|
Courtesy of ShopforT1.com
Definition 1. -
A high-speed digital connection capable of transmitting data at a rate of approximately 1.5 million bits per second. A T1 line is typically used by small and medium-sized companies with heavy network traffic. It is large enough to send and receive very large text files, graphics, sounds, and databases instantaneously, and is the fastest speed commonly used to connect networks to the Internet. Sometimes referred to as a leased line, a T1 is basically too large and too expensive for individual home use.
Definition 2. -
The T-carrier system, introduced by the Bell system in the US in the 1960's, was the first successful system that supported digitalised voice transmission. The original transmission rate (1.544 Mbps) in the Clearwater T1 line is in common use today in ISP (Internet Service Provider) connections to the Internet
Definition 3. -
The T1 (or T-1) carrier is the most commonly used digital line in the United States, Canada, and Japan. In these countries, it carries 24 pulse code modulation (PCM) signals using time-division multiplexing (TDM) at an overall rate of 1.544 million bits per second (Mbps). T1 lines use copper wire and span distances within and between major metropolitan areas. A T1 Outstate System has been developed for longer distances between cities.
Definition 4. -
A type of high speed Internet connection that provides a great deal of bandwidth. Many businesses lease T1 lines to connect to the Internet, but because they are expensive and offer more bandwidth than most small businesses and homes need, they are not realistic solutions for small and low-demand Internet users.
|
Wednesday August 13, 2008,
05:07 am ET
Clearwater, Kansas, Aug. 13 /Hunter Sheffield/ --
For many small to medium size businesses, higher productivity with relation to their broadband
and voice services is just around the corner. Thanks in part to the recent price reduction trend
in the industry, carriers have deemed it necessary to consolidate in order to offer more services
at a lower cost than their rivals. Overlapping networks have been consolidated into leaner, more
feature-rich versions of their previous selves, dramatically lowering the price small businesses
pay for the popular dynamic integrated T-carrier (T-1) lines that combine local voice and
high-speed Internet service into one connection.
There are two basic "integrated" DS-1 configurations, analog and digital. The 24-line
bundle in which they come is termed a "trunk". The main difference between analog and
digital trunks is their flexibility. With digital trunks, voice lines not in use
can be dynamically reconfigured to carry data traffic, so they don't sit idle.
Analog trunks on the other hand can not change their function once configured
by the service provider. Data channels remain data channels and the same for
voice channels, even if there is no voice traffic.
"Even though we have been witnessing the re-consolidation of AT&T, we will never go
back to the dark ages of telecom where customers were stuck with bad customer service
and high prices" commented Troy Karlson, telecom analyst for e-STAR. "The competitive
local exchange carriers (CLECs), all whom own their own networks and compete directly
with the Bells, have created products such as dynamic T1 service that enables its
customers to connect to the Internet at 1.5 MBPS and have up to 24 regular voice lines,
packed with a feature-rich suite of add-ons, all for under what it costs to have
6 regular phone lines from Qwest/AT&T/Verizon.
One might think that, given the cost - benefit analysis of the integrated T1 value
proposition, more businesses would be changing over to the new platform. However,
the rate of adaptation is rather slow. Rob Butler, head of the Telecommunications
Research Institute, thinks that "phone companies have a problem with trust amongst
their user base. For many years, customers have dealt with increasing rates, long
hold times, and frustration in general. Now, it appears, the ice is finally starting
to melt and customers are opening themselves up to new technology.
The adoption of any new telecommunications platform is never instantaneous. Many
technologies, like VoIP for example, have been in the works for years without
gaining much traction. Enterprises see communications as their life blood. Even
though many are becoming aware of newer, cheaper mediums by which they can conduct
business, the risk still outweighs the rewards in their minds. Couple the
'if it isn't broken, why fix it?' mind set with the telecom meltdown of the early
2000's and it isn't surprising that widespread adoption of new telecom services
has lagged. However, the new technologies of IP-based voice systems are finally
starting to gain an audience, and the chorus of satisfied customers continues to
grow. As this momentum pushes forward, so does general acceptance of it viability.
"For years I've played tug-o-war with the phone company who provided voice and data
service to my toy manufacturing company" commented Troy Bergfeld of Houston Texas.
"They kept trying to sell me services I didn't need, it took them months to finally
send me a correct bill, and I wasn't able to recapture bandwidth from my T1 line
when nobody was using the phone. Now that has all changed - my Telarus product
specialist recommending I give XO Communications a try. Now I use their FLEX T1
product and I pay less and get exactly what I want. I have even add another T1
seamlessly when the time comes for my business to expand."
Recent advances in technology, fostered by competition from growing CLECs, is bringing
integrated T1 services to small business everywhere. And the trend doesn't look like
it will change anytime soon. CLECs continue to grow their networks, offering more
advanced services like metro ethernet, MPLS, and more. Hopefully the CLECs can continue to push the boundaries of innovation and economics.
The only thing that can keep them from the promise land is the gatekeeper of competition:
the Federal Communications Commission, and the huge Bells (AT&T and Verizon - that's you)
who make it a point to spend more money lobbying in Washington DC than Exxon Mobile.
|
If you would like to get a real-time 
