May 9, 2015 at 6:35 am
Sergiy (5/8/2015)
There are no "local" calls from mobiles - you do realise that, right?Mobiles do only "long distance" and "international" calls.
Every single call from a mobile phone starts with "0", at least in Spain and UK.
Your experience with mobile networks is irrelevant to the discussion.
Can we agree on this?
No, we can't.
You've made three incorrect statements there:
(1) every call from a mobile starts with 0 in Spain - that's pure nonsense, so utterly wrong as to be laughable.
(2) every call from a mobile starts with a 0 in the UK - that's actually incorrect, but an easy mistake to make, and the treatment of these numbers (for example the UK numbers that on a landline would begin 0800 have to be dialled on mobile as beginning 800) is irrelevant to this discussion.
(3) Mobile phones are irrelevant to this discussion: they are actually relevant, look at for example O2 UK mobile PAYG tariffs: they have national calls, international calls, and another class (not called "local", but the name is irrelevant) which introduces the same problem that your NZ providers claim is insoluble since it can be called prefixed by the international code.
Clearly you haven't a clue - can we agree on that?
You've also made an invalid assumption:
(4) You think I'm talking only about mobile phones. But mobile phones are only mentioned because they are what caused me to find out that always using the country and area code (from landlines as well as from mobiles) wouldn't affect the cost so I could save myself trouble by standardizing on the form of number I record in contact lists - numbers with country code, area code, and local number all present, so that the phones used on my land lines also store the international codes and the area codes. And they, like the mobiles, transmit all of those codes, the only analysis any of them does is to replace + by 00 (in the UK and Spain).
In Spain only international calls using numbers incorporating a country code start with a 0 and this applies whether the calls are made from a mobile or from a landline. As far as I know Spain doesn't have a local call concept, but I use a tariff where national calls to landlines are free and Telefonica doesn't charge me for those calls from my Spanish landline although they all the calls I make include a country code and I can hear the phone send it on the line; so Telefonica (or Movistar, if they've changed the name - they have been shuffling things around a bit, some of their services which used to use the Telefonica name now use the Movistar name) can solve the problem that your NZ suppliers claim is insoluble.
In the UK, certain functional "area codes" can only be dialled on the a mobile by NOT prefixing the area code with 0. As these "area codes" can't be called internationally (whether from mobiles or from fixed lines) they aren't relevant to the discussion and the numbers which use these area codes can't be called without using the area codes they aren't relevant to the discussion.
The same applies to my landline phones in the UK (for which the provider is BT) - I get charged at local, national, or appropriate international rate according to the destination of my call, although the numbers recorded in by my fixed, non-mobile, phone all include the international codes and the area codes (since I transfer the contacts lisst to the phones from my laptop, which has to be able to call them from wherever I am) and I know the phones dial the international and area codes because I can hear them doig it. So BT can handle the problem that your NZ suppliers claim is too difficult.
I think that totally debunks the argument that it is too hard for suppliers to apply the appropriate tariff according to where the (landline) call is directed to (and/or from) unless the international code and (for some calls) the area code is left off the dialling information provided by the phone to avoid a higher tariff being applied. Since NZ is presumably using reasonably modern equipment it looks as if any claim that NZ suppliers make that they can't do this is just an attempt to conceal the fact that there is no technical obstacle to doing it and they are avoiding doing it for commercial reasons, fully aware that the extra money they make will be coming from the most vulnerable in society.
Finally, in the UK, how mobile calls are classified depends on the network provider. It doesn't matter whether one of those is called local or is called something else. Some providers have only two call types: international and national. The one I use has three call types: home national, national, and international. The home national calls are those made from my home zone (quite a large area) to any ordinary UK landline or to cell phones with the same network provider as me. I get UK calls in that type at the appropriate tariff (currently free) even if I prefix them with 0044 (whether typed using +44 or 0044 or stored in the phone as as +44 or as 0044) when I call them from my home zone, so (a) either the phone or the provider handles the problem you claim NZ providers can't and (b) the multiple tariffs make the cell phone relevant to this discussion and (b) according to you I can deduce from that that the phone handles the problem and doesn't transmit the 0044 code, but I can hear it transmit 0044 it (not 0) before the area code.
Tom
May 14, 2015 at 8:59 pm
TomThomson (5/9/2015)
Clearly you haven't a clue - can we agree on that?
You seem to get excited too easily.
Probably worth talking to a shrink.
Of course, I'm not an expert with phone dialing rules in every country in the world, but you're not either.
Last time when I exposed your ignorance regarding long distance charges when using an area code I included the reference to a telephone provider page explaining how does it actually work.
I think it would be a simple courtesy if you'd try to do the same when you think I'm not correct about something.
You've also made an invalid assumption:
(4) You think I'm talking only about mobile phones. But mobile phones are only mentioned because they are what caused me to find out that always using the country and area code (from landlines as well as from mobiles) wouldn't affect the cost so I could save myself trouble by standardizing on the form of number I record in contact lists - numbers with country code, area code, and local number all present, so that the phones used on my land lines also store the international codes and the area codes. And they, like the mobiles, transmit all of those codes, the only analysis any of them does is to replace + by 00 (in the UK and Spain).
can we have any proof of this?
I think that totally debunks the argument that it is too hard for suppliers to apply the appropriate tariff according to where the (landline) call is directed to (and/or from) unless the international code and (for some calls) the area code is left off the dialling information provided by the phone to avoid a higher tariff being applied.
There is no argument is it too hard or not too hard.
I showerd you how it is.
And I know that's how it is in Australia, RSA, Russia, Ukraine, Poland (not so sure, have no update for several years), etc.
Feel free to go to the telco's in those countries and fix these imperfections of the world, but till then - we all (and the systems we develop) have to deal with that particular way of dialing the phone numbers.
Finally, in the UK, how mobile calls are classified depends on the network provider.
1st - we agreed that mobiles are irrelevant to the discussion.
2nd - you're talkiong about charging plans. It's irrelevant to the discussion either.
My neighbour's business is on a phone-broadband plan from probider which applies the same charges to local and long distance calls.
Does it mean his phones dial number differently from the ones in the next door office which pay extra for long distance calls? Obviously not.
Some retail networks here run "No GST Weekend" campains - "You do not pay GST on this weekend purchases".
Does it mean they have some kind of temporary exemption from this mandatory tax?
Of course, not.
So, please, do not confuse marketing and billing features with technicalities of phone dialing.
even if I prefix them with 0044 (whether typed using +44 or 0044 or stored in the phone as as +44 or as 0044) when I call them from my home zone
Let's pretend you're a Russian who's coming to visit his online friend Tom Thompson.
You have Tom's office phone number recorded in your phone according to the Russian dialing rules:
8P10 44 {Tom's area code} {Tom's land line number}
Try to enter this number into your phone and dial it.
I'd really appreciate if you share the outcome of this little experiment.
_____________
Code for TallyGenerator
Viewing 2 posts - 76 through 76 (of 76 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply