Slashdot Mirror
Calling Cell Phones Could Cost More
tusixoh writes "CNN.com reports on another reason to keep a close eye on your phone bill. This fall, a subtle realignment in America's phone systems could cause a dramatic increase in what we pay to call cell phones that were once considered local now incur higher toll charges from landlines. The report states that it is unclear how many customers will be affected by these changes. No phone company would provide details on where people could be affected." Update: 10/25 12:31 GMT by M : The IP list carried a couple of informative articles on this: the original situation, and the informed commentary.
that i'll continue to make my cell my main phone. now if i could just get a bogus number for all the times i don't want to give out my cell number for fear of it being sold... ;)
Please explain why we "have" to get used to it, particularly in light of the usurious rates of mobile phones here in the States relative to Europe and Japan?
No, I don't "have" to get used to it. Why the hell are we tolerating this telephone cartel? Didn't we have a big antitrust lawsuit about this crap?
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
I'll start this comment by saying this:
I'm cheap.
I had no features added to my land line and made VERY FEW long distance calls. Either way my bill came out to around 30+ bucks. No caller ID, No Call Waiting, Nothing.
So... I decided to switch to a Cell Phone. It's only 42 bucks WITH TAX. The key is WITH TAX. With nights & weekends I'm always on the phone at night & costs nothing.
The point of my story:
Land lines are going to die!.
I have no desire to ever have a land line. Right now it's just cablemodem & Cell phone. That's all I need. I don't even have a dial-up.
My thoughts...
Yeah, but when I was in France and Germany last year, all cell phones had free incoming minutes to compensate... I doubt we'll get that luxury here.
*thwack*... Is that the sound of the consumer getting screwed again?
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
It wouldn't suprise me at all if this was an attempt to get more people to use cell phones. The phone companies make more money off of cell phones compaired to your average land line per month. Cell to cell calls are often coverd by special minute deals. Plus then there will be more people to spam with text messages about special offers.
We're going to make information free Mr. Anderson, whether you like it, or not.
Land line telcos are doing what they can to make their money
It's not the land line telcos charging more money, it's the cellular phone companies responsible for the fee increases:
Because of differences in how wireless networks are set up, wireless carriers don't need to get phone numbers in every local rate center. So your cell phone could have a number from a rate center distant from your home.
So right now I'm sitting in a computer lab (working on an overdue assignment). There is a large sign posted (where everyone can see it) that say's "No Cellphones!".
Guess what? In the past 5 minutes at least 5 cells phones have rang! This is disturbing to those of use trying to work.
On a more serious note. Maybe higher charges would make the inappropriate use of cells phones less common. I've seen numerous car accidents caused by people on cell phones who weren't paying attention to what they were doing.
Maybe it'll also mean less phones ringing during movies!
Here's one grumpy nerd hoping...
"It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
...as more and more people use cells as there only phone. The bill for keeping up the infrastructure will be footed by fewer and fewer people.
what it will means is it won't be free to call from the land line, unless you change your cell phone number to be in the same area code and prefix, or something very close. Call the company and find out what the service area is specifically for your phone... under TDMA it's called the SID code, under GSM it's called the CSA
Well, I can't find out any information about you from your webpage, but I assume from your comment that you're in college. Here's a news flash: In the real world, most people use phones more than email (or instant messaging) for getting in touch.
I thought I didn't need a phone until I had to live without one for two years (couldn't afford the outrageous prices on campus.) Try living without a phone if you need to get your car repaired/towed, for example. Or if you need to get in touch with someone who doesn't have a computer. It's really difficult. A pay phone is not always the answer, because sometimes people need to call you back.
Have you read the Moderation Guidelines Addendum?
