment. Remember that you
need to add VAT on top. (Quoting ex-VAT prices to consumers? Naughty,
naughty...)
--
Just last week, someone called every morning to speak to President Gore. By
Friday, the operator was flustered, and finally snapped, "You call every day
asking that, and every day I tell you that Mr. Gore lost the election. Why?"
"I just like hearing that. It's a great start for the day!"
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| YES AGREED, BUT THEIR HAVE BEEN CASES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE NOT HAD A BILL FOR
YEARS , LITERALLY !!! and then they get presented with a bill for thousands,
i would keep an eye on it if i were you dex, i mean their was a case i red
about where some old granny died because she got a bill for over 3k after
the company in question, i think it was npower, hadnt sent hera bill for 5
years
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
<
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 13:14:33 GMT, "UKHierarchy" <UK@Hierarchy.uk>
wrote:
>YES AGREED, BUT THEIR HAVE BEEN CASES WHERE PEOPLE HAVE NOT HAD A BILL FOR
>YEARS , LITERALLY !!! and then they get presented with a bill for thousands,
>i would keep an eye on it if i were you dex, i mean their was a case i red
>about where some old granny died because she got a bill for over 3k after
>the company in question, i think it was npower, hadnt sent hera bill for 5
>years
I don't think this will happen here and I am almost sure I know just
what has happened you see around this time last year company A
snatched our account from company B unknown to me until company A sent
a letter saying welcome to us . I immediately contacted company B who
said right will get you back to ourselves a week later I got a letter
from company A saying sorry for taking your account and you are being
transferred back to company B.
Now I am thinking we have left A and somehow got stuck between A and B
so no one knows we exist .
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| hmm in limbo huh, universal utilities are a well known sales agency working
on behalf of various utilities companies and thwy have regularly been known
to "switch" customers all over the shop, the interesting thing is looking at
their accounts they must make a fat profit out of it because theyre make
more profit year on year, they employ 16 year old sales people as well which
is beyond belief.
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| admittedly sometimes the powergen site is hard to get on but yes i have
always been able to see all the bills, i found opera as a browser to be
better for the powergen site for some reason though :-)
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
| |
| UKHierarchy 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| forgot to add only oncfe did i get the error message but it worked ok after
that , have yo phoned them to query it, they use 0800 numbers unlike most
other utilities :-)
--
----
"Sometimes I worry about being a success in a mediocre world."
| |
|
| In article <s1cgh15q1h75u03e2ee2e9dfpf215d2se3@4ax.com>,=20
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 08:58:06 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
> wrote:
>=20
2=20[vbcol=seagreen]
> We have two running 24/7 and if they where costing so much to run they
> would run out the front door quicker than they came in )) .
>=20
Agree, I think my T.v costs more to run than the computers and that is=20
only on a couple of hours a day, three at the most. Even then, there are=20
some days, where it is not even switched on.
| |
|
| In article <4319a107$0$25428$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,=20
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
>=20
> Iridium is a propietary mobile phone system, not a broadband system.
> Similar technology *could* be used to provide broadband, but Iridium
> concentrate more on voice.
I never heard of it, but that means nothing :-)
> [...]
>=20
> Are you sure of that?
Oh yes.
>=20
> I've put a power meter on various of my machines. The power
> consumption varies on all sorts of factors, but the readings varied
> between 90-180W at idle. The newer the machine, the more power it
> tends to draw.
>=20
> Let's take 120W as a reasonable average. So over an hour, it will
> consume 0.12kWh of energy. Multiply by 24 and 365.25 and you discover
> that it will consume 1052kWh over a year.
>=20
> The cost per kWh varies depending on your supplier and tariff, but it
> averages around 6p/kWh. 1052kWh * 0.05p/kWh =3D 6312p, or slightly over
> 60 quid.
Since my electric bill is only =A3180-=A3200 a year, I doubt =A360 of that =
is=20
for the computers. Until the last few months, my cooking was by electric=20
as well. My electric bill should way down now.
a computer will only use what it needs, if it is idle, then it uses less=20
electric, the monitors are switched off most of the time and this=20
computer which is my main one have a LCd monitor anyway.
>=20
> [...]
>=20
> Strange. I took one look at X-Lite and found it lacking, and a pain to
> use. The Sipura mostly just works.
What is X-lite?
> Well, yes, you don't actually save any money on the VoIP services
> offered to consumers. That end of the market seems to be mostly
> chancers preying on customers who have heard that "VoIP is cheap" and
> don't look too closely at the prices.
so I will go back to my very first post on this newsgroup. What is the=20
point of it all?
>=20
> Check out Gradwell's price list for a WTF? moment. Remember that you
> need to add VAT on top. (Quoting ex-VAT prices to consumers? Naughty,
> naughty...)
>=20
Whose price list? My ISP had their prices excluding V.a.t on the front=20
page, they have changed it now mind you.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-03, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 18:28:59 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Agree, I think my T.v costs more to run than the computers and that is
>only on a couple of hours a day, three at the most. Even then, there are
>some days, where it is not even switched on.
We are about the same and very rarely watch a program live especially
programs from ITV sooner record them on the DVD recorder then play
back later and cut out all the adds .
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-09-04, 2:45 am |
| On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 22:03:20 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <1125622616.815145.64040@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
>ledlight@gmail.com says...
>Not for a long time.
>
>
>wi-fi have got problems with distance, GSM is too expensive and also got
>blackspots. Satellite hyas too much of a delay and most of the time it
>is only one way, so you still need a phone line to transmitt the data.
The capacity of any kind of radio link is going to be limited if you
want to have multiple users in nearby locations. With physical cables,
every house in the street can have a 2Mb ADSL link. Try to do that
with radio and see how fast you run out of bandwidth.
Chris
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-04, 7:45 am |
| On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 14:50:53 +0800, Chris Blunt
<chris_blunt@despammed.com> wrote:
>The capacity of any kind of radio link is going to be limited if you
>want to have multiple users in nearby locations. With physical cables,
>every house in the street can have a 2Mb ADSL link. Try to do that
>with radio and see how fast you run out of bandwidth.
I will stick with physical cables Chris although I do hate the sight
of them in the house .
| |
|
| On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:50:17 +0000, Peter wrote:
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
>
> If you don't have a phone line, how on earth are BT supposed to deliver
> ADSL? RFC1149 avian carrier? Telepathy?
Yet you are forced to have "Option 1" which includes bundled voice so you
are forced to buy a telephone service.
| |
|
| steve <steve@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 00:50:17 +0000, Peter wrote:
[...]
> Yet you are forced to have "Option 1" which includes bundled voice
> so you are forced to buy a telephone service.
Due to the wonders of economics, the telephone service component
actually has a *negative* cost. Take away Option 1 and the phone
service, and the cost rises.
Why are baked beans with added sugar and salt cheaper than those
without?
--
Never keep up with the Joneses. Drag them down to your level.
- Quentin Crisp
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-04, 5:45 pm |
| On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 14:26:43 +0100, steve <steve@nospam.invalid>
wrote:
>Yet you are forced to have "Option 1" which includes bundled voice so you
>are forced to buy a telephone service.
there's no bundled call time in Option 1 ?
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
| Paul Cupis 2005-09-04, 5:45 pm |
| Phil Thompson wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 14:26:43 +0100, steve <steve@nospam.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> there's no bundled call time in Option 1 ?
Not bundled call time, but discounts on certain types of calls during
certain times of the day.
They don't seem to have a "just line rental, no discounts on calls"
product for residential users.
| |
| Steve Loft 2005-09-04, 5:45 pm |
| AD C wrote:
> My computer is on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year, in fact I got 2
> computers on 24/7 and it don't cost me £60 a year.
I'm curious to know how you can run a computer (let alone two computers)
for less than £60 a year. Let's say it uses 100W (it probably uses more
when you're actually using it), and electricity is about 7p per kWh. So,
0.1 * 24 * 365 * 0.07 = £61.32. Where's the flaw in my arithmetic?
--
Steve Loft
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-04, 5:45 pm |
| On 04 Sep 2005 15:41:51 GMT, abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk (Peter) wrote:
>Why are baked beans with added sugar and salt cheaper than those
>without?
because sugar and salt are cheaper than beans ? The contents weight
stays the same :-)
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-04, 5:45 pm |
| On Sun, 04 Sep 2005 17:17:27 +0100, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
wrote:
>They don't seem to have a "just line rental, no discounts on calls"
>product for residential users.
apart from the LUS, but let's not go there.
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
|
| In article <dff6mo$140s$1@custnews.inweb.co.uk>, paul@cupis.co.uk=20
says...
>=20
> They don't seem to have a "just line rental, no discounts on calls"
> product for residential users.
>=20
That what annoyed me when I first changed over to a new phone service=20
supplier. BT started this silly idea of sticking an extra quid onto=20
their line rental, just after I changed over. They done it to make it=20
more expensive for people like me to use other suppliers, as at the=20
time, I was paying =A31.99 for the same thing as Option one. My suppiser=20
now do not charge for that and they have alstaken over the line rental=20
and kncoked =A32 a month off that as well.
With the cheaper calls, I am better off without BT.
| |
|
| In article <dKFSe.63813$cv3.44080@fe12.news.easynews.com>,=20
steve@nybbles.co.uk says...
> I'm curious to know how you can run a computer (let alone two computers)=
=20
> for less than =A360 a year. Let's say it uses 100W (it probably uses more=
=20
> when you're actually using it), and electricity is about 7p per kWh. So,=
=20
> 0.1 * 24 * 365 * 0.07 =3D =A361.32. Where's the flaw in my arithmetic?
>=20
I doubt there is nay flaw, but theory do not always work out in=20
practice. Most computers use very little power when they are idle.=20
| |
| Mark Adamson 2005-09-05, 2:45 am |
| >> I'm curious to know how you can run a computer (let alone two computers)
>
> I doubt there is nay flaw, but theory do not always work out in
> practice. Most computers use very little power when they are idle.
PCPlus did a test this month using power meters. They found that when idle,
an athlon 64 computer used 132W, while a P4 used 170W.
Shockingly, even when switched off they used 27W and 28W repectively. That
can't be just wol, surely! As would be expected S3 standby mode used only a
little more power. It is a very neat standby mode in my view.
| |
|
| AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> I doubt there is nay flaw, but theory do not always work out in
> practice. Most computers use very little power when they are idle.
What's theory got to do with it? I used a power meter, tried the
machine with disks running and idle, ditto the CPU.
On a P200MMX, I was getting a base load of about 60W, plus 10W per
disk, plus another 10W when the CPU was in use. Power factor was about
0.6-0.7. So the true power is 90W and it requires 150VA. I was getting
similar figures for a PII system.
An Athlon XP2200+ system (a bottom-spec Flexiserv 1/2U system, as it
so happens) drew an astonishing 180W at idle.
My power meter is just left plugged into the input of my UPS, which
powers my 24/7 Linux box (an 800MHz PIII), router, cordless phone,
etc. It's clocked up well over 100 quid in the last year.
100 quid isn't bad for what that Linux box is doing, but I'd have a
hard job justifying a second machine and another 60 quid a year just
for Skype.
--
The traditional flaming Christmas pudding for example dates back to the 17th
century, when a form of stiff porridge was made containing plums, preserved
quinces, lemon peel, ox blood and grated pig livers. All bound together with
goose fat. No wonder they set fire to it. - Humphrey Lyttelton, ISIHAC
| |
| dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-05, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 08:28:41 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Yes, I kind of agree, but then even lines need replacing or fixing.
None of the poles or lines from poles to houses have been replaced in
the last 25 years that I know of so every single penny BT have got
from people around here has been near enough pure profit .
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-05, 5:45 pm |
| On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:20:21 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>With the cheaper calls, I am better off without BT.
and sometimes people are better off with BT and the full choice of
alternative carriers.
Depends on calling patterns etc. Unless the cheaper line rental
company gives the lowest rates available the saving of the odd quid on
rental can soon be lost on call charges or things like minimum or call
connection charges compared to using BT rental with death rate call
carriers.
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
|
| In article <0l9mh1ldoag9a93a7gltegv6rpr9dev3i6@4ax.com>,
dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> None of the poles or lines from poles to houses have been replaced in
> the last 25 years that I know of so every single penny BT have got
> from people around here has been near enough pure profit .
>
BT have been busy here, a lot of poles are being replaced, some are
being replaced with metal ones. Almost every week for the last couple of
months, there have been notices going up on different pole to say they
are going to be renewed. As for phone lines, you are right there, as
they are not touched, apart from reconnecting them back to the pole.
My cable should have been replaced 33-4 years ago and still nothing have
been done.
