Maybe getting rid of the landline

[mikea]

Now that there's this, you don't even need to have reception in your house to be able to use your cell phone. All you need need is internet and you'll be able to use your cell phone and get 5 bars.

Some people are getting coupons to get one of those for free.

BTW even though you provide the power and net bandwidth usage of the microcell still counts against your data and voice minutes.

With that, I really see no reason for a landline anymore.

You might see a reason to have a POTS line if you were in Manhattan on 9/11.

 

[Matthew]

I'm in the same boat: minimal land line(local only) and with DSL. Kindly post results of your research on canceling land line re DSL.

HR

I have AT&T local (minimal) and DSL. Haven't talked to anyone in Pakis..., I mean Customer Service, yet. I did see that the fine-print on their DSL services says it requires a local service line. Makes sense, I guess, since the DSL is pumped over the regular phone line.

Now, I need to weigh the cost of the current DSL service + local and see how much I'd save by going with Comcast (my CTV company) and dropping the landline.

I just have some personal reservations about going with Comcast - I'd like to switch away from them anyway, but then I'd have to change internet service providers again, ...


edit: Hey, just found out a few minutes ago that AT&T U-verse is available in my neighborhood now. This might be the chance to get away from Comcast that I've been waiting for!

 

[pookies]

I have a land line and enjoy it. It's a reliable way for someone to contact me if I forgot my phone on silent or the battery runs dead. I also prefer to have any conversation of length on the land-line because it sounds better and an actual phone just seems more comfortable.

I'm probably the only 22 year old that has a land-line. If it were possible I'd probably get rid of my cell phone and just use it. I'm not convinced that humans are meant to be SO connected.

Edit: Oops....This is Jesse.

 

[wsuffa]

There are some conversations I will not have on a cellphone. Esp. certain conversations for work. Landline required.

 

[Lawreston]

Thanks. My HughesNet for Internet was running about $65.00 per month. When Fairpoint Communications(now many financial problems after having bought VERIZON land lines in Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont) finally put DSL onto this island of Georgetown I got the land line/DSL(Internet -- no Television) combination: about $62.00(only LOCAL svc. for telephone). And the DSL is so much faster than satellite re my heavy use of send large photo files. Television service? I'm up on a hill; with Digital Converter boxes I get ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, and PBS stations, enough for my desires.
Cell phone? AT&T for 400 minutes - $39.99 and I'm always running plenty of carry-forward minutes.

HR

 

[SteveR]

I haven't had a land line at home in at least ten years. It'd be a nuisance to have one. Faxes are done far easier by computer. We built our house five years ago...the phone wiring was never connected to a phone. I re-connected it all as a network.

We have Sprint service and Sprint "femtocell" so our signal is strong all the time. We also have that redundancy, not that it was a concern in any way. I can't remember my cell phone ever not working at home in 10 years.

There are some conversations I will not have on a cellphone. Esp. certain conversations for work. Landline required.

I'd say a cell phone conversation is more secure than a conversation over an analog phone line. 15 years ago when cell phones were analog it was easy to listen in...today, not so much. Analog land lines can be very, very easy to listen in on, and it requires next to no specialized equipment or knowledge.

 

[wsuffa]

I'd say a cell phone conversation is more secure than a conversation over an analog phone line. 15 years ago when cell phones were analog it was easy to listen in...today, not so much. Analog land lines can be very, very easy to listen in on, and it requires next to no specialized equipment or knowledge.

You would be surprised.... knowing what I know from the business I'm in, I can tell you that the cellphone is no more secure. Yeah, a landline can be tapped, but it requires a bit more work than sucking a signal out of the air on a cellphone.

 

[SteveR]

You would be surprised.... knowing what I know from the business I'm in, I can tell you that the cellphone is no more secure. Yeah, a landline can be tapped, but it requires a bit more work than sucking a signal out of the air on a cellphone.

It depends on how the landline is wired. In some (most?) areas, there is just a phone terminal box that isn't even locked somewhere in the utility easement in the neighborhood. I can cut the cord on a plain handset and wire it to the terminals in that box in a minute or two and listen in. To suck a signal out of the air and demodulate then decrypt it, you have to have some fairly specialized (and expensive) equipment and the knowledge to use it.

