Google Voice vs. AT&T – The battle of the sex lines

Once upon a time, there were two competing services that would help people talk to each other. One of them was a corporate titan, large and powerful, able to buy just about anything that stood in its way. This company had a history of poor customer service, and because they were one of the biggest in the land, there was no reason for them to change their practices. As they saw it, customers were unlimited resources that you could squeeze money from whenever you needed to. This company was named AT&T

One day, another company crossed into the land of telecommunications and saw an opportunity to provide the citizens of the land with a free service that would work as well, or better, than the existing service that they were getting. This service was free, but only available to certain members in this land because this company felt it was important to thoroughly test new offerings before providing them to the general public. This practice of offering free service had made this company well known and loved across the many regions of the internet. This company was named Google, and the service was called Google Voice.

AT&T had been aware of Google, but didn’t feel threatened until AT&T felt that Google didn’t have to play by the same rules as AT&T. One of the things that AT&T was upset about had to do with the rules dictated in the Communications act of 1934. To paraphrase the act, there are some areas in the community, serviced by rural local carriers that have the ability to exorbitant termination rates to the long distance carriers (like AT&T), and then use deception and trickery to get customers to call their numbers. Offers of free adult chat and teleconferencing were presented to the rest of the nation and these rural carriers were able to charge a fee to the phone companies to connect to their lines. The rural carriers would then split the extra income back to these “traffic pumpers.” AT&T had been forced to provide service to these rural carriers, but since these costs could be transferred straight through to their existing customers, AT&T wasn’t that upset with the situation.

A few weeks ago, AT&T became aware that the Google Voice service was able to block access to the numbers in the rural carrier community, and decided to bring this to the governing body in this land – the FCC. After much lobbying persuasion, ATT&T convinced the FCC to investigate the invite only, open phone system that Google Voice provided. The FCC issued a letterto Google, asking them to explain why they feel that they are above the Communications Act of 1934.

Over the next few days we are going to investigate this story so that you can better understand this situation. We here at thetelecomblog.com will provide you with the information about the two companies, Google Voice and AT&T, to ensure that you have the facts to form your own opinion.

Is this Goliath v. Goliath, or is this more like comparing apples to oranges.

Stay tuned!

Written by: Jason Finnerty. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed

Skype over 3G – now available on AT&T

AT&T has decided to lift the ban imposed on Skype and other VoIP providers, enabling AT&T customers to use iPhones on the 3G network to access Skype and other VoIP alternatives. Previously AT&T customers could access Skype over Wi-Fi only. Rogers in Canada struggled with the perception of an imposed ban on VoIP on the iPhone, but last month this limitation was removed on Wi-Fi only.

Snipped from the TMCnet website: “Josh Silverman, president of Skype, said AT&T’s decision demonstrates that its customers are interested in taking Skype conversations with them on the go. Since the iPhone app launched six months ago, consumers have downloaded and installed Skype on 10 percent of all iPhone and iPod touch devices sold.”

At first glance, one would think Skype should get rolling on this, as a quick visit to their website FAQ states that while some features are enabled over 3G, Skype calling is only available over WiFi for the iPhone, but it looks like there will need to be a firmware upgrade of the iPhone in order for the apps (like Skype or Fring) to be fully functional on the 3G networks.

AT&T’s initial decision to ban VoIP apps was based on their concern about the impact the traffic would have on the rest of the network. After more consideration and analysis, AT&T has decided that the network will survive the traffic that the VoIP products might create. Hopefully they are right.

Written by: Jason Finnerty. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed

What is PRI ? What are carriers charging ? A sample quote from the US and Canada

Have you ever heard of PRI ? How do PRI rates compare from city to city ? Country to country ?

A brief technical explanation: PRI, sometimes also called Megalink, digital, or fiber, is a TDM, ISDN type (circuit-switched) type telco service which is rapidly replacing the older style analog line. A standard PRI service in North America has 23B channels and 1 D channel – if added together you have 24 channels. These 24 channels are comprised of 24 channels of 64 kbit / second, or 1.544 Mbit / second (24 X 64). The PRI is a similar service to the T1 – a T1 is made up of 24B channels, or 1.544 MB as well. The T1 has 24B channels, and the PRI has 23B + 1 D channel. The PRI is used for voice, and the T1 is used for data.

The PRI is a digital service, which means that the sound quality is near perfect. Unlike an analog line, which sometimes has a 6 to 8 dB loss, the PRI service has a 0 dB loss, making the sound quality that much better.

The technology has been around for some time – Digitcom.ca has been installing PRI circuits for our clients since the mid 90’s. It is a very mature technology, with obviously, a very high adoption rate in the small, mid, and especially enterpise Telecom markets.

Next question: Is your current PRI contract competitive, and how do American and Canadian rates vary ?