But I agree with you, normally BT do not touch thepoles, I got no idea
why they are around here.
| |
|
| In article <dfgs7r$gjq$1@wisteria.csv.warwick.ac.uk>,=20
fliblebibble@adamsonfdfgdf.com says...
>=20
> PCPlus did a test this month using power meters. They found that when idl=
e,=20
> an athlon 64 computer used 132W, while a P4 used 170W.
Well, I can tell you now, that my computers do not cost =A360 a year to=20
run.
>=20
> Shockingly, even when switched off they used 27W and 28W repectively. Tha=
t=20
If left connected to the mains, they will, but then, so do videos, set=20
top boxes, T.v's left in standby, and a lot of other electrical=20
products,
> can't be just wol, surely! As would be expected S3 standby mode used only=
a=20
> little more power. It is a very neat standby mode in my view.
>=20
S3 is a pain in the neck, if you are on a network. Everytime I put my=20
computer on any standby, when it returns, it can't find the network.
| |
|
| In article <431c3ec7$0$22097$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,=20
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
> AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
>=20
> What's theory got to do with it? I used a power meter, tried the
> machine with disks running and idle, ditto the CPU.
>=20
> On a P200MMX, I was getting a base load of about 60W, plus 10W per
> disk, plus another 10W when the CPU was in use. Power factor was about
> 0.6-0.7. So the true power is 90W and it requires 150VA. I was getting
> similar figures for a PII system.
>=20
> An Athlon XP2200+ system (a bottom-spec Flexiserv 1/2U system, as it
> so happens) drew an astonishing 180W at idle.
>=20
> My power meter is just left plugged into the input of my UPS, which
> powers my 24/7 Linux box (an 800MHz PIII), router, cordless phone,
> etc. It's clocked up well over 100 quid in the last year.
>=20
> 100 quid isn't bad for what that Linux box is doing, but I'd have a
> hard job justifying a second machine and another 60 quid a year just
> for Skype.
>=20
>=20
As I said, I do not use =A360 a year on my computer, so something must be=
=20
wrong somewhere. I don't use skype, in fact the only reason I leave my=20
computer on is because of access. I can come upstairs and acess the net=20
or do anything else I want to do, without waiting for the thing to boot=20
up. the other computer is used for the security camera.
| |
| Mark Adamson 2005-09-05, 5:45 pm |
| > S3 is a pain in the neck, if you are on a network. Everytime I put my
> computer on any standby, when it returns, it can't find the network.
I'm glad you said that as I have had exactly the same problem. It worked
fine with a wireless network, but it gets in a right bob on my wired one.
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-05, 5:45 pm |
| On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 19:43:18 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>But I agree with you, normally BT do not touch thepoles, I got no idea
>why they are around here.
>
might be to get 5.5m clearance on the road, or maybe the pole was
decayed.
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
|
| In article <226ph11f80pki6p7ldam8u11vo12v0ojgg@4ax.com>,
phil.thompson@spamcop.net says...
>
> might be to get 5.5m clearance on the road, or maybe the pole was
> decayed.
>
The new ones are going up in the same place as the old ones, I doubt all
of them are decayed. Maybe BT thought they better do something for their
money :-)
| |
|
| In article <dfi5gh$si1$1@wisteria.csv.warwick.ac.uk>,
fliblebibble@adamsonfdfgdf.com says...
>
> I'm glad you said that as I have had exactly the same problem. It worked
> fine with a wireless network, but it gets in a right bob on my wired one.
>
>
>
It fails on the wireless and the wired network here.
| |
| {{{{{Welcome}}}}} 2005-09-06, 2:45 am |
| Thus spaketh Mathew Curtis:
> Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>
> yep i agree i done away with bt and i am with NTL Broadband now and
> not looked back
>
> Mat
I'm having TW broadband installed Friday, and once the upload speed is
increased I will be doing away with my BT landline.
| |
| {{{{{Welcome}}}}} 2005-09-06, 2:45 am |
| Thus spaketh Ivor Jones:
> "UKHierarchy" <UK@Hierarchy.uk> wrote in message
> news:GSfSe.1019$7p1.870@newsfe7-win.ntli.net
>
> The fire risk from a PC is relatively small. The biggest risk is from
> the monitor, although that is less now that flat screens are becoming
> common. I once had an old CRT monitor burst into flames in front of
> my eyes, that plug got pulled out pretty quick..!!
>
> Ivor
Was that an Amstrad monitor, they were known to catch fire, we used to get
loads of them in with all the plastic melted.
| |
|
| In article <fuunh15tpu976ll5llh2soh5l0p2vbj154@4ax.com>,
phil.thompson@spamcop.net says...
>
> and sometimes people are better off with BT and the full choice of
> alternative carriers.
>
My parents for instance.
> Depends on calling patterns etc. Unless the cheaper line rental
> company gives the lowest rates available the saving of the odd quid on
> rental can soon be lost on call charges or things like minimum or call
> connection charges compared to using BT rental with death rate call
> carriers.
>
My parents get the low user rebate, which they would not get if they
swopped. They use the phone very little.
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-06, 7:45 am |
| On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 22:50:44 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>The new ones are going up in the same place as the old ones, I doubt all
>of them are decayed.
are they the same height ?
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
|
| In article <jvjqh1d16kjfl1l6num26lov38q2m65j70@4ax.com>,
phil.thompson@spamcop.net says...
>
> are they the same height ?
>
As far as I can tell. I noticed that they have stuck a notice on the one
outside my house this morning, They are doing the work sometime next
month, not sure when, since I did not take a good look at it yet.
| |
|
| AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> As I said, I do not use £60 a year on my computer,
OK, I'm not going to outright come and say "you're wrong", but can you
explain how you've come to this conclusion? Unless your electricity is
free or below cost, or your computer isn't a PC, or it's not running
24/7, it seems unlikely.
If you're just going by the size of your bill and guessing, you'd be
surprised. In my last house (I get "free" electricity in this one)
which had gas heating and cooking, approximately 70% of the
GBP80/quarter electricity bill was due to computers and associated
equipment.
--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger abuse@mooli.org.uk for full key
/:.*posting.google.com.*/HX-Trace:+j
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-09-06, 5:45 pm |
|
"{{{{{Welcome}}}}}" <bhx___spam@trapped___hotmail.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:fZCdnZ2dnZ2nX7-snZ2dnZW1gN6dnZ2dRVnypp2dnZ0@pipex.net
> Thus spaketh Ivor Jones:
[snip]
>
> Was that an Amstrad monitor, they were known to catch
> fire, we used to get loads of them in with all the
> plastic melted.
I don't recall ofhand, it was about 10 years ago. It wasn't a badged one
of any of the well known names like Dell or Compaq though, IIRC it was
just a cheapo one from a computer fair.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <431d76c7$0$17950$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,=20
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
>=20
> OK, I'm not going to outright come and say "you're wrong", but can you
> explain how you've come to this conclusion? Unless your electricity is
> free or below cost, or your computer isn't a PC, or it's not running
> 24/7, it seems unlikely.
>=20
> If you're just going by the size of your bill and guessing, you'd be
> surprised. In my last house (I get "free" electricity in this one)
> which had gas heating and cooking, approximately 70% of the
> GBP80/quarter electricity bill was due to computers and associated
> equipment.
>=20
A while back, I had a friend living here, so I had three computers on=20
24/7, my computer, my friends computer and the server. at the time I was=20
paying my eletric via a Pre-pay meter, so I knew how much I put in and=20
that was about =A35 a week, which is about =A3220 a year. she was here for=
=20
two years, when she moved out, she took her computer and the server was=20
switched off and was only put back into operation in the last few=20
months.
Now if each computer took =A360 a year to run, how much would you think my=
=20
electric bill would go down by, with two computers less? the fgirst=20
year, my bill should have been about =A3120 less, going by what you are=20
saying each computer takes. We had most meals together, so cooking was=20
done at the same time, The only things that used more electric when she=20
was here, was the washing machine and the shower. I know electric have=20
gone up in the last 2 years, but not to that extent.
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-09-07, 2:45 am |
| On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 18:07:22 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <431d76c7$0$17950$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
>abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
>
>
>A while back, I had a friend living here, so I had three computers on
>24/7, my computer, my friends computer and the server. at the time I was
>paying my eletric via a Pre-pay meter, so I knew how much I put in and
>that was about £5 a week, which is about £220 a year. she was here for
>two years, when she moved out, she took her computer and the server was
>switched off and was only put back into operation in the last few
>months.
