Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!sun!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: ucla-an!denwa!jimmy@seas.ucla.edu (Jim Gottlieb) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Modems and LD Carriers Message-ID: Date: 19 May 89 03:22:53 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Lines: 36 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 169, message 5 of 8 In article INTERMAIL@a.isi.edu (Robert Gutierrez / MCI ID: 367-9829) writes: >From: westmark!dave@rutgers.edu (Dave Levenson) >>In article , >gould@pilot.njin.net >>(Brian Jay Gould) writes: >>using the same carrier. The variation in data transmission quality >>varies even more among calls placed over the same carrier to >>different destinations. The variation between these carriers was no >>more than the variation between different calls using the same >>carrier. >I could not agree more. Perhaps. But certain carriers are bad all of the time. Certain resellers use compression to squeeze more voice circuits onto a channel (i.e. DS1 or DS3). This tends to send data throughput down the drain. The company I am most familiar with is Telesphere (10555). I find that I consistently get about half the throughput I do with AT&T or Sprint. The volume on voice calls is also a bit low. When I confronted them about this, they said, "We are a voice service. We make no claims about our ability to carry data." With apologies to Mr. Gutierrez, I find that MCI still has the worst voice quality of the major carriers. They are still using way too many analog microwave hops with the stations farther apart than they should be (fog in the central California valleys kills connections from Southern to Northern California for instance). -- Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: or or V-Mail: (213) 551-7702 Fax: 478-3060 The-Real-Me: 824-5454