Slashdot Mirror


Ma Bell is Back

brass1 writes Ma Bell is back. It seems that for the purposes of branding, SBC is changing its name to AT&T once the acquisition is complete. Meanwhile, a great force and a high pitched whining sound has been reported from Judge Greene's grave as he spins at nearly 10K RPM."

92 of 511 comments (clear)

  1. Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 3, Funny

    Could you please explain what's "Ma Bell" for us foreigners? Thanks.

    1. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by kflash15 · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Ma Bell" is a nickname for AT&T... like "Mother Bell" because it split into severl smaller "Baby Bells"...

    2. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Krach42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT&T

      I was gonna explain, but then I realized, Wikipedia no doubt has an article.

      --

      I am unamerican, and proud of it!
    3. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by DangerSteel · · Score: 5, Funny
      It was basically the phone company for the United States "back in the day". I think I remember thier motto to be:

      "We don't care, we don't have to !"

    4. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by pthisis · · Score: 2, Informative

      AT&T's Bell System (aka Ma Bell) was the large telephone system that served the US until the 1980s.

      It was ruled an illegal monopoly and broken up into many smaller regional companies (the so-called "Baby Bells"). SBC was one of the baby bells.

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    5. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Jynx97 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Like Ma Bell, I Got The Ill Communication!!

    6. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, this one is a little better.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    7. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It was basically the phone company for the United States "back in the day". I think I remember thier motto to be:

      Go ahead and mock the Bell System. They did step over the line quite a few times. But I don't really think the hodgepodge of companies that have come since have given a rat ass about the customer either. In fact, thanks to telecommunications deregulation, carriers no longer need to worry about pesky little details like quality of service, uptime or redundancy.

      How pathetic was it that virtually every single cell tower went down during the Northeast Blackout, yet Verizon and the other POTS providers kept humming along as though nothing had happened. Apparently the cellular providers can't be bothered with fancy new technology like batteries, generators and UPSes. In fact the last time we had a disaster around these parts the local phone carriers (Verizon and Frontier) went around and installed generators into all the central offices to keep things humming until electrical power was restored. There was zero downtime of POTS services. I'll wadger that in that same scenario your cell company would either deny that there was a problem or tell you that they were "working on it" and act annoyed at having to talk to you.

      In fact, barring Acts of God that destroyed infrastructure (Hurricanes or Drunk Drivers) I can't ever call picking up a landline phone and not hearing a sweet dial tone. The only gripe I've ever had with my local carrier has been the left hand (customer service) not knowing what the right hand (repair) is doing. I've never had a complaint with the reliability. And unlike all the solutions that have come since I still have a Governmental agency (the PSC) looking out for me.

      DoD was against the breakup of Ma Bell for a reason.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    8. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Shakrai · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which carrier was it and where did you hear about this?

      For landline or cells? For cells it was widely reported that they had serious issues during the blackout. The few tower sites with backup power were buried because of the traffic caused by the other sites going offline.

      For landline my experiences were all local. I would assume that in larger cities they already have generators at the central offices. Around these parts (upstate NY) in a lot of the smaller villages and towns all they have is battery backup. The point that I was making was that they called crews in and deployed generators to those locations before the battery backup failed. The Blackout caused zero interruption of POTS service in almost all cases.

      Contrast that with the cellular providers. I'd quote some Nextel PHB from the article I linked, "We need electricity to power our cell sites, but when you don't have that, it's out of our control" I guess Nextel has never heard of a generator.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by frank378 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I was curious about the wireless providers.

      From TFA you posted it looks like they are saying since the blackout exceeded 6 hours they were not able to keep the sites up. I'm positive they don't have the staff or the equipment to get a generator to every cell site. So they are a long way from "replacing" land lines if you ask me. I know most of the wireless providers have one or two COWs (cell on wheels) in the case of a single site going down but still not enough of these to make a difference. Also I guess some sites stayed up but ran out of channels since cals would get through every so often.

      Difference with landlines is the power comes from the CO (obviously you knew that). You can put a huge generator at the CO and everyone is set since phone is at +5Vdc and only gets up to +30Vdc while it's ringing IIRC. So it's a lot easier for them I guess.

      Interesting stuff, sorry for OT I just got curious........

    10. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by MalachiConstant · · Score: 2, Informative

      POTS = Plain Old Telephone System (really) In other words, the landlines and switches that make up basic non-cellular phone service in the country.

    11. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by frank378 · · Score: 2
      For our towers in the city limits of several cities, we're not allowed to use generators Care to cite some sources on that? I find it exceedingly hard to beilive.

      I know for a fact that for some sites it is not practical to use a generator. Let's say you have a "highway site" sitting near an offramp somewhere, okay that's one thing. But let's say you have a "rooftop site" where your only access is up the elevator to the top floor and then several sets of stairs, maybe walking across catwalks and what have you once you get outside. It's just not practical to 'copter in a generator so I can see why a battery with a six hour life might be much more affordable/practical.

    12. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Really? My pet peeve is when people can't be bothered to use Google or some such to do their own flippin' research.

    13. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative
      A similar "friendly nickname" is given to the BBC which is frequently refered to (unfortunately, probably more often by itself) as "Auntie Beeb", for much the same reason.

      The BBC hasn't been broken up (yet) ;)

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    14. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Auntie+Virus · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'll wadger that in that same scenario your cell company

      Wadgers? Wadgers? We don't need to steenkin Wadgers!!!

      --
      Why yes, I *AM* new here. Why?
    15. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Osiris+Ani · · Score: 3, Informative
      Bell labs was named after him
      Actually, Bell Labs was named after an earlier name of one of its parent companies, American Bell, which was indeed named after its founder, Alexander Graham Bell. Back in 1907, the AT&T (nee American Telephone and Telegraph Company, nee American Bell Telephone Company) and Western Electric engineering departments were combined to form what would eventually be named Bell Telephone Laboratories.

      (Decades later, this entity would be spun off and renamed "Lucent Technologies.")

    16. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by funaho · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The CLEC i used to work at tests its generators every Monday morning for about an hour. It's noisy as HELL. Sounds like a jet engine.

      I don't like the thought of cell towers going out during an extended blackout, but I can see why they don't have generators. Not only is there the noise issue but there are also space issues in some cases, plus the fact that generally one company owns the tower and others lease space, and I imagine the landlords are not keen on the idea of having to maintain and administer a shared generator system for every tower.