>
>Now if each computer took £60 a year to run, how much would you think my
>electric bill would go down by, with two computers less? the fgirst
>year, my bill should have been about £120 less, going by what you are
>saying each computer takes. We had most meals together, so cooking was
>done at the same time, The only things that used more electric when she
>was here, was the washing machine and the shower. I know electric have
>gone up in the last 2 years, but not to that extent.
You have to take into account the fact that the display monitor can
consume much more power than all the rest of the computer equipment
put together. This was especially true for the older CRT type
monitors, less so for new LCD displays.
A computer running 24/7 doing nothing except operating as a server for
running Asterisk or something, but with the display turned off, would
consume less power than one being used every day for normal work.
Chris
| |
|
| In article <nt1th1l97dcqv6p366q9o4n51dkcqos28e@4ax.com>,
chris_blunt@despammed.com says...
>
> You have to take into account the fact that the display monitor can
> consume much more power than all the rest of the computer equipment
> put together. This was especially true for the older CRT type
> monitors, less so for new LCD displays.
>
> A computer running 24/7 doing nothing except operating as a server for
> running Asterisk or something, but with the display turned off, would
> consume less power than one being used every day for normal work.
>
I realise that, but my other computers did not have the displays on all
the time either. The displays was only on when the computer needed to be
accessed.
| |
| Andrew Hodgson 2005-09-12, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 02:46:19 +0100, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>On 03 Sep 2005 00:50:17 GMT, abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk (Peter) wrote:
>
>A "phone" line carries both voice traffic and ADSL data one could or
>should be able to have use of just the data side of the line without
>having to have and be charged for the voice side of the line to put it
>simply .
Then who pays for the equipment at the exchange, the routers, etc?
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-09-12, 5:45 pm |
| On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:27:54 +0100, Andrew Hodgson <me3@privacy.net>
wrote:
>Then who pays for the equipment at the exchange, the routers, etc?
Most not all of the equipment in exchanges has been paid for a
million times over I can think back to the days when there where
12 men employed in our exchange now there is one every other
day plus an odd visit from an installation engineer .
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-12, 5:45 pm |
| On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 20:27:54 +0100, Andrew Hodgson <me3@privacy.net>
wrote:
>Then who pays for the equipment at the exchange, the routers, etc?
they aren't in the line rental, ADSL setup and rental pays for that
side of it, call charges (minimum call chrge) for the voice side.
I think line rental should be proptioned to bandwidth, so 4 kHz worth
for the voice signal and then next 1.1 MHz for ADSL (more later for
ADSL2+) so removing the voice capability would save 0.0004% of the
cost :-)
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
| Nick Ward 2005-09-14, 5:45 pm |
| Phil Thompson wrote:
> I think line rental should be proptioned to bandwidth, so 4 kHz worth
> for the voice signal and then next 1.1 MHz for ADSL (more later for
> ADSL2+) so removing the voice capability would save 0.0004% of the
> cost :-)
Isn't the problem that the margin is in the call minutes but the driver
for network expansion is in the cell/packet payload? I guess we will
end up with some kind of gateway which measures how much bandwidth
we've consumed over what period (something which ATM does pretty well
and IP doesn't just yet). But as you infer, if pricing is based on
bandwidth and voice consumes very little, then how do the telcos
present a coherent pricing policy?
Nick
| |
| ipolex 2005-09-22, 7:45 am |
| www.ipolex.com
IPOLEX CO. LTD. is a leader Tele-communication and IP solution supplier
from China. We offered both user-end device and master equipment. We
focus on business class VOIP products design and manufacturing.
This company IPOLEX CO. LTD., established in the year 2001, and as an
independent exporter, we are promoting the products with prosperous
marketing anticipation, making and sourcing products with the most
competitive price. The quality control, process under a strict set of
quality standards to make sure our produts are brilliant performance.
For the past four years, we have been supplying worldwide clients, and
our annual revenue is growing up at a rapid pace. We devote our company
in reducing cost, in order to our clients be affordable to buy our
products. Our persistent efforts in lowing the price and good
performance, is to support and helped us build up our credibility and
reputation among our clients.
Much of our success is attributed to our customer-oriented attitude,
supported by efficient and experienced staff, . we open a new branch
office for another sales marketing. We are expecting this year 2005,
our company will be the famous manufacturer and supplier for more
range.
