On Sun, 11 May 2008 18:27:54 GMT, Beachcomber wrote:

> For younger readers who might not perhaps be aware of the history, the
> name AT&T is an attempt to invoke the feelings of quality,
> reliability, and high standards of telephone service that existed
> since before 1900 and lasted well into the 1970's before the big
> break-up. The AT&T Corporation provided something like 80 to 90% of
> the local telephone service in this USA and near 100% of the long
> distance service.
>
> Everyone from the operators to the local installers were long-term
> experienced employees rigidly drilled in providing good customer
> service. It was a bureaucracy to be sure, but the people sure did
> know their stuff.
>
> These new AT&T companies exist as AT&T in name only. I've found that
> many of the service people at AT&T Wireless don't even know how to
> work the features on their own cell phones.

I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right out of
college and can support this statement. All equiment we designed and built
was to meet an operating life of 20 years minimum. The Bell telephones
used at home and in phone booths also met this standard. They were built
like a brick. Service was great, and call clarity was excellant.

Then our government broke up AT&T, and the downhill slide began. Cheap
imported phones were allowed on your home lines, introducing service quality
degradation. Competition spurned cost cutting on both the hardware and
customer support side. We all know the state of the landline telephone
service today. No wonder most young people don't even get a landline
phone, what with the costs of owning one. Nuiscence charges, stupid taxes,
and charges for options like voicemail that cellular carriers offer for
free.

FWIW, the only landline phone I have is for my business. The main house
phone is VOIP, and my family uses cell phones for other calls.