      There might just be a market here for someone with a lot of time and money...setting up central backup power centers and hooking cell towers up to a backup power grid. You'd have to deal with a lot of red tape and probably a lot of crap from the local power companies though.

    17. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by funaho · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Back in 1996, at my first ISP job, we had a bank of 30 actual physical modems hooked up to 30 POTS lines over a 300 pair cable into the owner's basement (ahh, those were the days!) One day all of a sudden 3/4 of the modem bank suddenly disconnected. On a hunch we walked one block over to the subdivision's junction box, and sure enough someone had backhoed the underground cable to that box. There was a poor Ameritech employee sitting there with a massive bundle of broken 600-pair cable on his lap with a soldering iron and some of those little crimp-on splicers. My boss took some digital photos of it...I should check and see if he still has them.

    18. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't knock the drunk drivers. One of them took out the big brown box down the road from me, and as a result I was finally able to get DSL.

      Nice. When the drunk driver hit the telephone pole out by my house the Verizon guys decided to hook us up to a different loop (we live on a corner at the bottom of a hill). As a result my DSL distance went from 16,000 to 12,500 feet. It made absolutely no difference in the performance of the DSL but it was amusing all the same.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    19. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by Farfromlosin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, the POTS lines stayed up. If you had any clue how the POTS systems or cell systems worked, you would realize how silly that argument was. In a nutshell (I'm good at nutshells, people tell me I'm nuttier than a squirrel turd.) The POTS line in your house is run from a CO (Central Office) with usually one big telephone switch, which is easy to have one big battery bank (usually there is one set of batteries in each cabinet to prevent any one cabinet from failing). In the event of a catastrophic power failure (loss of grid power) the internal cabinet batteries keep a tone on the line until the building backup generator gets warmed up and provide an external source of power. Everything is centrally located, easy to maintain, and in most cases, the generator never comes on because the cabinets will power themselves for at least an hour before they start dropping out. Now, when you lose the grid, imagine having to try to maintain the same scenario in 20 locations. Each tower must have a battery back system (which requires routine maintenance), and a generator in the event of a longer outage (more routine maintenance) plus if the tower is on a building, you have the problem of the landlord letting you store large banks of potentially explosive batteries, a generator, a large tank of explosive fuel. Also, the generators have to be fired every so often to make sure they don't have a problem, plus storage of fuel for said generators has to be stabilized, or rotated so you don't have "bad gas" in your backup system that would take it down. Now, you've spent millions of dollars in getting your towers on a reliable source of power. You now have the problem of providing a SECOND source of power for the incoming line from the CO. Being a multi trunked line, it isn't powered by the CO's emergency power like your POTS line is. You must supply 24-96 volts and it might be a proprietary -48Vdc system. So you are looking at even more things to fail. It's not quite as simple as plugging an APC UPS into your home computer, and as soon as you do all of this, the power goes out, your battery bank explodes because of a bad cell (happened to our local PD on the last power outage drill) and the site goes down anyway. Now you have to answer to your customers who want to sue you because they couldn't call 911 on their cell phones. Ok, a little more than a nutshell, but still not too in depth.

      --
      ...because what good is power unless you can abuse it?
    20. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by LurkerXXX · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Alexander Graham Bell and the invented the telephone.

      He and several partners formed the Bell Telephone Company in 1877.

      Management from Bell Telephone Company started another independent company called AT&T Long Lines.

      In 1899 AT&T bought American Bell Telephone Company (formerly Bell Telephone Company )

      In 1974 the Department of Justice broke up AT&T into the many 'Baby Bells' that are now rejoining.

      That's where the "Bell" came from. As far as the "Ma" part...

      According to bellsystemmemorial.com:

      Where did the phrase, "Ma Bell" originate as a slang name for the Bell System or AT&T? Well, nobody seems to know for sure, but here are some possibilities submitted by members of the ATCA and TCI clubs:

      "One apocryphal version is that employees of the Bell System acquired an umbilical cord effect. That is why there are very few people who ever quit the Bell System, and so many of the employees who stayed for the duration." - submitted by A. P. Bloom

      "Another version is that the stock of AT&T (symbol 'T' on the New York Stock Exchange) was purchased by or for widows and orphans as a long-term investment, since its reputation for reliabilty during recessions was its selling point." - submitted by A. P. Bloom

      "I worked for 'Ma Bell' for 34 yrs. Many, many years ago I was told that the term 'Ma Bell' came from a corruption of Alex Bell's wife's name, Mabel, which is pronounced May Belle, and that the company was run as a family business. The first employees were treated very well and thus referred to the company in a friendly way as Ma Bell. I also read that at the 109 Court Street, Boston location (where Bell and Watson did their earliest work on the phone in the 1870's) there was no division of labor. No us against them, managment vs labor division. Every employee was treated as an equal and listened to for ideas. A family atmosphere, thus the term "Ma Bell". True or not? I really don't know."
      "When I got married in 1971 I was given one more day of vacation (for the honeymoon) than I was due. When I went to my foreman "Pop" to straighten out the mistake, I told him there was a mistake and I wasn't due the extra day. 'Pop' put his arm around my shoulder and took me aside and told me, 'the same thing happened to me when I got married; you are now part of the family and will be treated as part of the family. The flip side of the coin is that when you go out and do telephone work, you will do it like it's the family business'. I worked that way for many years. Poor craftsmanship was simply not tolerated. Your biggest critics were not the customer or your foreman, it was your coworkers. I remember several times in the 1970's being told, 'the greatest asset of our company is the goodwill of the employees'. I never heard that said again after the breakup of the company on Jan 1, 1984. If it is a family now, it certainly is a disfunctional family!" - Retired and enjoying it, Walter Smith

    21. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One might note that these did not include the sale of AT&T's radio franchise to RCA (prior to 1956) or the sale of its motion picture franchise also prior to 1956.

      Imagine a company stretching from NEC to Nortel, from Lucent Technologies to half of the stuff Warner Brothers is in today. That is the giant that AT&T was before the first antitrust suit (filed in 1949).

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  2. Cool by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can we have Western Electric and Bell Labs back too?