Our company motto is "Honest, diligent, united and innovative. We are
always dedicated in providing customers with an excellent quality
produts and best services. If you are interested in our products,
please don't hesitate to contact us at your most convinient time.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-09-22, 8:45 pm |
|
"Nick Ward" <nicky.ward@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1125586579.264605.248060@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
[snip]
> The challenge for the telcoms industry is to identify
> applications which are going to drive deployment of a
> true broadband network. Given that 7M homes in the UK
> have a satellite dish, do we want/need TV over the phone
> line (whether it's copper or fibre)? If we have multi-MB
> access to our homes, will we all buy videophones? We
> didn't when we had ISDN2. Or are we going to start
> swapping our DVDs on-line? To sum up, what's the golden
> application for mass-market broadband? If it's TV >>
> Sport >> Football then why change the telephone network
> to do something which Sky does already?
For me, broadband is about fast internet access and VoIP. I don't watch TV
over it, and only occasionally do I listen to radio through it.
Broadband over satellite is problematic. Latency in the connection, for
one thing. Also not everybody has Sky nor do they want it. I for one will
not pay their inflated prices for a service more geared to quantity (200+
channels seems to be their main selling point) rather than quality of
programming. VoIP over a satellite link for the same reason is unlikely to
be viable in the near future.
Personally I think that we'll be needing copper pairs for a good while
yet.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <3pfpjhF9pgkeU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
> For me, broadband is about fast internet access and VoIP. I don't watch TV
> over it, and only occasionally do I listen to radio through it.
>
The only T.V thing I watch over the internet is Nasa Tv now and again, I
wish that is was on the Sky system, it would be much better, because
over the internet the quality is not that great.
I listen to two american stations now and again on the net, but any
other I either use FM or the Sky box.
> Broadband over satellite is problematic. Latency in the connection, for
True
> one thing. Also not everybody has Sky nor do they want it. I for one will
That is also true
> not pay their inflated prices for a service more geared to quantity (200+
At least now you do have a better choice and can now chose different
mixes. I admit the pirce could be better.
As for quality and quantity, most companies are like that these days.
Take a look at mobile phones.
> channels seems to be their main selling point) rather than quality of
> programming. VoIP over a satellite link for the same reason is unlikely to
> be viable in the near future.
>
I don't think it will be mainly because of the delay and also price.
> Personally I think that we'll be needing copper pairs for a good while
> yet.
They seem to prove they work and considering they was made for speech
only, they do very well and some of them are years old.
| |
| turtill@hotmail.com 2005-09-23, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 07:34:18 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <3pfpjhF9pgkeU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
trimmed
>They seem to prove they work and considering they was made for speech
>only, they do very well and some of them are years old.
I know that at BT research centre near me at Martlesham they are
already using voip so I expect BT will eventually bundle the telephone
in as part of their BB offering. The big problem is the exploitative
price of mobile calls atm and I think BT will have that cracked soon
to if you take into account the post by John about the article in the
Economist and his own views.
pete
| |
|
| In article <0d28j1dgo9ma7vsul07iiblhcu8hpu0skj@4ax.com>,
turtill@hotmail.com says...
>
> I know that at BT research centre near me at Martlesham they are
> already using voip so I expect BT will eventually bundle the telephone
> in as part of their BB offering. The big problem is the exploitative
I don't think they will be allowed to.
> price of mobile calls atm and I think BT will have that cracked soon
> to if you take into account the post by John about the article in the
> Economist and his own views.
I don't use my mobile mucha nd I dohn;t call mobiles, unless it is an
emergency.
| |
| turtill@hotmail.com 2005-09-23, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 18:03:43 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <0d28j1dgo9ma7vsul07iiblhcu8hpu0skj@4ax.com>,
>turtill@hotmail.com says...
>
>I don't think they will be allowed to.
What even if other ISP's are able to do so too?
>
>
>I don't use my mobile mucha nd I dohn;t call mobiles, unless it is an
>emergency.
I couldn't afford to call a mobile from a mobile. I hate having to
call mobiles from me landline. It is a giant rip off.
pete
| |
|
| In article <25i8j19hahgi3e01cjo5uhdlp85t9kgf0e@4ax.com>,
turtill@hotmail.com says...
>
> What even if other ISP's are able to do so too?
Correct, Bt is in a diferent situration than the other ISPs, don't
forget that BT is still a monopoly.
>
> I couldn't afford to call a mobile from a mobile. I hate having to
> call mobiles from me landline. It is a giant rip off.
