Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!IUS3.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU!Ralph.Hyre From: Ralph.Hyre@IUS3.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: (none) Message-ID: <8804111953.AA12709@rutgers.edu> Date: 11 Apr 88 19:51:07 GMT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The Internet Lines: 37 Approved: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu To: comp-dcom-telecom@rutgers.edu Path: IUS3.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU!ralphw From: ralphw@IUS3.IUS.CS.CMU.EDU (Ralph Hyre) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Non-Bell owned Bell companies Date: 11 Apr 88 19:51:07 GMT References: <8804081245.AA16703@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI Lines: 27 Cincinnati Bell is another BOC that AT&T had a minority stake in. I believe it made the breakup effects much easier there. They've always been pretty reasonable about things. I also believe they were able to get the non-POTS services going faster there (like a long distance service and software development company). Too bad they've got GTE (and even smaller companies) around them. Makes it a real hassle when traveling. I travel between Pittsburgh and Cincinnati a lot, and there are these vast wastelands on I-71 between Cincinnati and Columbus, and I-70 between Columbus and Wheeling where there are no Bell payphones to be had. I've actually gone to the trouble to specially mark a map with known Bell payphones rest areas, so I know where I can make calls from. You'd think they give favorable treatment to SPRINT or something, but no 950 numbers seem to work. (part of this may be due to population density, but it's a real hassle.) BTW, is there any carrier out there that doesn't have a 950 surcharge? SBS Skyline never did, and they were nice enough to activate my code in all the cities they served. The MCI took over, and life got tough and more expensive again. -- - Ralph W. Hyre, Jr. Internet: ralphw@ius2.cs.cmu.edu Phone:(412)268-{2847,3275} CMU-{BUGS,DARK} Amateur Packet Radio: N3FGW@W2XO, or c/o W3VC, CMU Radio Club, Pittsburgh, PA