|
Courtesy of ShopforT1.com
Definition 1. -
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 Champlain T1 line is in common use today in ISP (Internet Service Provider) connections to the Internet
Definition 2. -
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 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.
|
Thursday September 11, 2008,
07:33 am ET
Champlain, New York, Sep. 11 /Jeff Johnson/ --
During the 2000 Internet bubble meltdown, the telecom industry learned the hard way that
wild spending on network infrastructure was not the best approach to attracting new business
and investment. Over the past 7 years the industry, particularly the CLECs (Competitive
Local Exchange Carriers) have been focusing on building products that offer more bang
for the buck in order to compete with the Bells in their own backyards. One product that
has become the flagship offering to small to medium size businesses is the dynamic integrated
T1 line, which combines all the usefulness of 24 regular phone lines into a singe T-1
capable of delivering high-speed broadband on the same connection.
Is the era of the analog trunk, or bundle of 24 DS-0 (64 kbps) channels,
officially over? Possibly, thanks to the two-for-the-price-of-one features
of a dynamic integrated T1, which can function exactly like a pure 1.5 mbps
data T1 when no one is one the phone, and allocate required bandwidth
for voice traffic when a user initiates a phone call. Likewise, as soon
as the client terminates the voice session, the 64 KB is re-assigned back
to the digital universe. This switch-hitting capability provides all
of the feel and function of a data T1 and voice T1, for a fraction of the price.
From 1997 to 2007, the average cost of a POTS (plain old telephone service) line from the
Bells has hovered in the $50 - $80 per month price range. During this same time period,
integrated DS1 (digital signal 1) lines - which is the equivalent of 24 standard lines -
have come down in price from $1000 per month to $400. Small to medium size businesses
who have more than 5 phone lines can now actually save money by upgrading their service.
According to a recent study conducted by PK Communications Telecom Brokers Inc., the average
cost of a POTS (plain old telephone service) line serviced by the Bells (AT&T, Verizon,
and Qwest) have changed very little over the 10 year span from 1996, the year the
Clinton Administration signed into law the Telecommunications Act, to 2006. The real
change in the industry came in the T-carrier class of products, where customers can
get up to 1.5 Mbps of bandwidth and 24 digital phone lines all in one package. Some
CLECs like XO, TelePacific, Nuvox, One Communications, and even Covad are now offering
rates well below the $550/month level, making the change seem like a no-brainer to
thousands of customers.
"Like Forrest Gump said, finding the right phone service for your business is
like a box of chocolates - you never know what you're going to get" joked
Elizabeth Forest of Detroit, Michigan. "Before finding Cavalier Telephone
through my Telarus agent, I was mislead into signing up for services that weren't
a good fit for my business. Add to that the billing inaccuracies and the hassle
it was to get everything straightened out. My new integrated T1 works flawlessly,
I am able to get full T1 data speeds when no one is on the phone, and I don't
fear opening the bill when it arrives in the mail each month."
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.
Looking in the crystal ball of the future, it is clear that new an innovated services
being offered by the few super-CLECs remaining will drive innovation higher and prices
lower. New technology is being pressed to the forefront by lower prices that the mainstream
of small businesses everywhere can comfortably afford. Will this train of innovation, lower prices, and services that add value to SMB's continue
to roll down the tracks of progress? It's all up to our government - and which political
party controls the FCC. Without the deregulation act of 1996, we would have never known
just how much the CLECs were capable of.
|