[Hidden-tech] land phone alternatives for Shutesbury/no high speed
Robert Heller
heller at deepsoft.com
Mon Sep 12 15:10:48 EDT 2016
At Mon, 12 Sep 2016 13:10:35 -0400 roy at net-vantage.com wrote:
>
>
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> <html>
> <head>
> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
> http-equiv="Content-Type">
> </head>
> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
> <p>Yes, the trees, vines, and also the air characteristics
> (humidity, clarity etc) all make a difference.</p>
> <p>Of course, thanks to stubborn and desperate customers such as
> ourselves, after we prove a signal is working, they will in fact
> adjust their maps (at least att does).</p>
> <p>Looking forward here in Conway to the Commonwealth, MBI, and
> Comcast fulfilling their contract, which to my understanding, is
> signed sealed and delivered. Wasn't Shutesbury part of that as
> well?</p>
Nope. Shutesbury is NOT a cable town. Not part of the Comcast / MBI "deal".
Shutesbury (and Wendell, New Salem, etc.) will get fiber, eventually. Probably
two years before completion though.
> <p>It's been a complete and total disgrace that all of us here in
> "the rest" of Massachusetts have been without decent connectivity
> all these years. Especially with governments/schools requiring
> access via web ... shame shame shame but Hallelujah to the
> progress that's assumedly coming.</p>
> <p>-Roy<br>
> </p>
> <br>
> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/12/2016 10:50 AM, Robert Heller
> wrote:<br>
> </div>
> <blockquote
> cite="mid:20160912145008.B3A4273236B at sharky3.deepsoft.com"
> type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">At Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:55:41 -0400 Dede <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:dede at dedewilson.com"><dede at dedewilson.com></a> wrote:
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">
>
> ---Executing: recode
> Roy,
>
> we have tried updating and testing other cards and they don´t work as well.
> I think I was told since the older ones were "broader" albeit "weaker" (bear
> with me with my non-tech terms) and the newer ones were more
> "exacting"...all I can tell you is that in practice they did not offer
> better results, in fact they were worse. In fact, this is how we "proved" to
> Verizon that their maps were crappy. They sold me a "better" solution once,
> promised it would be great. It was a huge flop. They tried to charge me a
> re-stocking fee. I pointed out that they had been wrong all along and
> shouldn´t have made promises...they waived the restocking fee.
> </pre>
> </blockquote>
> <pre wrap="">
> Verizon's sales crew is clueless WRT Western Mass's rural geography.
> Hills/Mountains + forests. The coverage maps are "desktop models" -- that is,
> they have *never* sent real engineers out in the field measuring signal
> strength -- their ad with the dude doing the "Can you hear me now?" routine is
> totally fake -- NONE of the Cell Phone companies ever actually do that.
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">
> The antennae is directional and we know how to "test" the signal. Seems like
> for a few years we had to micro adjust often. In the last year or so we
> haven´t needed to. *shrugs*. I have ceased to try and understand why half
> of the time because really all that matters is what actually happens in
> practice and believe me, I am here "practicing" all the time LOL. We did
> upgrade the antennae about a year ago. Wilson company was great. Sent me a
> free one simply because I called to chat about not-so-great results recently
> with the former one from them.
> </pre>
> </blockquote>
> <pre wrap="">
> What I expect is happening is the trees. The leaves do "bad" things to
> UHF/VHF radio waves - scatter them, absorb them, reflect them, whatever. The
> "micro adjustments" are probably finding a "path" as the tree folliage changes
> from time to time.
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">
> That begin said, I am always open to new information. Roy, if you want to
> email me personally with any light you can shed and if you care to take the
> time I would love to hear more...or if phone chatting is easier, we can do
> that.
>
> Robert, our Verizon with LD is $60.12 including everything a month. It´s an
> old plan that we have hung onto. I work from home so LD is used a lot.
> </pre>
> </blockquote>
> <pre wrap="">
> Lucky you. The "standard" domestic LD plan ("Freedom USA" or something like
> that) is like $60-something + "fees and taxes" (about $20) -- works out to
> about $80/month total. ACN has the same plan for about $45/month + about $15
> in "fees and taxes", for a total of about $60/month.
