Telephony on TV [telecom]

Many businesses had trunks like this on their PBX switchboards. In some cases access was limited to the PBX attendant who had to place calls on them, in others users could dial on them using special access codes, such as 8 or 8n.

Many business people, especially high executives, had a direct line telephone that was separate from the PBX. In several offices I worked in the head man had such a phone and no one answered it if he wasn't around.

Absolutely. The Bell System strongly encouraged that business customers train their PBX attendants thoroughly in good telephone manners as well as merely how to work the keys and cords.

However, going way back PBX attendants were also gatekeepers to making outside calls. Many extensions could not dial out and needed the attendant to place any outside calls. Some companies were restrictive with even local calls, most companies were restrictive with toll calls. Often the PBX attendant dialed any toll calls and wrote up an internal charge ticket for the calling extension.

One big feature of Centrex when it came out was that each extension would get a separate toll call listing (even when ONI was used.)

Question: when did the phone company start providing machine-readable media to customers of their phone bill as an option in addition to paper? I know it was available in 1976.

The amount of 'extra service' rendered by a PBX attendant varied by each business. On large busy boards, the attendants tended to handle traffic only--connecting outside calls to the desired extension. On boards with less traffic the attendants would take messages, offer alternative extensions if one was busy, page people, etc.

Today, I find PBX service very frustrating if I need assistance. Switchboards today are so automated there is little service for a caller who needs help. For instance, if you don't know Mr. Smith's extension, you'll be asked to key in his name and it will look it up for you. If Mr. Smith isn't around you'll be routed to his voicemail.

The problem is that sometimes you don't know the proper spelling or department of the desired extension, or, the voice-mailbox is full, or the call is urgent. PBXs are supposed to have an exit to get a human, but far too often no human is available or the caller just ends up in dead air or cut off. They seem to go all out to design a system to make it as difficult as possible to get a human. I know they want to save money on labor, but it seems to me they're pushing it way too far.

(If there are any PBX administrators reading this would you share your comments on this issue?)

I remember in 1973 the city desk of a large newspaper had lots of 'space saver' ('pharmacist') telephone sets. Instead of a handset, a headset dangled from the hookswitch.

Reporters carried lots of dimes and knew the location of payphones to call in urgent stories. (In the 1960s, city reporters also carried transit tokens and a transit map to get around on the transit system).

On bitsavers, the IBM introduction to telecommunications has some early statistics of private line telegraph mileage between AT&T and Western Union. Although we thought of Western Union as the 'telegraph company', AT&T had a substantial amount of mileage, both switched and dedicated.

Both AT&T and Western Union would advertise large corporate and government private Teletype networks they operated. These included the Pennsylvania State Police, US Steel Corp, and the national Blue Cross/Blue Shield. In the 1960s WU installed a large system for the US Air Force.

For various reasons, many businesses had a news teletype in the office, well into the 1980s (the old dark green Teletype). Stock brokers had it alongside the stock ticker to give business news. Businesses that were weather-sensitive had weather information.

WU literature made a big deal of their ability to quickly set up telegraph lines to cover major sports events, political conventions, and other big news stories.

(Old copies of a WU general newsletter are available on disk from the WU retirees association. Interesting stuff, but about an era that is long gone. WU was proud of the many branch offices located in smaller cities and towns. Sadly, today many of those old business districts have fallen on hard times*).

The Phila department stores had, at least in the 1960s, Bell provided systems, included tie lines connecting all the stores (downtown and branches). This way if a customer wanted something that was out of stock, a clerk could call the equivalent department in another branch and see if the item was available.

(As an aside, when I was little I get lost in a branch department store. They took me to the PBX room where the attendants were very nice to me while they paged my mother "we have a little lost boy...". Even though it was a branch store, there were at least two operators, maybe three. Also a bag of jelly beans.)

When they got Centrex the phone book listings were detailed with the direct dial number of every department of the store. I think today they discourage customers from calling the sales floor.

Department stores had separate "order turret" lines for sales-by- phone.

  • When I read an old article about a business district, I look it up on Google Street View to compare the photos of then and now. Only once did I see a "Main Street" that hadn't changed--and that was because the 1950s Main Street was rundown already. In the 1950s view, it was clear the people seen were poor, and the main corner had a big pawn shop on it. The current view isn't much changed, and the pawn shop is still in business under the same name.
Reply to
HAncock4
Loading thread data ...

Is this what the "malicious call trace" feature which is seen on many modern PBXs does?

[Moderator snip]
Reply to
Justin Goldberg

No. All a PBX can do is issue the standard 'Vertical Service Code' for a 'customer originated trace' request. (AFAIK, this is not an actual _physical_ traceback through all the switches, but a capture of the originating 'caller-ID' info (even if the suppress flag is set), and the 'ANI' fields from the SS7 call-set-up packets.)

A full-blown 'lock and trace' takes explicit advance arrangement with the LEC, with special CPE to generate the request, and explicit enabling of the 'recognition' for that request at the C.O.

The lock & trace is still labor intensive, because it requires a tech to access the console of the destination switch, find the incoming circuit that matches the outgoing circuit to the customer, and then either repeat the process for each 'upstream' switch that that tech can access, or to contact another tech who _does_ have access to that upstream switch. It's a lot easier then when one actually had to 'follow the wires' through an electromechanical C.O., but it's not exactly trivial. There's no telling how may different 'telephone companies' may be involved in handling a single call, and it will take a minimum of one tech from -each- company to complete the actual trace. This just one of the reasons telcos "resist" doing actual lock & trace these days.

Reply to
Robert Bonomi

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.