I did a quick price survey – 1 in downtown Miami (with the help of my friend TJ Spohn from CPT Florida) and the other in downtown Toronto, 2 typical North American cities. Prices from the carriers are as follows:

Down Town Miami:

Nuvox
Rate / month $425
Install charge $0
Contract term 24 months
Lead time for install 30 days
LD rate .05 intrastate / interstate

Paetec
Rate / month $550
Install charge $0
Contract term 36 months
Lead time for install 30-45 days
LD rate .03 intrastate / interstate

AT&T
Rate / month $650
Install charge $0
Contract term 36 months
Lead time for install 30-45 days
LD rate .05 intrastate / interstate

Down Town Toronto:

Allstream
Rate / Month = $615 (10 DID’s included)
Install = $0
Contract term 36 months
Lead Time for Install = 4 to 6 weeks
Long Distance = $0.02 / minute North America

Bell Canada
Rate / Month = $672
Install = $0
Contract term 36 months
Lead time for Install = 3 to 4 weeks
Long Distance = $0.025 / minute North America

Telus
Rate / Month = $653
Install = $0
Contract term 36 months
Lead time for Install = 4 to 7 weeks
Long Distance = $0.025 / minute North America

Rates were coming down for some time, but seem to have stabliized over the last few years. Paying more ? Call your carrier !

Written by: Jeff Wiener. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed

FCC to decide on Net Neutrality rules – Who plays internet COP ?

According to a recent Associated Press article, it looks like the head of the FCC, Julius Genachowski, will make an announcement on Monday which will propose prohibiting ISP’s from throttling, blocking, and “policing” the internet traffic going through their networks. This is part of a pre-election pledge that Barak Obama made promising net neutrality with laws prohibiting the carriers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T from blocking traffic going through their networks.

Of course the ISP’s (Internet Service Providers) and major carriers want the unencumbered right to decide what traverses their networks, and to some extent, rightly so. There are of course many issues which need to be addressed with regards to net neutrality, but, the carriers should have some control over what, and how much travels across their networks.

Federal and state highways have the right to decide how much of a toll charge they charge cars that travel across their highways. In the same manner, it does seems reasonable that a carrier should have some control over the bandwidth, quantity, and speed they provide to their clients. Those customers needing more bandwidth, speed, and less intervention pay more of a toll charge, and those customers needing less pay less. As applications become more bandwidth intensive, the carriers need to spend massive infrastructure dollars upgrading their networks, and equipment, capacity … all of which costs money. Unless the US Federal Government wants to subsidize these infrastructure upgrade fees, they should allow the carriers, to some extent, decide how much, and what fees should be charged for anything crossing their networks.

On the other hand, what I have objection to is the carriers selectively choosing certain applications, specifically the ones which compete with their own services, as the ones which need to be throttled. Voice over IP, and Internet TV is specifically sited as the traffic the carriers would like to throttle. VoIP services, like Skype, cost the carriers long distance revenue, and Internet TV cost the carriers lost cable revenue. For them to selectively decide to throttle that specific bandwidth is anti-competitive and the government should step in. They should treat all bandwidth equally, and charge network usage on a fair basis, not based on kind of traffic.

I have a problem with the carrier controlling the pipeline and the content on that pipeline and selectively choosing which services to throttle based on anti-competitive measures. I don’t have a problem with the carrier publishing rates for usage and speed. Let’s see what happens at Monday’s FCC’s commission hearing.

Written by: Jeff Wiener. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed

Rogers has a need for speed – releases HSPA+

Just days after AT&T announced their blazing speeds of up to 7.2 Mbps, Rogers Canada announced the release of the new HSPA+ network, available in 5 cities in Canada – with speeds up to 21Mbps.

That’s the good news.

The bad news – there aren’t any handsets currently available that can take full advantage of these new speeds, and only one laptop adapter that can keep up with this impressive promise; the “Rocket Stick” available through Rogers. Make sure your laptop has USB 2.0 – because these new speeds are almost 2x as fast as what USB 1.0 can handle, but chances are, if you’re the type that needs to have these speeds – you’re pretty used to upgrading your laptop…

ITnerd asks what’s in the future for the folks that are stuck with paltry 3G devices.

Now it’s time for the other carriers to catch up. The pressure is on !

Written by: Jason Finnerty. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed

AT&Tractive – AT&T rolling out HSPA 7.2

AT&T is looking fast and furious – rolling out HSPA 7.2 in six cities by the end of the year.

Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles, and Miami AT&T customers will be able to take advantage of up to 7.2 Mbps (theoretically) – providing they have the handset for it. AT&T is hoping to have 6 new handsets and 2 new laptop cards to help customers capitalize on the new speeds. The iPhone 3Gs is supposedly capable of achieving these new speeds.

President and CEO of Operations, John Stankey, says that the expansion “will enable our customers to continue to ride the leading edge of emerging devices and thousands of mobile applications.” Shifting from 1.9GHz to 850MHz has allowed the company to speed things up for over 90% of their network, and this upgrade is paving the way to the LTE speeds of the future >10Mbps

Bigger, faster, stronger, longer – AT&T is putting their money where their mouth is.

Written by: Jason Finnerty. www.digitcom.ca. Follow TheTelecomBlog.com by: RSS, Twitter, Identi.ca, or Friendfeed