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.
Land line telcos are doing what they can to make their money. Look closely at your bill and ensure every fee is accounted for. Or don't and pay something for nothing.
If we don't fight for ourselves no one will.
Isn't this how it has been in Europe and other countries since the beginning? I remember it costing a lot more to call someone on a cell phone from a landline when I was in England. Just another one of those things that Americans will have to get used to, that everyone else seems to have acclimated to already.
I drink to prepare for a fight; tonight I'm very prepared. -Soda Popinksi
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... ;)
(Fot those in EU US cell phones have regular numbers and are called at regular rates, often free from your local area code)
Because of this, you can practically get a phone for free with no contract, so this model has its up sides. Personally, I prefer the US approach, he who has the phone foots the (monthly) bill!
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...
Here's how it works:
This is one reason mobiles are more common overseas. They didn't just start as executive toys. For example, workmen on call sites could be given a prepaid phone (with viturally no money on it), and then be reachable.
Madness takes its toll. Exact change please.
... why I don't use phones, period. Well, to be perfectly honest, I call my girlfriend when she really needs/wants me to, but other than that, I stay away from both cell and normal phones.
...
:-D
Cell phones are not very reliable. Calls are dropped all of the time. I've had conversations where one of the two parties involved has had to call back two, three, even four times because of lost reception. Also, many towns don't want cell towers, so you may find while driving down I-95 that certain areas just kill your cell phone's reception.
I also don't *want* to be reached sometimes, especially by a boss or other superior. Cellphones eliminate that freedom because you're always "plugged in" to the (digital)/(rest of the) world. That means eight hour work days turn into 9 hour work days, and you may get a call while at a baseball game on Saturday or church Sunday morning.
I just set-up my personal voicemail box today (2 or 3 months into the school year), but that was only because my mom was about to disown me if I didn't do so. I tell her I prefer email, but she prefers the phone. So, I can't win there, and she's my mom, so
I also don't like people who can barely drive to begin with to use cellphones on the road. I know there have been studies that show it's worse than driving drunk!
Anyway, this ends my rant...sorry for running-on so terribly, but I really hate cellphones
Eric Krout dot com, ya'll...
If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
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.
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
Similar article from DaytonDailyNews:
1 9cellphones.html
http://www.activedayton.com/ddn/business/daily/10
...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.
Why does it matter to the large phone companies if you are calling a cell phone or a landline? Almost all the major phone carriers have wireless entities (SBC and Bellsouth, Verizon, AT&T, Sprint,etc). Pretty soon will probably see stuff like "As a Verizon customer you can call any Verizon wireless customer nationwide for free. Call an AT&T customer though and it'll cost you $25/min and your left kidney). Geez...
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
I'm in the process of dropping my Nextel service, and so changed my rate plan to the cheapest they offer. When I did so, the customer service person told me something to the effect of "with this plan, land line callers may pay more to call you". I didn't give it much thought, but this is certainly what they meant. Perhaps more expensive wireless plans cover that fee on behalf of the caller ... ?
I wouldn't mind this if it meant not being charged or loosing minutes when someone called me on my cell. If they want to talk to me let them pay for it. After all I've been paying to hear them.
I've hit Karma 50 and gotten a Score:5, Troll... I win!
Maybe this will discourage telephone solicitors from calling cell phones? that would be reason enough to make my main phone a cell-phone.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The title is totaly wrong for this story. It need to change to: "Being interupted 24x7 Could Cost More".
Karma stuck at 50? Add 2-5 inches.. err.. 2-5x Karmas Count to your pen1es.. err.. Karma all naturally and private
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.
In the UK if i go abroad with my UK cellphone say for arguments sake Spain and you call me from anywhere then you will only pay the standard premium cost (approx 40p per min) but as my phone is officially "roaming" as its in another country, I have to pay for the international part of your call to cover the multiple network operators involved ie: the price of a international call from England to Spain so ineffect its like a reverse charge call !
and you feel ripped off!
a lot of people have been caught out when their friends have called them while they are on holiday and they chat thinking its a regular call until they get home and see their cellphone bill and see hideous charges incurred for other peoples calls, needless to say sales calls get a mouthful of abuse.
as for benefits, I really dont want to make it easier for people to reach me. So no thanks!
