Monday July 28, 2008,
09:22 am ET
Emery, South Dakota, Jul. 28 /Kim Mankaryous/ --
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.
Ultimately it all comes down to basic economics. Whenever a technology can offer
more features for less money that what businesses are currently paying, it's just
a matter of time before the flood gates open up with companies wanting to adapt
the new standard. According to the Telecommunications Research Institute, headquartered
in Miami, Florida, the mass migration to dynamic integrated service offerings
is only being held back by a lack of education and/or the ability of carriers to
reach their target market. "Most people are leery of advertising and solicitations
by phone company salesman." comment Bill Bradley, analyst.
"The marriage of lower price points and feature-rich T-1 services have made it so that
customers can now get more bang for less buck" observed Kent Stallions, telecom expert
at PK Communications. "The good old days of the Bells charging people $50/month for
regular POTs lines without them having another alternative are over. With the advent
of sub-$450 dynamic integrated T1 service, businesses are able to get up to 1.5 Mbps
of Internet connectivity and 24 phone lines all in one package, for less than what they
pay now for 5 regular phone lines" Stallions continued.
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.
Prior to the advent of the "all digital" integrated T-1 in 2005, customers only had
one choice when it came to dedicated service: analog trunks (24 line bundles).
Not only where analog trunks expensive - the average cost ranging from $800 to
$1500 per month depending on the user's geographic proximity to the LECs point
of presence - they could not re-allocate unused voice channels to carry data.
Digital trunks, on the other hand, can reclaim voice lines not in use and put
them to work carrying high-speed data packets. That means users enjoy the full
1.5 Mbps of broadband when they are not on the phone.
"Commercial telecommunication providers were never on my Christmas card list"
commented Jake Chang, a small business owner in Denver, Colorado. "Dealing with them
meant erroneous bills, long wait times when trying to reach customer service, and
taxes I could never understand. Now that we migrated to a dynamic integrated
T1, my phone lines and high speed internet are bundled into one line with super
reliability. Not to mention the fact that XO Communications, a CLEC, treats me
like they actually want my business - not like I'm a pain in the you-know-what."
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. Until deregulation allowed smaller, hungrier telecommunications companies the
ability to compete, the United States was stuck with technologies that were quickly
becoming out of date. Now that the Bells actually have to innovate to keep up with
the smaller CLECs, customer everywhere are reaping the benefits.
|
|
Courtesy of ShopforT1.com
Definition 1. -
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 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 Emery T1 line is in common use today in ISP (Internet Service Provider) connections to the Internet
Definition 3. -
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 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.
|
Welcome to our real-time 
