Thursday July 24, 2008,
09:18 pm ET
Douglas County, South Dakota, Jul. 24 /Olamide Lieberman/ --
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.
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.
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.
To see how customers are reacting to this new product, we interviewed a series of
small business owners in South Dakota who are currently using the service. One such
individual shared with us his enthusiasm for the enhanced capabilities dynamic
service offers. "When I was first contacted about the dynamic integrated T1,
I was deeply skeptical of what I was hearing. Over the course of my brief
dealings with telephone companies, all I got was less service with more cost.
Now I am happy to say that I am getting more for less, which makes for one
very happy customer."
At $50 to $75 per month, the average small business telephone customer could expect to pay
up to $750 for just 10 regular phone lines, which come with only a standard set of features
such as Voicemail, Caller ID, and Three-way calling. From 2000 to 2005, the cost of a
dynamic integrated T1 line was well over $800, making it an unattractive option from a
pure cost point of view. However, that paradigm has changed with the introduction of
sub-$400/month price plans and features that make the old POTs lines look pre-historic.
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.
CLECs are continuing to find new and loyal customers in the small business space, but
for how long will this trend continue? Will the RBOCs ever be able to give them a fight
on a level playing field? Only the FCC knows that answer to that question - all we can
do is be thankful for the past 12 years of progress and hope we never return to the
pre-1996 era of Telecommunications. Evolution has lead to a better, cheaper alternative to TDM services that the Bells were
peddling for decades in a vacuum of competition. Now the industry, lead by the innovation
and great business practices of the CLECs, seems to have turned a corner - leaving the
incumbents playing catchup. Obviously, the main benefactor of all of this competition
is the small to medium size business - a segment of the market that was taken for granted
until today.
|
|
Courtesy of ShopforT1.com
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.
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.
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 T1 line is in common use today in ISP (Internet Service Provider) connections to the Internet
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.
|