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
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.
Well, at least we know why your assignment is overdue.
Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
www.fogbound.net
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
I already got rid of my home phone and just use a cell phone. Also, I will be moving to VoIP at the office as soon as Vonage can get me a Denver area code.
It's nice to be free from those local phone service bastards.
It's been this way in New Zealand for as long as I can remember. I don't understood why cellular communications is still so expensive. Consider a text message - at 150 characters long for 20 cents, that's a bandwidth cost of approx NZ$1400 a megabyte! Someone's raking it in...
CowboyNeal posted this story? and the previous one? I thought he was just a made-up poll answer!
It's only if you are calling a number whose physical switch is outside your local landline calling area.
For example, I'll take Delaware as an example since it's dead simple. Three counties, three rate centers. If you have a cell phone whose number is from county #1, then county #2 and #3 pay normal intra-lata rates to call your number. Users in county #1 will continue to not pay.
In Delaware, cell companies give you a choice what county you want your number from so most people get one in the same county they live.
Let's take another theoretical example. Let's say you live in Benson AZ and your cell phone number is from Tucscon. It's a toll call from Benson to Tucson for landline users, but since Benson isn't big enough to have its own infrastructure for basing cell phone NUMBERS out of it (not towers), then the charges to call a cell phone based in Tucson from a landline in Benson were waived.
(Above just being an example of a small town with no local calling to its neighboring big town that I know, it's not a literal example)
I would expect a message from the phone company informing me that I was calling a cell number so I could make the decision to hang up and not pay the extra fees. If they just started charging me extra for calling a number that looks just like any other phone number, I'd have serious thoughts about cancelling my regular phone service and going with VoIP, or maybe just changing phone companies.
I've maintained for a long-time that the telcos would much rather have residential customers on wireless as opposed to landline. The residential landline service has been subsidized by business customers for decades, and the telcos are salivating over the prospect of putting that money into the profit column.
Since all the RBOC's have their own wireless ventures, changes in pricing structures would prompt the most upwardly mobile (meaning "has discretionary income") customers to transition from landline to mobile. This moves potentially highly profitable customers from a fixed-rate service to a service that is more useage-based. Sure you get 3,000 minutes per month on your cell phone, but even when the billing is the same, the telco should eventually get a return on not having to manage so much copper in residential areas. Or, at the very least, freeing up some of the infrastructure from voice circuits allows the pairs to be used for DSL/other services without the incredulous expense of sending big burly men out to string more cable.
That may not seem like a big deal until you consider that many of the residential areas are using copper that's been hanging on poles or in the wet ground for more than 40 years. Getting away from or recycling for other purposes the existing buried infrastructure seems to be very forward thinking, which would appear to be out of character for telcos.
I know this will probably never happen, but what would be the upsides/benefits to a universal number- ie a number that goes to your cell and your home phone and maybe even your work phone.
No longer would you have to worry about all the telemarketing calls you might have missed while at work during the day!
moto411.com
No phone company would provide details on where people could be affected.
They should have said: the only customers who will be affected are those who call wireless phones from their land lines. If you don't call a wireless phone from your home phone, you have nothing to worry about. You can always tell a wireless phone number from a land phone number because the former has 7 or 10 digits (depending on the inclusion of the area code), wherease a wireless number has 7 or 10 digits (depending on the inclusion of the area code).
moto411.com
You could even take it further by integrating it into other services like .Net
Aparently, one can improve anything by integration with ".Net": phone service, single sign-on, crab juice....
moto411.com
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.
Did anyone read the article? What the phone companies did is *worse* than that. They eliminated something that *will* affect many dialup ISP users. Not to mention all those companies in New York City that pay not to have their area changed (although that's a whole other story)...
What the local phone companies are getting rid of is "reverse billing." This is a service which allows a company located in Region A to offer a phone number in Region B by paying the difference in cost for phone calls made to their Region B number. When cell phone companies first started up, they only had callable offices in relatively few locations, which could have made calling cell phones expensive. Nowadays, this is not a bit deal anymore.
Unfortunately, a lot of other firms like using reverse lookups. ISPs use reverse billing to allow them to have phone numbers all over the place while maintaining only a few central dialup pools. Outreach programs often use these numbers to reach out to communities that they would not have been able to easily call them otherwise.
