Steven Lichter wrote:
>> As you said when TSPS systems came online things changed. I worked a
>> lot of the TSPS conversons, the directors had to be modified and
>> tested then we had to move 800 and payphone detection systems and
>> convert them for TSPS. As the changes were made fewer and fewer
>> offices Toll offices and a few remotes. ... I
>> remember some of the operators coing into the CO to see what we were
>> doing, they were either very young kids or older woman who had been
>> operators for years, they were transfere to other offices and jobs, it
>> was really said.
> Both veteran operators and Brooks' "Telephone" said TSP/TSPS wasn't as
> satisfying as cord switchboards. TSP did all the interesting stuff
> automatically. From the company's and customer's viewpoint, it was
> much more efficient. Occassionally, they still had to 'build up' a
> call by relay the old fashioned way. One time I had trouble placing a
> call and the operator did that for me, it was interesting to listen.
> I wonder if they can (or would) do that today.
> For some reason, my home exchange was served by two types of
> operators. If we just dialed zero, we got a older toll & assist
> cord board in one location. But if we dialed 0+ or 1+ from a
> payphone, we went to a TSP office in a different location. That TSP
> did not handle plain 0 calls for some reason even though it was part
> of the design. (One other quirk we had: local Info was 411, long
> distance was 1+ac+555-1212. But distant Info within the area code
> (short range toll calls) was explicitly stated to go through 0.
> Then they went to 555-1212 for local Info (to discourage use). Now
> we're back to 411 for everything. I don't know when they hit you > with a charge.)
>> The same came as we converted our offices to EAX.
> The good old days. What's "EAX"?
>>(c) 2005 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot in Hell Co.
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Traditional Bell had a habit of
> always using an 'X' to mean 'e(X)change', as in PBX (P)rivate
> (B)ranch e(X)change, FX as in (F)oreign E(X)change, and PAX as
> (P)rivate (A)utomatic e(X)change. An exception was FAX as in
> (FACS)imile Service. But you asked about EAX which was (E)lectronic
> (A)utomatic e(X)change, or another name for an electronic and
> automated switchboard. Of course there is also CENTREX or a
> (C)entral Office e(X)change. The only difference between a PBX and a
> PAX is the former involved an operator at a manual cordboard in a
> company and the latter was the same thing but an 'automated
> switchboard'. I am not well-versed enough to tell you what small
> distinction there was between EAX, PAX and PBX but I guess there was
> something. After all, Bell was always right about everything,
> weren't they? PAT]
I would guess that is they had to do a relay to local operators it could be done.
EAX was Automatic Electric's version of an analog electronic switch, they had an EAX1 and for a short while an EAX2, plus AE Canada had a C1 EAX, we had one of those in here in Califoria, big error, they were made for very small offices.
The only good spammer is a dead one!! Have you hunted one down today? (c) 2005 I Kill Spammers, Inc. A Rot in Hell Co.