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">
> Guess I´m off to Home Depot for some string...
>
>
> Dede
>
>
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 8:59 PM, RA Cohen <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:roy at net-vantage.com"><roy at net-vantage.com></a> wrote:
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">I don't understand - "ancient card"?
>
> It sounds like you are dealing with a 2G or at best 3G signal that is intermittent at times. But if there is a better signal out there would you know about it?
>
> Is your Wilson antenna a directional one and is it aimed exactly where it needs to be? [important]
>
> The older Wilson amplifiers won't amplify a 4g signal so perhaps a new amplifier is needed ... but I wouldn't spring for one until I knew I had something to amplify.
>
> If you are already amplifying the only signal available then I guess you are indeed, SOOL... unfortunately. Satellite the only option. Aside from the delay (ping times >500 msec), the technology I think has come a long way. But for the most reliable service you need to know how to deal with the provider's way of caching and optimizing the connection - or you will be on the tech support queue repeatedly... and it won't help your voice / texting issues.
>
> Hope this helps,
> -Roy
>
>
>
> On 09/11/2016 07:49 PM, Dede wrote:
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">Thank you for responding Roy.
>
> We have a weak signal, which is how we have an internet connection. I have a Wilson antennae connected to an amplifier connected to a router which holds the ancient card that we bought from Verizon.
>
> And yes, we have proven Verizon wrong on their maps as well. They "say" we should get coverage - 4 g even - but we do not.
>
> Now, the broadband is just enough to email and load light pages. We cant come close to watching videos or anything like that.
>
> Our cell phones pick up enough to occasionally receive a text. But you cannot respond and definitely cannot make a call..and yes after many years of testing out companies, Verizon is the "best" signal of them all.
>
> So, are you saying there is a way to get some voice service via the way my card connects? How would I do that?
>
> Any further help much appreciated.
>
> Dede
>
>
> On Sep 11, 2016, at 7:23 PM, RA Cohen <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:roy at net-vantage.com"><roy at net-vantage.com></a> wrote:
>
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">Dede are you very very certain you have no useable cell signal? How about immediately outside your home ... you need to check everywhere and know how to check ... If you find a very weak signal close to the house it could conceivably be amplified to provide good voice and somewhat acceptable data ... but you must be looking very closely and at all the carriers: Verizon, ATT and T-Mobile.
>
> Signal might be at the high point of house, or might not, it is surprising how these frequencies actually travel.
>
> You can find (online, of course) all the carriers' maps and signal footprints, but they are not 100% accurate. In my own case, I proved their maps inaccurate!
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> -Roy
>
>
> On 09/11/2016 04:42 PM, Dede wrote:
> </pre>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <pre wrap="">Hello all.
>
> Much to my displeasure I had to "disband" by one-pay option with Verizon/Verizon Wireless when I went to order a new iPhone with monthly installments. So now I will have a bill with broadband card and our 2 cell phones and a Separate bill for the landline, which we Need due to our location. Cell phones don´t work here at home.
>
> I am not happy with the $60 a month for the landline and want to know options, if any exist.
>
> * We do not have satellite, nor will we be getting any.
> * we do not have DSL lines near us
> * we do not have any HiSpeed internet whatsoever
>
> Is Verizon my only option? I´m looking for a domestic and international land line less expensive than the $60.
>
> Thoughts or am I SOOL? Cans and a string? Maybe a Really really high quality string?
>
> Dede
>
>
> Dédé Wilson
> bakepedia.com
> ask me about the low-FODMAP diet
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.symanteccloud.com">http://www.symanteccloud.com</a>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hidden-discuss mailing list - home page: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.hidden-tech.net">http://www.hidden-tech.net</a>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net">Hidden-discuss at lists.hidden-tech.net</a>
>
> You are receiving this because you are on the Hidden-Tech Discussion list.
> If you would like to change your list preferences, Go to the Members
> page on the Hidden Tech Web site.
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.hidden-tech.net/members">http://www.hidden-tech.net/members</a>
> </pre>
> </blockquote>
> <pre wrap="">
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933
Deepwoods Software -- Custom Software Services
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Linux Administration Services
heller at deepsoft.com -- Webhosting Services
More information about the Hidden-discuss
mailing list