Personally, I feel (*hope*) that CNN seems to be missing some details. If the phone companies truely are getting rid of reverse billing, one would think that they would be getting rid of all their 800/888/877/866 numbers that are *entirely* reverse billed down to pay phone costs. And if a cell phone provider with a central switch in Region A serves customers in region A', and said switch is located in region A, I don't see why reverse billing would come into play; the cell phone company would be like any other large business that just happened to own a few hundred phone numbers in the area.
This will have zero impact on me, which is one of the reasons why I decided to take control of my phone bill. I was getting pretty sick of SBC trying to stick it to me every way that they could.
My last phone bill? $76.69. Same as the month before it. And that included standard local telephone service, unpublished number, voice mail (with telephone or web access to pick up messages and pager/email notification), caller id, call waiting, 3-way calling, speed dial, anonymous call rejection, and maybe another feature or two I don't remember. (I still remember SBC billing me for "touch tone". Bastards.)
On top of that, I now get free calling 24x7 to anywhere within my area code. And free calling 24x7 to anywhere within my state. And free calling 24x7 to anywhere within the continental United States. Frankly, the only thing I have to worry about is accidently calling a Canadian number.
My last phone bill had 1,739 minutes of long distance in 249 calls, for an added fee of only $0.00. And no, I didn't have to just call members of the plan. This was the rate to absolutely any regular telephone number in the US.
I was on SBC's "local plus" plan, which billed me about $30/month extra on top of basic telephone service to call anywhere within my area code for free. Now, I'm saving money, got tons more features, and don't have to worry about fluctuating phone bills. Thank God.
Yes, I know. This absolutely isn't the perfect plan for everyone. But MCI's The Neighborhood really has a lot going for it if you've got a regular phone bill that is at least $70. I wish their financial condition was better. I'd like to see them tear SBC a new hole.
because like mentioned previously, outside the US calls to mobiles are actually more costly than to land lines. But my post is actually more of a question to US cellphone owners:
How much (on average) does an outgoing call from your mobile costs? Please provide explanation such as within same area code or otherwise, service operator, etc.
Do you get charged for incoming calls as well?
Do you have prepaid packages? How popular is it and what are its pros and cons?
I live in Malaysia and work in Singapore, and I use prepaid packages for cellphone usage. In Malaysia, I'm using the HotLink package from Maxis, where as in Singapore I use the M Card by M1. A significant difference between the two is that in Singapore, they actually charge for incoming calls, something that doesn't happen in Malaysia.
Which method does the mobile operators in your countries follow?
Welley Corporation - SLM Scammers
In a perfect world the end user could select the rate for the incoming call. If it was an important call from someone I want to talk to then I don't mind paying my share of the connection time. But if its a pesky hanger oner than they can pay to talk to me and I'll do a revenue share with the phone company. Perhaps, I can turn my phone into a profit center?
It's a shame that vonage isn't available with Missouri Zip codes. I would love to OWN my phone number.
Also, how is the latency?
I personally use my cell phone for almost all my calls. I have no quality or dropped call problems that others mention. I'm on sprint.
The man who trades freedom for security does not deserve nor will he ever receive either. - Benjamin Franklin
Very few people are going to be affected by this change. The issue only applies to geographically large area codes, in which certain numbers within the area code actually constitute long distance calls. For example, if your area code is AAA, then the number:
1-AAA-333-1234
might be local, while
1-AAA-444-1234
is a long distance call. In these area codes, the three digit "prefix" after the area code is what determines where you are calling, and calling between certain pairs of prefixes is long distance.
How does this apply to cell phones? In very geographically spread-out area codes, cell phone service providers do not necessarily have a prefix in every fare zone. Returning to the example, a cell phone company might have the prefix 1-AAA-455, which is local from a 444- phone, but not a 333- phone.
In these situations, people living in the 333 calling area might be assigned 455 cell phone numbers, which would be long distance when called from a local phone. In the past, what happened is that if someone called 455 from a 333 phone, the cell phone provider would be "reverse billed" for the long distance charges. Cell providers didn't mind this because it didn't happen very often, and because they hoped it would lead to cell phone adoption in new markets (in which they might eventually install their own equipment and get their own prefix).
