Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: dorl@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Michael (NMI) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Caller-ID Technical Question Message-ID: Date: 14 Feb 91 09:20:17 GMT Sender: news@casbah.acns.nwu.edu Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center Lines: 64 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 115, Message 4 of 6 If you'll tolerate another addition to this thread... In article <74397@bu.edu.bu.edu>, m21198@mwunix.mitre.org (John McHarry) writes... >larson@snmp.sri.com (Alan Larson) writes: >>after the first or second ring. Why doesn't it send it out before the >>first ring, so the phone could know if it was to ring at all. >>[Moderator's Note: I do not think the intent of Caller*ID is to tell >>folks what calls NOT to accept (Call Screening is intended for that). >Indeed! You don't expect Ma to leave any money on the table do you? >I think, however, that we shall soon see caller ID boxes that swallow >the first ring burst until they have the number to decide how to treat >the call. I, for one, would like to send some numbers to my answering >machine, but not others. >[Moderator's Note: Precisely my point! I cannot imagine telco >encouraging people to NOT answer their phone. If the calling party >does not connect then there is no profit for telco. Call Screening is >an exception, but please note it is one of the higher priced features >available now ... so telco makes money, answer or no answer, because >the called party is paying telco to *not* put the call through. Then >too, there are the numerous examples of 'what do you do if someone you >*do* want to speak with is calling from a different phone number?'. >A policy of 'do not pass ringing from a number that is not recognized' >is not a good one because there will always be parties you want to >hear from calling from an unrecognized number (payphone, new phone >line just installed, etc). By sending a 'courtesy ring' first, you >have the option of examining your readout and deciding what to do >next. The problem of a box which will 'absorb the first ring and act >on the data received' is how do you prevent other extensions on the >same line from giving a first ring also? PAT] My first reaction to Caller ID was to oppose its deployment without blocking. Articles in this forum have shown me that caller id may benefit me in avoiding unwanted calls. I disagree with our moderator's comments above. I think there's no right or wrong here and I really care little what the phone company wants; if the caller id information is available, I'll use for whatever purpose I want. The consumer electronics industry is going to make products that folks want and I for one want products that will shield me from unwanted calls. It's going to be cheaper for me to buy a box to do call screening than to rent that same service from the phone company. In my opinion, the one thing the industry could do to make Caller ID appealing to the general public would be to provide even more information. For example if the Caller ID information included a call type (direct marketing, residential, commercial, etc.) the market would provide products to screen out calls I don't want. The direct phone marketing business is driving public opinion on this topic. Surveys I've seen show the majority of folks are against Caller IDd because they are afraid of the resulting follow on marketing. I've taken to asking all direct market calls to please wait and then abandoning the phone until they hang up. Michael Dorl (608) 262-0466 fax (608) 262-4679 dorl@vms.macc.wisc.edu MACC / University of Wisconsin - Madison dorl@wiscmacc.bitnet 1210 W. Dayton St. / Madison, WI 53706