    --
    No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
    1. Re:Cool by bedroll · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Bell labs only changed their name. They're still around today operating as Lucent. http://www.bell-labs.com/

      On the other hand, AT&T had a nifty lab of their own. http://public.research.att.com/

      I don't see what the hubbub about all of this is, though. The forced split of AT&T was a success, in so much as creating competition and removing the public's reliance on a single firm. With this acquisition by one of the largest baby bells it brings the company back in line to compete. It's not like they'll suddenly be allowed to buy out Verizon and create another monopoly on that scale.

      To top things off, even if they were to obtain a monopoly on the telephone system again it would never be as powerful as the one they once had. Today we have Cell Phones and VoIP. There's other means of efficiently communicating over long distances. They would basically have to buy control over most of the network comprising the US portion of the Internet to be able to come close to what they once had. I just don't see that happening any time soon.

    2. Re:Cool by JUSTONEMORELATTE · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry to bear bad news, but most of AT&T Labs has been outsourced to IBM as of last May.
      IBM is actively trying to move as much of that work as possible to India, and they are overt about this. It's discussed openly in director-level all-hands meetings.
      I used to work for Labs, and became an IBM employee with the outsourcing, and then found myself reporting to someone with the @in.ibm.com address.
      Then the people who knew WHY we did our jobs kept leaving, and getting replaced by people who only knew how to populate status reports and timesheet codes.

      Then I quit and got a job in the Energy sector instead.

      AT&T Labs is essentially gone, and will never be reformed in the SBC/AT&T merged company.

  3. They aren't as dangerous as before by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think that with the tremendous variety of communications options available today, they simply aren't as dangerous to the consumer as they once were. While companies can certainly get "too big" and I love to hate all the big guys, I think this will all be just fine... I don't need or subscribe to their service and I don't plan to.

    1. Re:They aren't as dangerous as before by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would argue this point: SBC is already a horrendous company to work with. And have you ever tried to get DSL service without phone service?

      Do you really believe this will get better as there are fewer and fewer options?

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:They aren't as dangerous as before by thedogcow · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can attest to this. SBC majorly sucks on toast. Just initiating for them to turn on the telephone service for the first time(translation: click "OK" at the call center) costs $50.

      --
      Yes! I listen to NYC Speedcore and do math at 3AM. I suggest you try it too.
    3. Re:They aren't as dangerous as before by Skowronek · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, I'm just trying to get DSL even though I *have* their phone service, and I can't - their page tells me I'm not a customer of SBC :/

    4. Re:They aren't as dangerous as before by Krellan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's a reason for why they charge $50 to click "OK".

      The $50-or-so price is cast in stone, as a tariffed rate!

      Back about 15 years ago, when the price was merely $33 for flipping a switch (no fancy "OK" buttons to click here), a family friend of ours got a phone line activated.

      Turns out, the wires were too ratty/old to hold voice service: static, buzzing, dropped calls, and the like.

      The phone company came out, and ran over ONE MILE of new wiring, including telephone poles, through a forest, just to reach his house!

      This was in a small little rural town, as you might have guessed. No way would he have been able to pay the true market rate for the labor/equipment to install the phone line, which I guess would have cost at least $10,000.00 if he had hired a crew to do it privately. "Universal service" at work!

      This is why you're paying $50 for them to hit a button: the cost to you, and essentially everybody else, was $0.05 for 15 seconds of a call-center employee's time. It's just these rare exceptions, that bring the average subsidized rate up to $50 or so.

      And, no, the phone company will NOT give him DSL service today, nor install a second voice line. I wonder why? :)

    5. Re:They aren't as dangerous as before by Pollardito · · Score: 2, Informative

      i was able to get them to come out to my apartment for a DSL install, but :

      1. it took three appointments of letting them in to check the junction box to see that i *could* get DSL (two appointments they missed and the third they showed up half hour late for their 2-4 hour window)
      2. the tech who showed up to do the install was clearly unfamiliar with a PC beyond the little icon that starts up freecell
      3. they removed my existing ISP setup during the install (this is important, because they ultimately failed to install the new service)
      4. they removed every icon from my quickstart group (because he wanted it to reboot faster while he was installing)
      5. he never got it to work, but suggested that i ask someone from work to help, but couldn't leave any of the equipment like the modem because it wasn't a finished install
      6. they still proceeded to bill me for service even though it never got installed!

      anyone that's lived in one of their markets can tell you that SBC is incredibly inept, yet somehow they keep growing and taking over new markets. are the other carriers that much worse?

  4. I don't care what they call it, it ain't Ma Bell by wiredog · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And thank $Deity for that. Ma Bell did quite a bit of good, Bell Labs being a prime example, but the modern internet/www/etc wouldn't have been possible without the breakup. At least there's some competition, driving down prices and increasing usability, today.

  5. service mark by blamanj · · Score: 5, Funny

    We Don't Care, We Don't Have To.

    Get Lily Tomlin on the line, she's got work to do.

    1. Re:service mark by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 5, Informative
      HELLO?? MODS?? PLEASE TRY TO KEEP UP.

      "We're the phone company. We don't care, we don't have to." is a famous tag-line from comedianne Lilly Tomlin from the old "Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In" TV show. She played a phone operator (Ernestine) with a plugboard and did things like calling Richard Nixon's White House and asking "Why do you have 162 extension phones?...Well, if they're so silent, why do you need 162 phones?".

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  6. "Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instead. by RKBA · · Score: 2, Informative

    Last week the police came to my home and demanded immediate entry (they said they didn't need a warrant for "a case like this") to search for anyone in need of help that may have called. Our telephones were completely out of order (no dial tone) at the time the police say the call came in, and I was sitting peacefully having my second cup of coffee for the morning. After I realized that the telephone company had somehow mis-connected my wife's telephone to the 911 emergency number while the telephones were out of order and repairmen were out working on the lines because of the recent thunderstorms, I had my telephone service discontinued and the wires physically removed from my home.

    I suggest that if there is anyone who does not want the police to come to your door at their whim claiming to have received an emergency call and demanding to come in and do a warrantless search, that you also have your telephone lines disconnected. My wife and I now have an excellent cellular telephone plan now that's actually cheaper than what we were paying to SBC.

    Ron Dotson
    Glendale, CA, USA

  7. Wished they never sold Unix by Nick+Driver · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just recently met with some SBC reps last week who are trying to sell my employer a new phone system, and heard the AT&T name change from them. I asked of them now that SBC owns AT&T if they wished that AT&T had retained ownership of Unix, in light of certain events that have transpired over the years. Their answer was "Absolutely!"

    1. Re:Wished they never sold Unix by Nick+Driver · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And yet, Linux would have still kicked UNIX's ass.

      Linux is a great *nix and all that alright, but where SBC->AT&T is coming from is:

      1)AIX
      2)Solaris
      3)HP-UX
      4)???
      5)Profit!

      When you need a big-iron machine, such as on a big RS6000 machine with 6 or more 64-bit RISC processors, Linux still can't touch AIX for enterprise-level performance and features. Linux is perfect for small to midsize scale duty, but when you have 500+ users hitting nearly two hundred gigabytes worth of Oracle databases, you've got to use the primary o/s developed for that hardware. And even though IBM calles it AIX 5.xL (L- for Linux affinity) it ain't Linux at all, it just has a lot of Linux compatibility for recompiling written-for-Linux source code into native AIX binaries without as much hassle as in years past. Most SuSE app source code tarballs compile with ease under 5.xL and that's no coincidence.

  8. Re:I don't care what they call it, it ain't Ma Bel by NoTheory · · Score: 3, Funny

    So, the word MILF has been coined after Ma Bell disappeared, i'm kind of curious... what do you call a Ma who wants to screw you?

    --
    There are lives at stake here!
  9. Mebbe they'll discover & invent more great stu by elwinc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Ma Bell brought us the transistor. My guess is the fallout from that single invention drives about 30% of our economy. And let's not forget the development of Unix and C, and the discovery of pulsars. Sure, they were a huge slow bureaucracy, but the research arm changed our lives forever. I'll never forget you, Ma Bell. Unfortunately, the landline phone business is a dinosaur, and will never again support anything like Bell Labs. If you have a cable modem and a cell phone, landline phones are completely optional; there's no chance to reassembel the old Bell monopoly.

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  10. Good description by interiot · · Score: 2, Informative

    Here's some fantastic diagrams that describe the history of telecom. See pages 9 through 12 on this powerpoint slide from MIT. The AT&T breakup made things kind of complicated, the 1996 Telecom Act made them even more complicated, but has allowed everything to go back to a pre-breakup configuration.

  11. Like Ma Bell.... by Jeff+Mahoney · · Score: 2, Funny

    So are all their customers now in for some ill communication?

  12. The 80's are back by heroine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The last time AT&T was on TV commercials, QA engineers could afford houses, people could retire at 50, and gas was $0.89. Having the word AT&T back on TV is going to remind a lot of people of better times.

    It's about time they did something to improve their situation by going back to a name from the 80's. When you're a front end to an Indian outsourcing business whose only product is your name, changing your name has a big impact. Hopefully they'll still have enough money to buy the rasterline globe trademark back from Infosys.

  13. times change by RealProgrammer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like IBM, and maybe soon Microsoft, the conditions which allowed the phone monopoly to exist no longer are present. A single company can't dominate the computer industry the way IBM did, nor the communications industry the way AT&T did.

    How long before Microsoft lose its monopoly on desktop computing software?

    --
    sigs, as if you care.
    1. Re:times change by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You forget, IBM and microsoft is not forced upon you. (ok some might argue that point) but in many places SBC is forced upon you because that is the only choice for Local telephone service and broadband. and in those instances they enjoy abusing the customer because they know you can not go anywhere else. when I lived in northern michigan Verizon was like that (then was called GTE) they did not care one bit about the customer because what were you going to do there was no competition and oh gee cellular is useless here.

      when they own and control the wires on the poles going to homes is when they enjoy screwing customers with inflated rates and poor service.

      the moral of the sotry is that only fools trust a large corperation, bigger fools trust a monopoly.

      And Yes, a single company can dominate a region easily. there is a reason that some of those towns do not have any competition, it's written in the franchise agreement.

      Legal Monopolies brough to you by the corruption we all call local government.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  14. I'm so sorry.... by Stavr0 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Does that mean they're reviving the 'Death Star' logo too?

    "That blast came from the Death Star! That thing's operational!"
    "It's a trap!"

  15. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by Kainaw · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like a great idea! We don't want Big Brother spying on us, so lets run out and get cell phones that will allow Big Brother to track where we are every second of the day since we will always have the phone with us. That will show those Big Brothers!!!

    --
    The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
  16. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by MemoryAid · · Score: 2

    So...How did the event play out? Quick search for bodies followed by sincere apologies, or invasive search worthy of community outrage?

    --
    Language students: Don't try to learn English here. This ain't it.
  17. In related news... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

    SBC/AT&T announced they were looking to acquire the SCO Group and Lucent Technologies. Judge Greene's rotting corpse is reported to have been purchased by the local electric company, who announced it would be used for electric power generation it was spinning so fast, for an undisclosed sum

  18. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by mrsbrisby · · Score: 5, Informative

    Alexander Graham Bell -> American Bell -> American Telephone and Telegraph (AT&T) + Western Electric -> Bell Laboratories (Bell Labs).

    Bell Labs did everything first: telephones, lasers, telecommunications satellites, electronic and packet switching, UNIX, etc.

    In 1949 Bell Labs was sued for antitrust. They settled in 1956 with the US DOJ. Part of the settlement is that Bell Laboratories couldn't use one monopoly (telephone) to gain others. In 1974 they got another antitrust suit which was to be split up in 1984.

    Prior to 1984, there was one telephone company. The bell. Mother bell. Ma Bell. Whatever you like. It was so huge and spanned so many products and etc, that many people didn't know where one part began and another ended. They kept telephone and data circuit prices real high, so the DOJ's decision to make a bunch of little bells (baby bells) was to make it easier for others to compete and hopefully bring the prices down.

    It didn't work.

  19. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by Krach42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After I realized that the telephone company had somehow mis-connected my wife's telephone to the 911 emergency number while the telephones were out of order and repairmen were out working on the lines because of the recent thunderstorms

    Can you say accident?

    Last week the police came to my home and demanded immediate entry (they said they didn't need a warrant for "a case like this") to search for anyone in need of help that may have called.

    This would be a good thing. Warrants aren't required when there is reasonable cause. Having a 911 call placed from your line without an answer is reasonable cause.

    You had a bad experience, no reason to think that there's some grand conspiracy to have the police check your house.

    I had a situation where at college, a friend and I were sitting playing video games with our door open, when two cops came up, and one used the door for cover with his gun drawn and said something along the lines of don't worry, stay back... just plain "stay out of our way." Some other guy had talked to his girlfriend, she was scared he might kill himself, and that he might have a gun, and thus called the local cops where she was at, who called the local cops where we were at, who responded like they did.