Now what's happening is that the land-line providers want to end the reverse billing, primarily because it is very complicated to implement. In particular, there are going to be some changes whereby people will get to keep their cell phone numbers even if they switch mobile phone companies. When this happens, the existing implementation of reverse billing will not work any more--things are complicated by the fact that now a call to 455 might need to be reverse billed to one of several different cell phone companies.
Since reverse billing is so rare anyway, the land line companies successfully lobbied to stop implementing it.
Note that this is very different from say, Europe, where calling a cell phone is always more expensive than calling a local land line. All that's happening is that there will be some fare zones in which it is impossible to get a cell phone number. So some people may not be able to call any cell phones free from their land lines. However, for any particular cell phone there will always be land lines somewhere that can call it with a local call.
In any event, highly populated areas with overlay area codes (where calling accross area codes is not long distance) should see no change in how calls to cell phones are billed.
Oh goody. I get to post my favorite rant on why "caller pays" isn't better. In a nutshell, here's why:
When the person who owns the cellphone pays for their own calls, they have a strong incentive to seek out the cheapest plan they can get. Hence, they put direct pressure on their cellphone company to be more efficient and keep their operating costs as low as possible.
When the person who owns the cellphone doesn't pay for the call, the charges for the call are "reverse-billed" back to the caller. Since the caller isn't a customer of the cellphone company, the cellphone company has far less incentive to keep the reverse-charges low. (Ever notice that collect calls are more expensive than regular long-distance calls? A similar economic principle is at work.) Typically the government steps in to regulate the prices that companies are allowed to charge, and that's rarely as efficient as direct competition.
I'm convinced that over the long-run, the "caller-pays" system will result in higher costs than a "cellphone-owner-pays" system. This depends, of course, on the remaining competitive barriers coming down: in the US, for instance, it's still too difficult to switch from one provider to the other. Hopefully the new regulations which allow cellphone owners to switch providers without losing their phone number will help in this area.
Incidentally, if my explanation didn't make sense, here's a much more detailed explanation.
From what I understand, if you use Verizon in the Boston area, then it does cost to call 'local' cell phones. I guess they are just getting the jump on everyone
Tibbon
tibbon.com
No, you're paying for your own calls. Just because somebody calls you doesn't mean that you're not involved in the conversation.
I admit that it can suck if you answer a lot of wrong numbers or undesirable calls... But that's what caller ID and voicemail is for, and they work pretty well for the most part. I'm convinced that the American system is actually better, and you certainly avoid messy situations like the one described by the poster above. When somebody calls me from abroad, I know I'm not paying their international charges.
. . . that since these numbers are long distance, a landline user must dial the access code "1" before the number? Otherwise, the customer could place a toll call without knowing it, which I imagine would result in lots of indignant letters to public utilities commissions, and we know how much the telco's love that.
We have the same deal with Cell Phones in Japan. All incoming calls are free, and the use of email often negates the need for outgoing calls. And yes, I did say email, not that dinky SMS protocol.
Most folks don't even bother getting a land line since you have to actually purchase the line for about $600.00+. Calling a local land line is about 3 cents per minute and calling a cell phone is around 10 to 12 cents per minute. Cell phones have a completely different prefix, so you won't accidentally get raped on the bill. The flip side of course is that outgoing calls on cell phones run about 20 cents per minute and you won't find any 4000 night/weekend plans around here. My plan is 5000 yen/mo. (about $38 at the current rate) and I get around 200 outgoing minutes excluding the 1 to 2 yen per email charge and my daily web activities checking news and weather. If I have a busy social calendar, which is about 4 dates per week plus assorted work functions, my bill is arround $100.00. I never use my land line for anything more than a link to my 12MBit ADSL provider.
I've dirtied my hands writing poetry, for the sake of seduction; that is, for the sake of a useful cause. --Dostoevsky
I live in the US and use Vonage VoIP. I've noticed that Vonage charges me only 5 cents/minute to call a UK landline, but a whopping 23 cents/minute to call a UK cellphone. It's possible that Vonage is inserting some sort of markup there, but given that their rates are generally bare-bones low, it would appear that British cellphone companies are charging (close to) 18 cents/minute to simply provide service from the cellphone tower to the handset-- not including the long distance charges. That's a lot.