 

[wsuffa]

It depends on how the landline is wired. In some (most?) areas, there is just a phone terminal box that isn't even locked somewhere in the utility easement in the neighborhood. I can cut the cord on a plain handset and wire it to the terminals in that box in a minute or two and listen in. To suck a signal out of the air and demodulate then decrypt it, you have to have some fairly specialized (and expensive) equipment and the knowledge to use it.

As you note, "it depends".

I'll leave it at that for the obvious reason.

 

[Everskyward]

Now that there's this, you don't even need to have reception in your house to be able to use your cell phone. All you need need is internet and you'll be able to use your cell phone and get 5 bars.

With that, I really see no reason for a landline anymore.

Except that I need a landline to get DSL. There is no cable here.

 

[SkyHog]

Except that I need a landline to get DSL. There is no cable here.

In Albuquerque, there was an option to get DSL without the landline, but it cost a slight bit more (less than the landline did).

Might be something to look into.

 

[mikea]

I have AT&T local (minimal) and DSL. Haven't talked to anyone in Pakis..., I mean Customer Service, yet. I did see that the fine-print on their DSL services says it requires a local service line. Makes sense, I guess, since the DSL is pumped over the regular phone line.
...

In most regions you can get "naked DSL" with no POTS line but it costs more so you might as well take the minimal POTS service.

 

[Everskyward]

In most regions you can get "naked DSL" with no POTS line but it costs more so you might as well take the minimal POTS service.

I agree. My landline is only about $24/month and I don't consider my cell phone service there reliable enough to get rid of it anyway.

 

[alaskaflyer]

Like others the only reason we still have a landline is because our Internet service is through DSL from the phone company, and we can't get "naked" DSL here (data without phone service.) We almost never use it and though it is in the phonebook the only people who call us on it are political organizations. I would be happy to be rid of it.

Cellular-based data here (as you might imagine) is veeerry slow otherwise I would look at that instead of DSL, even.

I always give my cell number out for transactions, accounts, etc. I don't get unsolicited calls that way (for now anyway )

 

[PilotAlan]

As an emergency management professional, I recommend people keep the most basic landline service then can, as landline service is, in my opinion, by far the most robust, most survivable, the last to go down, and the quickest usually to restore.

I have one analog phone line which runs my alarm, DishNetwork receiver, fax machine, and has an old-school plug-in phone powered off the line voltage. That's my backup communications to 911 and everything else. With minimal service packages (no long distance, no caller id, no nothing) it's cheap insurance.
It's a matter of how many points of failure do you want between you and 911 when someone's life is at risk?

 

[SkyHog]

As an emergency management professional, I recommend people keep the most basic landline service then can, as landline service is, in my opinion, by far the most robust, most survivable, the last to go down, and the quickest usually to restore.

I have one analog phone line which runs my alarm, DishNetwork receiver, fax machine, and has an old-school plug-in phone powered off the line voltage. That's my backup communications to 911 and everything else. With minimal service packages (no long distance, no caller id, no nothing) it's cheap insurance.
It's a matter of how many points of failure do you want between you and 911 when someone's life is at risk?

How many points of failure are there in a device that doesn't use wall or line voltage, can be used without active service, and in a case where a tower has broken, its usually a small drive to another area where another tower exists (read: probably faster than finding a payphone when your landline fails).

Complete power outage in the home due to fire which has eaten the walls and all wiring away. Which is more likely to work? Cellphone or Landline connected to the wiring which has just burned away?

Not being a smartass, but really, the argument that landlines are more prone to survival in emergencies doesn't hold water. A cellphone has only one point of real failure: Battery. And even then, if you're out and about, you can usually plug it into the car.

 

[gprellwitz]

As an emergency management professional, I recommend people keep the most basic landline service then can, as landline service is, in my opinion, by far the most robust, most survivable, the last to go down, and the quickest usually to restore.

I have one analog phone line which runs my alarm, DishNetwork receiver, fax machine, and has an old-school plug-in phone powered off the line voltage. That's my backup communications to 911 and everything else. With minimal service packages (no long distance, no caller id, no nothing) it's cheap insurance.
It's a matter of how many points of failure do you want between you and 911 when someone's life is at risk?

Well, at about $15/month, it's $180+/yr. About the same as the non-owned airplane insurance renewal. I could significantly increase my coverage with that money.

That said, there are certainly some redundancy benefits to it.

 

[Everskyward]

A cellphone has only one point of real failure: Battery. And even then, if you're out and about, you can usually plug it into the car.