> pete
>
The whole mobile system is a rip off, but since people are prepeard to
use them so much, nothing will be done.
| |
| turtill@hotmail.com 2005-09-24, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 06:57:39 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <25i8j19hahgi3e01cjo5uhdlp85t9kgf0e@4ax.com>,
>turtill@hotmail.com says...
>
>Correct, Bt is in a diferent situration than the other ISPs, don't
>forget that BT is still a monopoly.
Yes but if they have got away with it for so long and allow other
ISP's to use the same arrangements with their customers I cannot see
the problem. In fact I would think many of the other ISP's would jump
at the chance to be able to offer their customers free telephone
calls.
>
>The whole mobile system is a rip off, but since people are prepeard to
>use them so much, nothing will be done.
Yes that is the problem until mobiles become voip enabled. This is all
a comparatively new use for communicating and I think something is
bound to happen eventually. Wishful thinking?
pete
| |
|
| In article <5o0bj19m01c87krogvfkepd3ifu9cud93c@4ax.com>,
turtill@hotmail.com says...
> Yes but if they have got away with it for so long and allow other
> ISP's to use the same arrangements with their customers I cannot see
> the problem. In fact I would think many of the other ISP's would jump
> at the chance to be able to offer their customers free telephone
> calls.
Maybe, but Ofcom still got BT on a lead, well sometimes they have.
>
> Yes that is the problem until mobiles become voip enabled. This is all
> a comparatively new use for communicating and I think something is
> bound to happen eventually. Wishful thinking?
I think it will be a few years yet. For VOIP to work on mobiles, the 3G
network would need to be used and there are still not that many 3g
phones around.
Most phones that are around now, could not be used for VOIP. I only just
got myself a new mobile phone and I am not going to buy another for at
least 6 years, I will try and make it ten years if I can.
I did not want to buy this thing, but my old one fell out of my pocket
and decided it did not want to play anymore.
I hate mobile phones, I really do. The only reason I got one is because
of my mother being ill.
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-24, 8:45 pm |
| On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:26:36 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Most phones that are around now, could not be used for VOIP.
no point really, why use 50 kbits/s for a job that is currently done
with 14.4 kbits/s :-)
Phil
--
Usenet spam eaten by a Hamster http://www.tglsoft.de/
No more cable clowns :-))
Please do not feed or re-quote the trolls.
| |
| turtill@hotmail.com 2005-09-24, 8:45 pm |
| On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 22:26:36 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <5o0bj19m01c87krogvfkepd3ifu9cud93c@4ax.com>,
>turtill@hotmail.com says...
>
>
>Maybe, but Ofcom still got BT on a lead, well sometimes they have.
We can but hope.
>
>I think it will be a few years yet. For VOIP to work on mobiles, the 3G
>network would need to be used and there are still not that many 3g
>phones around.
>
>Most phones that are around now, could not be used for VOIP. I only just
>got myself a new mobile phone and I am not going to buy another for at
>least 6 years, I will try and make it ten years if I can.
>
>I did not want to buy this thing, but my old one fell out of my pocket
>and decided it did not want to play anymore.
>
>I hate mobile phones, I really do. The only reason I got one is because
>of my mother being ill.
The thing I dislike about mobiles is my g/children will text me and
that means I have to stop the car, put my glasses on and then try and
find their message. Other than that we use them only for emergencies
and as we have had our motorola m3788e phones for about 4 years now
(new batteries) we know we are way out of date but we just cannot see
the numbers on small new phones. Now, if they were voip enabled I
would be prepared to pay a good price to buy one. One problems occurs
to me though and that is my bt phone. It costs more in rental than for
the calls we make and I don't know if I could have it taken out and
retain my BB?
pete
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-09-25, 7:45 am |
| On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 00:50:13 +0100, turtill@hotmail.com wrote:
>One problems occurs
>to me though and that is my bt phone. It costs more in rental than for
>the calls we make and I don't know if I could have it taken out and
>retain my BB?
the line rental pays for the line over which your ADSL broadband is
delivered. If you want to be free of the line rental you need to
switch to cable broadband, wireless or satelite.
Phil
--
Usenet spam eaten by a Hamster http://www.tglsoft.de/
No more cable clowns :-))
Please do not feed or re-quote the trolls.
| |
| turtill@hotmail.com 2005-09-25, 5:45 | | | |