|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
The Evolution of Integrated T1 Service
Friday October 31, 2008,
09:16 am ET
LINWOOD, Maryland, Oct. 31 /Kiersten Thomas/ --
For many small to medium size businesses, higher productivity with relation to their broadband
and voice services is just around the corner. Thanks in part to the recent price reduction trend
in the industry, carriers have deemed it necessary to consolidate in order to offer more services
at a lower cost than their rivals. Overlapping networks have been consolidated into leaner, more
feature-rich versions of their previous selves, dramatically lowering the price small businesses
pay for the popular dynamic integrated T-carrier (T-1) lines that combine local voice and
high-speed Internet service into one connection.
Maryland is a place that we found was a hot spot for small business owners
making the move over to dynamic T-1 lines. One business owner that we interviewed
gave glowing reviews of his move to TelePacific's "OnePac" dynamic product.
Keith Gray explained "I used to have a regular integrated T1 with 10 voice
lines and 14 data channels. When no one was using the phone in my office,
we were limited to just 896 KB of bandwidth. After searching on the Internet
for better options, I found that I could reduce my price from $850/month to
$500/month, and at the same time have 14 voice lines and 1.5 mbps of broadband.
I didn't take long for me to pull the trigger and make the change."
There are two basic "integrated" DS-1 configurations, analog and digital. The 24-line
bundle in which they come is termed a "trunk". The main difference between analog and
digital trunks is their flexibility. With digital trunks, voice lines not in use
can be dynamically reconfigured to carry data traffic, so they don't sit idle.
Analog trunks on the other hand can not change their function once configured
by the service provider. Data channels remain data channels and the same for
voice channels, even if there is no voice traffic.
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.
Will this train of innovation, lower prices, and services that add value to SMB's continue
to roll down the tracks of progress? It's all up to our government - and which political
party controls the FCC. Without the deregulation act of 1996, we would have never known
just how much the CLECs were capable of.
Change does not happen quickly in an industry as so heavily regulated as Telecommunications.
Recent industry consolidation has provided huge alternatives to the incumbents, who
are now under pressure to keep up with new technologies while charging better prices
to retain and attract new customer bases.
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
