Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hound.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!hound!rfg
From: rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Programmability cost -Touch-Tone vs Rotary costs
Message-ID: <1104@hound.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Apr-85 14:39:10 EST
Article-I.D.: hound.1104
Posted: Thu Apr 25 14:39:10 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Apr-85 08:50:24 EST
References: <259@cmu-cs-g.ARPA> <3614@alice.UUCP> <73@harvard.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 13

[]
Not being a real expert on this,I feel free to talk about it.
You claimed that "costs" were lower for touch-tone telephone sets and touch tone service than for rotary dial sets and service (although telco chargesm are
higher in both cases).
I think you are wrong. I believe that the costs are comparable, both ways, not
widely different. There are, of course, many advantages to touch-tone so
people are willing to pay more for it. Personally, I think its one of the best
things to come from a phone company in years and I consider people who don't
have it as being somewhat ...uncivilised.

-- 

"It's the thought, if any, that counts!"  Dick Grantges  hound!rfg