    I'd say the guy were pissed (he didn't have a gun, and wasn't going to kill himself; his girlfriend was just overreacting). Do I think there was some grand conspiracy for the cops to have come by my room with guns drawn? Hell know, coincidence and accident man. Nothing more, nothing less.

    --

    I am unamerican, and proud of it!
  20. So THAT's what "Modified" Final Judgement means by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like the stock market gets to modify Judge Greene's Modified Final Judgement again and again and again.

    Well, at least the "new" stock ticker symbol should fit the SBC to a "T."

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  21. Return of the Trusts by Dolly_Llama · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's not just Ma Bell. Consider the mergers in the oil industry and the shared refining / distribution systems, and you could make a good argument that Standard Oil is back too.

    --

    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -- Carl Sagan

  22. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by RKBA · · Score: 2, Informative

    No apologies were proffered by the police. The exact same thing happened to me back in January with the local fire department incidentally.

  23. Only 10K? by Weaselmancer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Any decent SCSI-2 compliant judge corpse should spin at least 15K.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  24. Re:Western Electric by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative
    They may be gone, but their tech lives on!

    Western Electric made telephones you could drive nails with. Most of the phones you get today would break if you dropped them only once, phone cable dialectric craps out after a few months. Stuff that was built to hold up for decades will probably still be around when the cockroaches are all that's left roaming the earth.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  25. hmmm by StarvingSE · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does anyone remember the scene in Terminator 2 when Arnie shoots the frozen T-1000 and it smashes to a million pieces, only to coalesque back into a big glob of liquid metal again?

    For some reason that image came to mind when reading this article.....

    --
    I got nothin'
  26. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by da'+WINS+pimp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Lets hope the cops don't come back, because if they saw something during the search worth arresting you for you won't be able to phone home from jail now. The phones in every jail I've been in (thankfully only two, for minor misdemeanors...) do not call out to cell phones. The only folks you can call are good old landlines. This is the only reason I still have my account with Ma Bell, on the outside chance I need to make that dreaded "one phone call".

    If anyone's mileage varies here please correct me and provide location of the detention facility.

    FYI...

    --

    "I'm just here to regulate funkyness." - James Gandolfini, as Winston in The Mexican
  27. Theory of corporations by Alioth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's sort of a bit like the opposite of the Big Bang really. You take a giant corporation, break it up into lots of little ones, and eventually it gravitationally collapses back into the original giant corporation (and gets broken up, rinse, lather repeat). I bet if they re-broke AT&T again tomorrow, in 20 years it will have re-formed, just like the Bad Terminator from Terminator 2.

  28. I for one welcome our new, err ... old, overlords. by lukateake · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does this mean that Captain Crunch is coming out of retirement soon?

  29. Look at the other side of the coin by MyNameIsFred · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Consider the other point of view. Consider what if this was a domestic dispute? What if someone called 911, but was forced to hang up at gun point. Do you want the police to blindly accept the word of anyone who answers the door. To search your house, the police have to have probable cause. And if they reasonably believe that a crime is occuring, they have probable cause to enter. I believe that receiving a 911 call, even if it is cut off, provides the police with reasonable suspicion that a crime is occuring. If this happened to me, I would be upset, but understanding.

  30. SBC used to be called Southwestern Bell by dananderson · · Score: 4, Informative
    SBC was originally called Southwestern Bell. It covered the Southwest United States (except for California and Nevada). It was one of the regional "baby Bells" created when ATT was split in the 1980s.

    SBC merged with two other baby Bells: Pacific Bell in 1997, and Ameritech in 1999.

  31. Survival of the fittest.... by angelasmark · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These mergers in the telco industry are simply adjustmets to survive. With Muni-Wifi becoming more prevalent and VOIP cellphones coming out there is less and less need for land line telephones. Saying Ma Bell is back may be a little too strong with the amount of competition when it comes to telephone service. Its also starting to look like Internet service may be looking more like a 3 way competition with muni wifi coming to San Francisco, Anaheim, and Philly in the near future. We're actually getting more options as consumers and the telco are merging again as a result.

  32. What does this mean for San Fran and SBC Park? by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, so the SF Giants no longer play in "Pacific Bell Park"... we JUST changed the name to "SBC Park" after the recent Pac Bell / SBC merger.

    So, now it's probably going to be "AT&T Park ?!" This is ridiculous. I miss the days when our stadiums had names that didn't change. The 49ers have played in Candlestick, which was renamed "3COM," which has now been renamed "Monster" Park. And now the Giant's stadium is getting it's 3rd name as well. uhh. Time to change the freeway signs AGAIN.

    And on a side note, is it possible for me to change my Slashdot nickname to "Pepsi Presents AquaOSX?"

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    1. Re:What does this mean for San Fran and SBC Park? by Chemical · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a matter of fact, they are.

  33. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by Rydia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And if there was an actual call to 911 for an emergency that you weren't aware of?

    It's "unreasonable" search. Not "any search."

  34. Back to the Future Saw This Comming! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Remember in Back to the Future II when old Marty got a call from Needles and a voice at the end of the call said "Thank you for using AT&T"? Well it looks like that movie accurately predicted the return of the company back in 1988!

    That movie is like Nostradomus on flim!

  35. Re:They even have a "Bell Labs" by sg3000 · · Score: 3, Informative
    > Formerly called SBC Technology Resources, Inc., currently called SBC Labs, will it be renamed to Bell Labs
    > now that the former holder of the name gave it up for the trendy 90's marketroid name of "Lucent"?

    If things keep going the same for Lucent, they might not be needing that name any longer, either.

    From today's New York Times:
    speculation about Lucent's long-term outlook - and even its survival as an independent company - gathered steam yesterday after it released earnings for the fourth quarter. Profits plunged 69 percent compared with the same quarter a year ago, to $374 million, or 8 cents a share, from $1.21 billion, or 23 cents a share.

    --
    Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
  36. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by daivzhavue · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm amazed you were able to get the phone line physically removed.

    I had a house where the previous owners had had phone service ran to a garage apartment. I was remodelling and wanted it removed as its placement on the building was awkward and in my way.

