[ih] AT&T, carterfone, the 103, and why didnt BBSs start earlier?

[mills at udel.edu (David Mills)]

Vint,

I recall that 103s were $25 per month; that's when a POTS line was 
$7.50. I used an accoustic coupler anyway. After the FCC Carterfone 
decision AT&T began offering Data Access Arrangements and offbrand 103s 
became available. I had the first DAA installation in Michigan. Ma Bell 
sent literally a fleet of cars, trucks and installers to light up the 
thing. The installers ignored my ham radio phone patch, which 
technically was illegal, but the installers didn't care. Upon returning 
to the US in 1972 I called to order a DAA and the operator asked what 
color I wanted. True story.

Dave

Vint Cerf wrote:

> I thought the bell modems were pretty expensive for residential users?
>
> v
>
> On Aug 13, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Johnny RYAN wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> This is my first posting to this list. It's a question about the Bell
>> 103 modem in 1962 and Carterfone
>>
>> If AT&T sold modems commercially since 1962 (the 103 modem), why was
>> the carterfone decision so important? I understand that the
>> introduction of the Hayes modem prompted Christensen to write XMODEM
>> and set the scene for the BBSs - but does anybody recall why these
>> things could not have happened with the Bell 103 from1962 on? Was the
>> 103 just intended for subscribers of expensive leased lines such as
>> corporations or universities?
>>
>> Best wishes to you all,
>>
>> Johnny
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> My Next Book... http://johnnyryan.wordpress.com/books/net- history-2010/
>
>