Hi All, The discussion of universal service is certainly being aired out! While reading my 39 email messages today an interesting article popped up that I felt was relevent... So much of the rhetoric is in comparison to the traditional "definition" of universal service that we all have come to recognize as "picking up the phone -- dialing a number -- and someone answers". The service should be available to anyone "universally". Next we get bogged down in what is "technology" and how does all this internet and computer based rhetoric related to our traditional "definition". I continue to "lurk" on the us-nd listserver and jump to the next message... Another of my listservers (Money Daily) supplies my next input... What's today's subject? "Web-phone breakthrough: Look Ma, no computer!" As I read along I'm stopped by a quote in the article from a FCC lawyer... "Neither service will affect the Federal Communications Commission's hands-off attitude toward web-phones, according to Kevin Werbach, an FCC attorney." Now I ask you? ... How universal is an internet phone? ... I suggest the FCC adopt a hands-on attitude toward digital technologies and make universal service at least an internet phone. I'll quote a portion of todays Money Daily listserver message for details: "===================================================================== >Subject: MONEY Daily: Web-phone breakthrough: Look Ma, no computer! >X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN > >Weekend, August 31-September 2, 1996 > >Web-phone breakthrough: Look Ma, no computer! > >Two new Internet long-distance services let you >place a call ... with your telephone > >by Tripp Reynolds > >Two companies about to enter the Web-phone market >have succeeded in disconnecting telephony >technology from your computer. LATIC and AlphaNet >Telecom, Inc. (Toronto exchange: FAX) are >developing services they hope to roll out before >the end of the year that let users place phone-to- >phone Internet calls. Current Web-phone services >require a computer-to-computer or computer-to-phone >connection. > >"The possibilities of eliminating the computer and >the pipe and going phone-to-phone are enormous," >says Ted Julian, an Internet analyst for IDC >Communications. "The big difference between these >guys going phone-to-phone instead of computer-to- >computer is the market potential -- a lot more >people have phones than computers." > >The new services, LATIC's Latcall and AlphaNet's >UniPost, are both uncharacteristically easy to use, >although at this point, UniPost is the slicker and >more refined of the two. Since no computer >knowledge is required, either Latcall or UniPost >can be used by just about anyone. > >Here's how it works. You pick up the telephone, >dial into a gateway-server, enter an account number >or a credit card number, and then dial the phone >number. The process is similar to making a credit >card phone call; UniPost even guides you through >these steps with an electronic voice prompt. > >On the back-end the two services operate >differently. The LATIC gateway-server, one end >plugged into the phone network and the other >plugged into the Internet, routes the call over the >Web to another of the company's servers, which then >taps back into the phone network and rings the >appropriate phone. > >"That's an interesting way of approaching Internet >telephony," says Peter Andrew, a research analyst >for A.G. Edwards. "LATIC certainly could be on to >something. It could be especially attractive to >corporations that can afford to put servers in >different branch offices." > >IDC's Julian agrees, adding: "Business have shown >an interest in this technology, and they are >probably the low-hanging fruit here. They have >already built intranets for e-mail, document >sharing and what-not. If you can add a little >bandwidth and some servers and get voice, that's >pretty cool. You wouldn't pay AT&T at all unless >that's who you buy your Internet bandwidth from." > >Andrew points out that one of the advantages LATIC >has over original Web phones is its separation from >on-line service providers. "If you were using AOL >during its recent blackout, you wouldn't have been >able to use your phone for 16 hours." The downside, >he says, is that LATIC would have to put one of its >gateway servers in just about every local calling >exchange in the country. > >AlphaNet hopes to avoid this problem by leasing >large chunks of the Internet's infrastructure from >Sprint, according to Charles Mathews, vice-chairman >of AlphaNet. Mathews cites two advantages to this >approach. First, AlphaNet is able to cordon off its >area of the Internet from other traffic, which >increases the service's sound quality (when the >Internet is congested with heavy usage, voice calls >typically suffer because they have to be >transmitted without interruption in order to sound >intelligible). Second, AlphaNet doesn't need to >place servers in every nook and cranny around the >world. Where ever the Internet goes, so goes >UniPost, providing, of course, that AlphaNet comes >up with the necessary funds to rent the lines from >Sprint. > >For ease of use, the new services outperform most >of the current Web-phones, simply by providing >phone-to-phone service. Besides being frustrating >to set up, software versions of Web-phones can be >inconvenient to use. Configuration and >compatibility issues often necessitate the use of a >real phone or lots of e-mail to set up a time and >place to make a Web-phone call, which seems to >defeat the purpose. > >We tested Latcall and UniPost using the telephones >here at Money Online. The sound quality was >surprisingly clear and free of the electronic >squawks, hisses and disconnects normally associated >with Internet telephony. Two relatively minor >drawbacks: a slight lag between the time one person >speaks and the other one hears it, and a signal >that's somewhat weaker than a regular telephone >call (a problem we were able to solve by turning up >the volume on our phones). > >Overall, though, LATIC and AlphaNet offer the first >Web-phone services that begin to rival the quality >of the traditional long-distance carriers. But you >get what you pay for. Unlike other Web-phones, >Latcall and UniPost won't be free. Currently, the >pricing structure for Latcalls are set at $0.05- >$0.08 a minute for a domestic U.S. call. AlphaNet >has not finalized a pricing structure for UniPost, >but they will charge what the market will bear, >according to Mathews. > >Neither service will affect the Federal >Communications Commission's hands-off attitude >toward Web-phones, according to Kevin Werbach, an >FCC attorney. But he adds: "The technology is >evolving in a lot of ways. It's not only becoming >more convenient, but the quality is also becoming >better. That will affect the penetration rate. As >the penetration goes up and the usage goes up, it >may eventually change the way the FCC views >telephony." > >So how can you make one of these calls? Neither one >is ready for broad use at this point, but of the >two services, LATIC's is more geared toward home >users. AlphaNet, according to Mathews, is going >after corporate and business clients first, >although he hasn't ruled out making the service >available to individuals. You can visit AlphaNet's >Web site at http://www.alphanet.net to get more >information on how to use UniPost. > >The first step to making a Latcall is to wait until >late September when it is scheduled to become >commercially available. LATIC only has two servers >working right now, one in Washington and one in San >Francisco. But the company expects to have 10 >servers in operation and a Web site (now under >construction at www.latic.com) where you can sign >up for the service by the time it launches. > ===============================================" In conclusion, I ask again; how universal is an internet phone? Comments? Gene Chesser Independent Consultant President Texas ISDN Users Group ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J. E. "Gene" Chesser chesser@tiug.org http://www.ph.utexas.edu/~chesser Voice (915) 646-2116 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~