|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Wednesday May 13, 2009,
02:02 pm ET
FIDELITY SERVICE COMPANY, Massachusetts, May. 13 /Kim Mankaryous/ --
Is there a resurgence in the popularity of telecommunications providers that compares with
the late 1990's? The answer may surprise you. Since the crash of the Internet bubble,
struggling telecoms have seen Darwin in action as many companies were forced with the
choice of bankruptcy or forced consolidation. However, some companies chose the road less
traveled: innovation. By offering customers more for less, many small to medium size
business customers are finding that they can upgrade to integrated T1 service for the
same cost of five regular phone lines.
Min Lieu owns a small insurance agency in Massachusetts. Five years ago he signed up with
XO Communications for a TDM-based integrated T1 line for $870/month, which did not
include local or long distance calling. Recently, he was offered XO's version of
a dynamic circuit called "XO Flex" for half of the price he was already paying.
"I would have been a fool not to take the deal" stated Mr. Lieu. "I'm able to
add headcount with additional voice lines, without any increase in expense or
degradation in high-speed Internet performance."
The Integrated T1 line has two general flavors; analog and, of course, digital.
The term "trunk" is synonymous with an integrated T1 line, representing 24
bundled DS0 (regular 64KB) channels. Digital trunks form the basis technology
for dynamic integrated lines, which are capable of transporting digitized
versions of voice traffic in addition to regular data packets. This ability
of digital trunks to function in the data realm allows it the ability to
dynamically allocate traffic according to the application, allowing priority
for voice traffic and "re-claiming" that bandwidth for data transfer when the
phone call is completed. This ensures that none of the capacity of the
T1 line is ever wasted.
The irony of the new small business communications revolution is that it took so long
to gain traction. The whole idea of reclaiming inactive voice channels for data applications
is not new, and was introduced by many CLEC operators over five years ago. So why did
it take so long for SMB's to adopt the technology and make the change? One might argue
that the Internet bubble burst in 2000 shook many people's confidence in telecommunications,
one of the hardest hit industries. With so many telecoms going out of business, or merging
with other small players just to stay solvent, many customers took the "wait and see"
approach before making the decision to entrust their communications with a company not
associated with Ma Bell. Now that economic Darwinism has taken hold, the remaining companies
are attracting new customers who see the benefits of the new technology without the downside
risk of loosing service or not being able to get through to customer service in the pinch.
Until deregulation allowed smaller, hungrier telecommunications companies the
ability to compete, the United States was stuck with technologies that were quickly
becoming out of date. Now that the Bells actually have to innovate to keep up with
the smaller CLECs, customer everywhere are reaping the benefits.
But how much longer will we continue to see improved technology, services, and prices?
It's all in the hands of the Federal Communications Commission, as they have the power
to sqwash the CLECs by proxy. No wonder AT&T and Verizon are the two biggest lobbying
powers in Washington. It makes you wonder what kind of services they would be able to
offer had they plowed that money into R&D instead of politics.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