    The linemen were working in the alley behind my place and wouldn't remove it without a work order. Fair enough. I called and after almost an hour of being transferred around, I got someone to place a work order to remove the phone line.

    Fortunately I was at home when they came as they started to remove my phone service at the house. Stopped them from doing that, but they wouldn't actually remove the service off the garage since the work order didn't specify that.

    Tried to get them to come back out and never had any luck. So I pulled the box off of the garage, rolled up the attached cable as well as possible and left it at the base of the telephone pole.

    That was three years ago. The phone box and cable are still at the base of the telephone pole.

    --
    "A REAL computer has ONE speed and the only powersaving it permits is when you pull the power leads out of the back!"
  37. WTF? by Moonwick · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Meanwhile, a great force and a high pitched whining sound has been reported from Judge Greene's grave as he spins at nearly 10K RPM."

    Or maybe Judge Greene realizes that the telecommunications business has changed dramatically in twenty years and that 'Ma Bell' would no longer have a monopoly, so he doesn't actually give a shit. But don't let that keep you from sensationalizing a story, slashdot!

    --
    Only on slashdot can a posting be rated "Score -1, Insightful".
  38. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by JWW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It didn't work.

    Really? Many people like to claim that the breakup of AT&T meant nothing. But I have to ask. "Do you have a cell phone?"

    I don't see any reason the the telephone monopoly would have ever gladly spawned the cellular telephone network. They might have developed it yes, but they would have had no impetus to provide good coverage and reasonable rates.

    Any scenario I could imagine where AT&T was the only phone company providing cell service doesn't look good at all.

  39. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by Rolgar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would say prices have gone down. In the 80's the price of long distance was over 10 cents a minute. Now, you can get plans that run about 2 cents a minute. I've even seen calling cards that give long distance for under a penny a minute. I do agree that the Bells owning the lines still impedes competition (I'd rather the local government own the infrastructure, the same way the government owns the roads), but I would say that the breakup of AT&T and the competition from Sprint, MCI, and other competitors has brought lower prices. Of course, if we had government owned lines, maybe we'd have free phone like we have mostly free roads, then again, maybe not.

  40. Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen by scronline · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So much money was spent to declare an anti-trust/monopoly against the telco giant...now we're just letting it all fall right back into place.

    Here's another great one for you, the remedy for the anti-trust/monopoly wasn't really a remedy. Each "baby bell" was still a monopoly in it's region. You don't have a choice what phone carrier to use if you're in SBC's region, same with Verizon, SWBell, whatever.

    What NEEDED to be done is one company handles all the infrastructure. They wouldn't be allowed to do ANYTHING other than maintain the lines...that's it....nothing more....ever....period. With an oversight commitee or something to keep them from price gouging or taking advantage of that situation. Then they sell access to those lines to anyone who wanted it. You would then have your choice of phone carriers anywhere in the US as well as internet providers over DSL without having to STILL pay SBC/Verizon/whoever for use of their phone line, plus transport of the DSL.

    I can't tell you how many people HATE SBC and refuse to do ANY business with them. But because you have to have an SBC line to get DSL if you're in SBC's region, you're just S.O.L. How is that NOT a monopoly? I mean really.

    1. Re:Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen by scronline · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure we would. They would be able to charge more for use of fiber lines than copper. That would be where that company would increase it's income by investing in it's infrastructure...which would be all that company was ever allowed to own and operate in.

      The point I'm trying to make here is that by allowing a company to control both infrastructure and offer services, they can use that position to unfairly leverage the competition into a no-profit situation or higher prices which of course makes theirs "look" better. Trust me, I'm in ISP and I've been dealing with this crap from SBC for well over 6 years now. They always kept the price point just out of our reach of being able to compete on a level price structure. Granted, that usually makes our service better since we have to justify the cost.

      Think of it like this. Microsoft being allowed to write other software that works on their OS probably shouldn't be allowed either. Think about all the times MS has used that OS monopoly to their advantage. Intentionally writting updates that breaks other software functionality such as WordPerfect. There's really no difference, it's just a different arena.

    2. Re:Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen by scronline · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Sure you have a choice, but only because the feds MADE them open up the lines to outside companies. But the thing to remember here is that SBC/Verizon leverage things to their advantage because they own the copper in the ground.

      For example, with SBC, I pay $11.50/mth per "primary" DSL. That's my cost to SBC to get a customer to my line. Now I say to my LINE because that doesn't automatically bring it to my network like it does with SBC. We also have to pay for a circuit to go from their network to ours. Right now, that's roughly costing me about $10 per user. Then we add on internet bandwidth costs, server costs, and support costs. There's absolutely NO way I can offer DSL to a customer for $14.95/mth even if it's only for 6 months. It costs me about $27-30/mth to supply that DSL.

      They don't have to pay for the additional line to their network since it's already on their network. They also subsidize that $14.95 with additional phone service fees. To get that $14.95 you have to also have Caller ID, and Call Waiting at the least.

      Basically the same thing happens with these other phone providers. But to offer you service so much cheaper, they're doing it by pretty much killing off their profit margin. Basically, they're probably only making $2/mth off your phone service, but they plan make up for that in sheer volume. However they're burning through their investors' money until they reach the break even point.

      But then we have to take into consideration the recent FCC ruling that DSL is considered a data service even though it's offered over phone lines. Believe me, SBC and Verizon WILL find a way to try and twist that to their benefit.

      The problem boils down to the people who make, judge, enforce, and interpret laws don't really know what's going on in the industry. They may have a little knowledge...enough to be dangerous. Or they're just thinking from a purely political, business, and/or financial standpoint.

      anyway, sorry, I digressed considerably there. Point is sure it's possible, but those companies have to pay through the nose to have access to those same services that can't/aren't subsidized from somewhere else. So what will usually happen if they're cutting the price so low like that is service/support ends up suffering.

  41. Judge Green will never know by hey! · · Score: 3, Funny

    He's still waiting for residential ISDN. Apparently the crypt is too far from the CO.

    If you need to get a hold of him though, call Mary Baker Eddy and leave a message for him.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  42. Exactly by Infonaut · · Score: 2, Interesting
    They're not as dangerous as before, except if you live in a place where their competition has been muscled out through legally dubious tactics (Covad), or has been late in entering the came (Comcast). A choice between two crappy monoliths isn't much of a choice. SBC has screwed me consistently since they pushed Covad out of our area back in 2000 or so. Going from Covad to SBC was torturous. Then when I moved (still in the same general area) I had to go with SBC for my DSL from the get-go, but they screwed up the account transfer and I was without DSL service for FIVE weeks. I called several different departments and spent over three hours on the phone with literally over a dozen people before it was finally cleared up.