The comparison with Europe is pointless, as it's not going there anytime soon. The article says that only zones using reverse billing (very few) will be affected, you will pay LD calling those cells. The rest, paying for airtime when receiving a call, remains. A more important point is that cell. numbers will become portable among carriers. This is much more newsworthy to me!
have you been defaced today?
yeah right, /.
busy working awaying posting messages on
The landline companies have yet to offer the calling freedom and rates that are standard with cell phones. They will lose customers if they institute even more charges for what were local calls.
at least here in England (and Europe I presume from reading the other comments) the calling party pays. Which makes sense. You make the call, you pay for it. I don't want to pay for YOUR DECISION to call me! I primarily don't use my phone to call people, instead, I use it for text messages and for recieving calls. Thus, I am quite happily able to live off £10 of pre-paid credit for months on end (i get free txts) - which suits my meagre budget just fine.
ppl in the US should just stop whining and accept the fact that the most of the other continents are charging more for mobile calls - you guys were just spoilt :-p *pouts*
Fight Crime - Shoot Back!
Cellphones eliminate that freedom because you're always "plugged in" to the (digital)/(rest of the) world.
Cell phones come with an "off" switch these days.
For instance, in Texas basic phone service is around $20 a month. That gets you local calls in a local metropolitan area(not the greater metropolitan area), or, if you are in a rural area, perhaps a 10-15 mile radius. If you call outside that small area, you are charged a long distance toll that can easily be twice the interstate long distance toll. You can avoid this toll for the small fee of around $30 a month. If you want the other services, like caller ID, voice mail, etc, that will cost $40. The total, with taxes, is well over $100.
Why again do we have a residential land line? For less than $100 I can get plenty minutes, all the services, plus free long national long distance on my cell phone. I like having a land line so I can have a place that telemarketers and other annoying persons can call, not to mention the DSL. That is sort of worth $25 a month. But $30 more a month to avoid a toll for calling next door. That is crazy.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
It may be someone else's call, but YOU'RE the one that decided to take your phone to another country. Since your phone number is still the same, the calling party has no way of knowing where your phone is at any given time (unless you tell them, of course). Say if you go to another country, and someone calling you does not know that, why should they pay long distance charges? As far as they're concerned, it's still a local number.
The same applies to my land line. If I forward my calls to the hotel where I'm staying in another state (I'm in the US) and someone calls me, *I* get charged the long distance for forwarding the call from my regular number. This makes sense since I am the one who decided to be somewhere else. Why should the cell system be any different?
Text messages are ridiculously high, however thats because of a stupid uniformed easily led market (teens).
Normal phone's have a bandwidth of upto 9600bps (at least thats what I get using my phone as a modem). Thats 4.2Mbytes an hour. It costs me arround £1.20 ($2) for a one hour call, or 50 cents/megabyte. This is on a limited, highly contested frequency. A far cry from text message costings. Yes text's rake it in for phone companies, however 50 cents a megabyte isnt too bad.
It doesnt seem fair to charge a receipitent for a call. Think about it, if I dont like you I set a computer to phone you 24/7, and you have to pay for it! Give me the worldwide standard instead of one of the u.s. proprietry systems, any day.
In America, how am I supposed to know that a particular phone number is cellular or not? It's not as if they are restricted to a particular area code, or you have to dial a special prefix to reach cellphone numbers (as it is in some other countries). If the phone is based in my city, I can just dial 7 digits as if it were next door. In some circumstances I am not in a position to ask what type of phone it is prior to calling the person. Then it's only weeks after making the call that I find out, after getting hit with a high phone bill for the airtime charges.
This is just another way to rip off consumers by having them run up charges on their phone bill without knowing it until after the fact.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
Hmm.. Is Europe really that ahead of the US when it comes to cell phone usage and tech? I mean, I wouldn't want to have a cell phone if I had to pay for incoming calls - that sounds really really dangerous when I think of the bills...
Why doesn't the consumers (that would be you americans) question these policys? IMHO, it should be free to receive a call - that's sorta the idea with the cell phone tech, isn't it? To be "available for anyone at any time" ?
God does not play dice - Albert Einstein
1000 hours per month? Lets crunch some numbers here... 31 days (max) × 24 hours = 744 hours. Hmm...