The network can fail or be overloaded especially in a widespread emergency situation but that can also be said of landlines. That said, I can't remember ever making a 911 call from my home but I've done it a couple times from a cellphone. People didn't worry about these things before cellphones were common. Now it seems that people feel they need to have a means for contact at all times.

 

[Steve]

Immediately after Katrina the emergency response personnel, feds, state, locals, relied on ham operators and satellite phones. Cell towers were one of the first things to go. The service providers did work fast to bring in temporary equipment, but there were lapses.

OSH has had its share of overloaded cell service during previous years, too.

I'm just not important enough to be that connected, I guess.

The network can fail or be overloaded especially in a widespread emergency situation but that can also be said of landlines. That said, I can't remember ever making a 911 call from my home but I've done it a couple times from a cellphone. People didn't worry about these things before cellphones were common. Now it seems that people feel they need to have a means for contact at all times.

 

[mikea]

How many points of failure are there in a device that doesn't use wall or line voltage, can be used without active service, and in a case where a tower has broken, its usually a small drive to another area where another tower exists (read: probably faster than finding a payphone when your landline fails).

Complete power outage in the home due to fire which has eaten the walls and all wiring away. Which is more likely to work? Cellphone or Landline connected to the wiring which has just burned away?

Not being a smartass, but really, the argument that landlines are more prone to survival in emergencies doesn't hold water. A cellphone has only one point of real failure: Battery. And even then, if you're out and about, you can usually plug it into the car.

You are totally full of it, Nick. You make this argument when you're gloating about how many people can't get iPhone to stay connected and how many can't use cell phones in their own houses? Do they work inside steel framed high rises?

With a cell you need to get one of the hundreds(?) of free freqs to the tower and the tower has to be there. During 9/11 we found out how many didn't even have working standby power.

When the POTS system gets loaded during an emergency, you just have to wait maybe 30 seconds for dial tone. The power comes from huge batteries and the COs have diesel generators to kick in when needed DAYS later.

Your comparison requires the house to burn enough to melt the phone lines but not burn you or your cell phone. I hope you find a fire that cooperative.

You don't need to imagine what will happen. We've had actual disasters - 9/11, The NYC blackouts, Katrina. In all cases the mobile networks were unusable while the landlines worked a lot longer.

 

[Missa]

I'm in the same boat: minimal land line(local only) and with DSL. Kindly post results of your research on canceling land line re DSL.

HR

I have a DSL line without a landline. It was my first question to verizon when I wanted to ditch Comcast. I have no landline, don't want a landline, can I get DSL?

In my area the answer was yes.

 

[SkyHog]

You are totally full of it, Nick. You make this argument when you're gloating about how many people can't get iPhone to stay connected and how many can't use cell phones in their own houses? Do they work inside steel framed high rises?

With a cell you need to get one of the hundreds(?) of free freqs to the tower and the tower has to be there. During 9/11 we found out how many didn't even have working standby power.

When the POTS system gets loaded during an emergency, you just have to wait maybe 30 seconds for dial tone. The power comes from huge batteries and the COs have diesel generators to kick in when needed DAYS later.

Your comparison requires the house to burn enough to melt the phone lines but not burn you or your cell phone. I hope you find a fire that cooperative.

You don't need to imagine what will happen. We've had actual disasters - 9/11, The NYC blackouts, Katrina. In all cases the mobile networks were unusable while the landlines worked a lot longer.

I don't know if I'd go so far as to call myself "full of it" or to get angry about it, but have right at it.

I'll keep my cellphone and call 9-1-1 on the road when I see an emergency.

 

[cessna182b]

What issues have you had with Magic Jack?

It will only work on one account on a computer. if someone logs off that one and on to another, the magic jack goes away until you log back on
to the primary account. Sometimes it just locks up, requiring a restart.

Perhaps I have gotten used to it's quirks, but it seems to have fewer and
fewer problems as time goes on. Most of the time it works just fine.

Dave

 

[RJM62]

I use MagicJack as my "official" number, which means it's the number that I give to banks, credit card companies, department store loyalty cards, the IRS, the Census Bureau, and anyone else I have no desire to ever receive a call from. I almost never answer it.

I also have several Vonage lines for business use, which usually are set to forward to my cell phone.

Only family, friends, and a few good clients have my cell phone number.

-Rich