    The problem with Big Telecom is that in general they don't seem to have a friggin' clue about customer service. They accept the status quo (crappy support, customers get bounced from dept to dept on the phone, arcane billing) and we all do to, because in many geographic regions there is still simply not enough choice. A market split between two of these lumbering giants isn't a truly competitive environment.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  43. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by monkeydo · · Score: 2, Informative

    The officer who claimed they didn't need a warrant was either grossly mistaken or lying through his teeth. Either one is indicative of the gradual failure of rights protection in the US.

    Google "exigent circumstances".

    HAND.

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  44. Future Plans by FurrBear · · Score: 2, Funny

    Future business plans are to acquire BellSouth and Qwest and change the name to "The Phone Company®."

  45. Re:"Ma Bell" should be called "Big Brother" instea by Amouth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I still use a StarTac they can only triangulate me when i make a call.. i keep having to fix the phone (replace the screen the wireing harnes) but it works.. funny thing is that if i disconnect it or switch services it is aginst the law for them to reactivate the phone because it doens't support "E911" which is where the phone can transmit it's location when you place a 911 call.. yea.. orginaly i was keeping the startac becuse i like it and i had all the damn stuff for it already.. but i think i will keep it for ever or atleast until the government makes it agisnt the law for them to take my money if i use it.

    --
    '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
  46. Re:"SBC is changing it's name" by WizardOfFoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I would suggest some of Strong Bad's Rhythm 'n' Grammar. Highly educational.

  47. Re:Trivia Question: AT&T's chosen name? by stox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    American Bell.

    They actually started using it on internal product before the name was shot down. I think I have a piece buried somewhere in my basement.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  48. American Bell by rkhalloran · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Working contract at AT&T Computer Systems in NJ '87-'90, they re-used the American Bell badge blanks they'd pre-ordered for the name change. The Name That Must Not Be Spoken was whited over with the authorized building codes.

  49. Monopoly Subsidized Bell Labs by HighOrbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For all the talk about the evil monopoly, the fact is that the confortable non-competative enviroment of the monopoly allowed AT&T to subsidize all the cool research at Bell Labs. Now-a-days, the ultra-competitve, cost-cutting, outsourcing-to-save-a-dime way of business would never tolerate a "dead-weight" research division that wasn't turning a quick direct profit. The modern business model of pursuit of a quick profit and "enhancing shareholder value" means that the kind of long term research done by Bell Labs is a thing of the distant past.

    When was the last time that Lucent (the sucessor to Bell Labs) invented anything that was totally groundbreaking like the transitor or UNIX? Never. They are too busy trying to stay afloat (by selling switches and equipment) to fund any significant research.

    I wouldn't expect SBC/AT&T to be any different. Either they will only think about quick profits -OR- they will claim (perhaps trufully) that they don't have the cashflow to fund extra research. From SBC Labs' website that you linked to, it looks like their proudest accomplishment was developing a DSL self-install kit. Whoopie.

  50. Re:ma bell not back by rkhalloran · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the beginning was Ma Bell, and things were regular.

    Then did Judge Greene divide, and there was AT&T and seven Regional Bell Operating Companies: NyNex, Bell Atlantic, Bellsouth, Ameritech, US West, Southwest Bell and Pacific Telesis.

    Nynex & Bell Atlantic -> Verizon
    Southwest Bell & Ameritech & Pacific Telesis (and SNET) -> SBC
    US West -> acquired by Qwest during the dot-boom

    Seven RBOCs down to four, three of them owning a LD carrier or trying to: Qwest already a carrier, Verizon buying MCI, SBC buying AT&T. Bellsouth's the poor sister at this point. What ever happened to Sprint's LD business?

  51. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative
    Any scenario I could imagine where AT&T was the only phone company providing cell service doesn't look good at all.
    But it wouldn't have been. In most Western free-market countries, cellular service was deliberately un-monopolised. The dominant landline operator was usually given a franchise together with a competitor, because there's no reason why cellular should be a natural monopoly. It's cheap to deploy, a substantial proportion of the costs are per-customer (as opposed to landline service where it's more per-street)

    In Britain, BT was given an effective monopoly on landline telephone service in 1984. At around the same time, the UK government set up two cellular franchises, and while it allowed BT to be involved with owning one of the operators, it actually insisted that BT own a minority share (Cellnet, for it is them, was majority owned by a company largely known for delivering parcels and money.)

    In the early nineties, as this wasn't creating enough competition, they opened up three more franchises (though two franchisees merged early on), and the EU itself forced the UK to open up more (albeit resulting in only one more competitor) a few years ago for 3G services.

    I can't imagine it being any different in the US. The AMPS network supported B and A carriers from the start. Would the FCC not have opened up the 1900MHz band in the mid-nineties?

    Not that I think the break-up of AT&T did nothing. But the notion that AT&T having a regulated monopoly would have meant it would have controlled cellular too strikes me as unlikely. The only change I can possibly think of is that it's possible that the calling-party-pays scheme would have been more feasable in an environment in which one landline operator exists who sets the charges for every type of call. And, having lived under both regimes, I can't honestly tell you if that'd have been better or worse.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  52. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by Dynastar454 · · Score: 2, Informative

    And thanks to the magic of Inflation, the cost is about the same, despite the price change.

    You're saying that thanks to inflation 2 cents today is worth the same as 10 cents in the 80s? I think you'd better go brush up on your economics. :-)

    --


    Laugh at stupidity: mod idiots +1 Funny.
  53. Ma Bell was worse than you think by einhverfr · · Score: 3, Informative

    Go ahead and mock the Bell System. They did step over the line quite a few times.

    I think that the conspiracy between J.P. Morgan and Theodore Vail was more than a bit over the line. Note that Ma Bell didn't become a monopoly without a lot of "help" from the good friend of Vail's. Basically Morgan would withhold credit, the competitor would go belly up, and AT&T would buy it for pennies on the dollar. This is how they went from about 60% market share in 1900 to a near total monopoly 50 years later. Tragically Congress intervened on AT&T's behalf, effectively exempting telephony from the Sherman Act.