Here's my question: what do you do if you feel that cost is too high? Under the US system, when my phone bills are too high I look for a cheaper provider (the mere threat of this keeps prices low.) If the prices are too high in the UK, it looks to me like you have a whole lot less recourse. Either you shell out that 18 cents/minute, or you don't call other peoples' cellphones at all. Where are these charges set, anyway-- does the government mandate the charges?
It seems as though you've got a lot more leverage over your cellphone company's charges when you pay for all the costs vs. when there's reverse-billing going on. Theoretically, this should lead to a more competitive and therefore more efficient US cellphone industry, which benefits us all.
I'm sure there's a way to hook up the alarm system to a cell phone, but that's not cost effective. That's one of the main reasons for me not to do what you suggest.
- sigs are for wimps.
My SprintPCS phone has an option to disallow roaming. If I ever leave a spint service area, I'll know it. If I really feel the need, I can then enable roaming. Yeah, it means the call I was on would be dropped, but I would prefer that instead of a bunch of unexpected roaming charges.
Edward Burr
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool.
When I dial a number that's in my area code but outside my local calling area, I have to prefix my call with "1" and my area code. Won't this take place for cell phones, too? Won't this alert people that calling that phone will result in an additional charge?
Just like leaving your home phone behind, you can leave your cell phone behind by turning it off! Or just not carrynig it with you!
Despite evidense to the contrary, California and Arizona are not different countries. Neither are New York and Pennsylvania. Ergo a call from one state to the next state is merely going over an abundance of fiber optic lines between the states. The difference between France and Germany is they are indeed different countries. Any call between the two countries has to switch between different national telephone systems. It isn't the amount of area you roam in but the different networks you roam in. Try roaming around northern Louisiana or central Texas making calls with impunity and see how high your phone bill is. Off network roaming no matter what continent you're on is very very expensive.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
I don't know what that attitude sounds more like; a slave or a dog.
Here, boy. Good boy. Sit. Stay still. ON YOUR VACATION. ANYWAY. Good dog.
Egad, man. Have you no self respect? Unless they're paying you to be on-call, work can stay at the office, thank you. Work is where you make your living, not where you live.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Crazy. That's gotta be some sort of locality thing. I live in Grayson county (texas, north of DFW near OK) and my phone bill was $22.15, and i have a pretty huge calling area (at least 20mi radius, not quite sure where it ends, but I think I get at least parts of the metroplex free. I know N Central dallas is free. I don't know if it crosses to OK, not that I know anyone there). Dallas County has huge taxes, in case you haven't noticed. Now what I find utterly ridiculous is that "touchtone dialing" is a $1.50 option rather than a given. How many people readily have a rotary phone on hand? (i have one, but it doesnt do a damn thing for my modem not to have touchtone dialling). Somebody's gotta do something about all this nickel-and-diming us to death bull. I've had a land line for all of 4 months now and i'm already sick of it...my cell may cost a little more, but at least it gives me distance for free and doesn't think twice about piling on the options for free.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
And do you pay for receiving foreign letters?
I know in NZ rural dwellers have to pay to receive mail, but this is a fixed fee yearly amount, and they get pickup as well. It still upsets my mum (she trekked to the "local" post office to pick up her mail for months in protest).
Where all mobile phones are in the "07" area. The networks are all nation-wide, so different call charges may depend on which network you call (i.e. it is more expensive to call a different mobile network than the same network, or a landline) but the location of the phone is irrelevant, unless it is out of the country. In which case the US system applies ("Roaming rates") and both the caller and callee pay for the call. This means if you are in greece and your friend is in greece and you both use your UK phones to call each other, the operators think "Ka-ching!". But at least you get to meet up easily.
when I lived in northern NJ it was a toll call to call my girlfriend 17 miles away - same area code.
Now I live in Atlanta. There are 4 whole area codes who are 100% local to me - and it is probably about half the state (a little less).
Go figure.
I live in Germany and I think my cell company really has the right ideas. O2 (the former Viag Interkom) is offering the so-called Homezone plan.
This means that whenever I am at home I have special conditions. "Being home" here depends on the density of the cell network in your area (sometimes the homezone has a radius of 2km).
