NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/uk/telecom/41

Text File | 1992-11-20 | 3.7 KB | 80 lines

Newsgroups: uk.telecom
Path: sparky!uunet!unipalm!keith
From: [e-mail] (Keith Mitchell)
Subject: Re: Cordless Phones recommendation provided
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Unipalm Ltd., 216 Cambridge Science Park, Cambridge CB4 4WA, UK
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 13:51:12 GMT
Lines: 69

[e-mail] (Tim Steele) writes:

>...or you could wait 6 months for the Rabbit handsets to be sold off
>for peanuts when the whole system is declared a failure.

>Callpoint (CT2) technology failed miserably last time round, and this
>time it's very similar - admittedly there's only one firm offering it
>instead of three, but let's face it: now that a cellphone (Motorola)
>can be had for #80 + VAT *without* a mandatory airtime contract, and
>the low-use rental is #15 per month, what kind of leg do Rabbit have
>to stand on?  (A rabbit leg, presumably.)

>At half the #200 price tag, their phones might be attractive for
>in-home use only.  The use-it-anywhere concept is doomed to failure,
>just like it was last time.  You can't receive calls on them; they
>only work within 200m or so of a call point.  Why should people buy
>them?

I'm not inured to the risks of buying the kit, it will make a nice
in-house/office system even if the whole public service collapses.

However, some reasons why I think Rabbit have got it more right than
Callpoint/Phonepoint/Zonephone et al:

- They are marketing the phones as an at-home package first, public
  service second. The latter should be able to build on the former.
  Previous attempts were done the other way round.
- They have implemented the CAI interface, instead of there being multiple
  mutually incompatible standards.
- There is no competition or confusion from multiple service providers. In fact,
  Rabbit seem to be making use of kit abandoned by the other defunct providers.
- Rabbit/Hutchinson have a PCN licence. They have a commitment to builing
  a market share, and an infrastructure, some of which it makes sense to
  be shared between PCN and CT2. I would like to think there will be some
  upgrade path from CT2 to PCN, especially if the former fails.
- Their providing a pager and voicemail gets around the problem of not
  being able to call the mobile to some extent.

Also, some reasons why I like using my Rabbit better than Cellphones:

- Much better speech quality. My dodgy hearing can often barely cope with the
  appaling crunch that is cellphone communication.
- Much better battery life. You can talk on a Rabbit for around two hours,
  try doing this a cellphone. What's more, in an emergency, you can run a Rabbit
  off any old 1.4V dry cells. You can leave a pager switched on for
  much longer than a cellphone.
- Try using a cellphone on an Underground platform, or in a computer room !

I'm not claiming that CT2 is a superior form of communication to cellphones or
anything else. I just think it has some good points that suit me personally,
and it's not all a dead loss.

There are some things Rabbit are getting wrong though:

- Retail availability of the kit is dreadful. The only place that seemed to *want*
  to supply one to me was Mandarin.
- There is not very good marking of where Telepoints are. There are many
  functioning Telepoints not marked, and marked Telepoints that do not function.
  The only directory is for the Manchester area, and its format is next to useless.

Ask me again in a year if it was good idea buying it....

Keith Mitchell

Public IP Exchange             [e-mail]
216 The Science Park           [e-mail]
Cambridge, UK                  [e-mail]    (non-IP JANET sites)
Phone: [phone]
Fax:   [phone]