    It was only though the hard work of the folks at the FCC and NASA that we have any competition in the telphone market today. (FCC because of their tireless work to ensure that customers could purchase their own telephone equipment, and NASA for jumpstarting Comsat Corp. The FCC also made it a policy of subjecting AT&T to much more regulatory scrutiny than their competitors, such as Microwave Communication Inc, later named MCI.)

    The early AT&T made Microsoft look like a good corporate citizen. And they only got away with what they did because first Congress rolled over and exempted them from an important antitrust act, and secondly, that two major wars (WWII, Korea) disrupted investigation and enforcement on remaining grounds. But the break up was the result of seventy-four years of repeated predatory activity on the part of AT&T, investigations by the ICC (later FCC), and government policy aimed at curtailing AT&T's power. Note that the ICC's first investigation into antitrust violations started in 1910 and that it took two antitrust cases (both settled out of court) to break the company up.

    At its height, the Bell system included AT&T, Western Union, Western Electric, Bell Labs, and all the regional bell operating companies. They had their own radio network and were even attempting to get in on producing motion pictures prior to the consent decree of 1956.

    For many years, you could be heavily penalized for putting a piece of cellophane tape on your telephone. No consumer purchased equipment. No acustic fibers that would effectively mute the device, nothing. In essence your telephone was the equivalent of closed source software today. It was licensed to you. You could not dissassemble it. You could not extend it. You could not purchase another one and swap parts. You could not even purchase another one and connect it to the Bell network. And if you did, they would sense the impedance differences and disconnect your service.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    1. Re:Ma Bell was worse than you think by Shakrai · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was only though the hard work of the folks at the FCC and NASA that we have any competition in the telphone market today.

      Yes, and today the nice folks at the FCC are busy rigging the game against the telephone companies even though they are facing a three front war against major competitors (VoIP, Cable providers, Cell Phones). Care to explain why Time Warner doesn't have to let a startup use their cable plant but Verizon does? Said startup can sell one of Verizon's lines for pennies on the dollar and if it ever breaks they just blame Verizon for it -- and then Verizon get's to fix it for them. I would love to start another cable company in my area -- how do I get started, eh?

      The FCC also made it a policy of subjecting AT&T to much more regulatory scrutiny than their competitors, such as Microwave Communication Inc, later named MCI.)

      Yes and per my above example they are still doing that today. Because we know what good cooperate citizens Time Warner and Comcast are. Those evil fuckers at Verizon and Bellsouth deserve what they get.

      For many years, you could be heavily penalized for putting a piece of cellophane tape on your telephone. No consumer purchased equipment. No acustic fibers that would effectively mute the device, nothing. In essence your telephone was the equivalent of closed source software today. It was licensed to you. You could not dissassemble it. You could not extend it. You could not purchase another one and swap parts. You could not even purchase another one and connect it to the Bell network. And if you did, they would sense the impedance differences and disconnect your service.

      Yes and they would also come out and fix that phone if it broke. Which it never did -- because the old phones were bricks. That said, I agree you with that it was a PITA. But how is that any different from Time Warner moving to digital cable that can only be accessed with their box. Thus, either locking out a lot of solutions (picture in picture) or forcing us to jury rig them (TiVo with an IR blaster) to get them to work properly. That double standard drives me up the wall. And don't even get me started on how they are selling their digital phone service to avoid the "hassle" of regular phone service. Yeah, that dial tone and line that always works is such a fucking hassle.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  54. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by einhverfr · · Score: 2, Informative


    Really? Many people like to claim that the breakup of AT&T meant nothing. But I have to ask. "Do you have a cell phone?"


    People miss the point. The AT&T divestiture was offered in exchange for allowing divisions of AT&T to monetize products they were not otherwise allowed to sell. Independant wireless phone providers (ala the Carterphone) were encouraged by the FCC, as were alternate long distance circuits (Microwave Communications, Inc-- guess what company they are today ;-) ), etc.

    The idea was that if AT&T stopped coordinating between the local bell operating companies and the long distance service, that it would allow for more competition on long distance lines. That part worked. But it was not the only part of the plan. In reality it was a part of a long and concerted effort on the part of the federal gov't to weaken AT&T. Portions of this included the FCC registering protective circuits on telephone equipment so that AT&T had no legal grounds for excluding them, NASA refusing to give AT&T exclusive rights to microwave communication via satellites and instead forming Comsat Corp (1/2 owned by telecom industry, 1/2 owned by private investors, with AT&T barred from owning more than about 25%), and more.

    Don't forget that the breakup was mutually agreed upon. And that it formed the final piece of the puzzle regarding competition for long-distance networks.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  55. Re:Ma Bell? Yo no entiendo - SHORT VERSION by mrsbrisby · · Score: 3, Informative

    Um no, BBN did packet switching first by building the Interface Message Processor. AT&T said it could not be done.

    That quote is taken out of context so many times it's not even funny. What AT&T said couldn't be done was replacing the analog infrastructure with the digital one required for packet switching.

    There are no digital circuits in my town, so I'd say that packet switching still hasn't replaced the analog infrastructure.

    I'd never say that it won't happen, some day, but this quote occurred back in 1965 over 15 years after AT&T started experimenting with packet switched networks.

  56. Turn, turn, turn by fm6 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Meanwhile, a great force and a high pitched whining sound has been reported from Judge Greene's grave as he spins at nearly 10K RPM.
    Not quite true. Greene was pretty hard on AT&T, but he didn't actually break them up. They broke themselves up voluntarily, using the anti-trust suit as an excuse to convert themselves from a utility to a commercial company. The theory was that they had been prevented from cashing in on all the cool stuff they invented (transistors, communications sattelites, and Unix are highlights from a very long list) because as a public utility, they couldn't engage in commercial ventures. If they spun off the RBOCs, they could go into any business they wanted to.

    The big flaw in that strategy was that they didn't know how to be a commercial company. Every venture of theirs collapse because of bureaucratic nonsense and bad planning. I worked for the company that built Unix PC for them (basically, one of our 68010 time-sharing boxes clumsily mated with some of their telecom hardware plus an ineptly designed keyboard and display). AT&T spent something like a billion dollars developing this product and paying for initial production — and never even tried to sell it. By the time it reached the market, they decided that they were going to to IBM-compatibles instead. Which made a certain amount of sense — except that product line didn't sell either.

    How many different ways did they screw up? Let's see, "phone stores", the TCI buyout...