The phone will have the common mobile prefix, which costs more, if you call that number. However, when I am in the homezone, I can also be reached under a local fixed-line number. When I'm on the road, calls to that number will be forwarded to voice mail for free or to the phone (but I will have to pay the transfer then). You probably think this might be super-expensive. Let me just quote some prices from their site (all in Euro, but Euro:$ is almost 1:1 anyway atm):
monthly fee: 12.95
local minute price (homezone): 0.03-0.05
long distance (homezone): 0.04-0.07
on the road minute price: 0.07-0.49
calls to other mobiles: 0.19-0.59
http://www.genion.de/genion/genion/genion__product s/genion__home/tarife/index.html
The ranges depend on time of day and week, as well as other options you choose (local, city, mobile)
Oh, and when I extended my contract for another 24 months, I only had to pay 200 Euro for a brand new SonyEricsson T68i.
I pay 55$ CDN a month. This gives me voicemail 100 incoming/outgoing SMS/Email, 400 first-incoming daytime minutes, 200 daytime minutes, unlimited evenings and weekends (M-F, 09:00 to 18:00 are daytime). I can roam anywhere AT&T has support (Boston, NYC, Hawaii no problem -- I only pay for airtime), and SMS with any AT&T customer anywhere in the world is flat rate past my first 100. I'm glad about the SMS thing, because new plans require that you allow AT&T to SMS you messages that may be advertisements, in exchange for free incoming SMS (as many as you want).
:)
My minutes don't roll over, not that I've ever gone past them
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
This happened to my parents (using SBC), when all of sudden they started getting long distance changes everytime they called their cell phones from home. While not bankrupting, the cost was closer to $5/month, not just the few pennies that Verizon claims in the article.
There solution was to change the cell phone numbers so that they were local calls instead.
Cell phone towers are popping up everywhere. On vacation to my hometown just this past week I recall seeing 6 cell towers that were built in the 3 years since I moved away from that area.
A tower is simply a suitable structure to put a transciever. In many parts of Europe planners tend to discourage putting up new towers and masts if possible. The general position is that if it can go on an existing tower, mast or building then it can go there. Which had lead to some fuss being made, especially about small low power cellsites, which are simply small boxes which will go anywhere.
Maybe planning rules are different in parts of the US.
Reception may be a problem in some areas, but I'd say it's rapidly improving.
Unless this is a huge town 6 purpose built towers should give you very good reception.
What happened is that some drunk redneck or gangbanger or something blew apart the local McDonalds sign with a shotgun.
However, what you didn't know is that cell phone towers are hidden in places like that -- the only indicator is a little notch or a light in the sign.
It's a lot cheaper to put a box of electronics on or in an existing structure than errect one from scratch. Also as it's out of sight is less likely to have people objecting, an illuminated sign is especially nice, since it already has a power connection.
I spent hours talking on my phone during the time, which I thought was free, but since the McDonalds sign was destroyed, it went ROAMING. I had a $600 phone bill that month, which I tried to explain and still refused to pay, so they disconnected me.
Did the handset not give some indication that it was roaming? If it did then it's your problem, if it didn't then your provider sounds like they are being rather nasty.
Despite evidense to the contrary, California and Arizona are not different countries. Neither are New York and Pennsylvania. Ergo a call from one state to the next state is merely going over an abundance of fiber optic lines between the states. The difference between France and Germany is they are indeed different countries.
You might just as well compare the US and Germany, since they are both federal republics. Or even with the UK, you don't play roaming charges moving between England and Wales or between England and Scotland or even if you cross the Irish sea to Northern Ireland.
There is probably plenty of fibre capacity between France and Germany too.
Any call between the two countries has to switch between different national telephone systems.
The actual issue is between telephone networks operated by different telephone companies. AFAIK there are no companies providing cellular telephone coverage of the entire US. But you can end up with the situation of "islands" of coverage from one company, without any coverage between these areas.
My 68-year-old father loves his internet and cell phone. His telco provides both in addition to his landline, and just put him on a special combination package:
- Unlimited fibre-optic internet
- Unlimited local cell calling
- Package long-distance minutes shared between the landline, fax and cell numbers at the same bulk rate
- Single bill
CAD:$100/mo (about USD$65/mo).