<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Phone Holder Has Bell in Base</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/</link>
	<description>Yesterday's tomorrow, today.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 22:56:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: g510</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048299</link>
		<dc:creator>g510</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Mar 2008 15:53:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048299</guid>
		<description>First a bit of history, and then, a surprise.  

What you are looking at there, is Automatic Electric type 34 Monophone.  In fact the first self-contained combined sets (with ringer in the base of the telephone rather than mounted on the wall) were made in Europe by L.M. Ericsson and its licensees. These were the classic "French phones" but they were actually Swedish, while at the time, the French "P et T" (Postes et Telegraphes) used a design wherein the bell box was mounted in a central point in the house and the telephone sets did not contain bells.  The first American self-contained set was made by Automatic Electric and consisted of a type 1A Monophone handset cradle mounted atop a ringer box: not unlike the Norwegian version of the "French phone," however it did not catch on in the USA.  
.
The type 34 Monophone did catch on, in part due to clever publicity including a photo of Shirley Temple using a light-colored phone of that type (they were available in something like six different colors even in the 1930s, though at added cost, so most people chose black).  

And now I have a little surprise for y'all preceding commenters who seem to think that today's whizzy new cellphones are such a great advance in technology.  They're not.  In fact, in terms of sond quality, they stink.  

The AE type 34 Monophone SOUNDS BETTER THAN TODAY'S CELLPHONES.  Yes, really.  I've done tests with this specific type of telephone and another of similar vintage (Western Electric type 202), wired up together through a mechanical dial circuit, just to prove the point.  People talking over these things from opposite ends of a building (so they can't hear each other through the walls) understand each other better and never have to ask each other to repeat a word or phrase.  There is no "huh? what did you say?"  There is no "I'm sorry I didn't hear you."  And needless to say, calls are never cut off in mid sentence. 

Neener-neener-neener!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First a bit of history, and then, a surprise.  </p>
<p>What you are looking at there, is Automatic Electric type 34 Monophone.  In fact the first self-contained combined sets (with ringer in the base of the telephone rather than mounted on the wall) were made in Europe by L.M. Ericsson and its licensees. These were the classic &#8220;French phones&#8221; but they were actually Swedish, while at the time, the French &#8220;P et T&#8221; (Postes et Telegraphes) used a design wherein the bell box was mounted in a central point in the house and the telephone sets did not contain bells.  The first American self-contained set was made by Automatic Electric and consisted of a type 1A Monophone handset cradle mounted atop a ringer box: not unlike the Norwegian version of the &#8220;French phone,&#8221; however it did not catch on in the USA.<br />
.<br />
The type 34 Monophone did catch on, in part due to clever publicity including a photo of Shirley Temple using a light-colored phone of that type (they were available in something like six different colors even in the 1930s, though at added cost, so most people chose black).  </p>
<p>And now I have a little surprise for y&#8217;all preceding commenters who seem to think that today&#8217;s whizzy new cellphones are such a great advance in technology.  They&#8217;re not.  In fact, in terms of sond quality, they stink.  </p>
<p>The AE type 34 Monophone SOUNDS BETTER THAN TODAY&#8217;S CELLPHONES.  Yes, really.  I&#8217;ve done tests with this specific type of telephone and another of similar vintage (Western Electric type 202), wired up together through a mechanical dial circuit, just to prove the point.  People talking over these things from opposite ends of a building (so they can&#8217;t hear each other through the walls) understand each other better and never have to ask each other to repeat a word or phrase.  There is no &#8220;huh? what did you say?&#8221;  There is no &#8220;I&#8217;m sorry I didn&#8217;t hear you.&#8221;  And needless to say, calls are never cut off in mid sentence. </p>
<p>Neener-neener-neener!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stannous</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048042</link>
		<dc:creator>Stannous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 20:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048042</guid>
		<description>I saw a woman in a restaurant using one of these:
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/cellphone/7830/?cpg=cj

Of course her ringtone was an old-style phone ringing</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw a woman in a restaurant using one of these:<br />
<a href="http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/cellphone/7830/?cpg=cj" rel="nofollow">http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadge.....30/?cpg=cj</a></p>
<p>Of course her ringtone was an old-style phone ringing</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roflcopter</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048003</link>
		<dc:creator>Roflcopter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:08:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048003</guid>
		<description>oh upsi... bbbb...bbbase.. not ccccase... too much work.. sry ^^</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh upsi&#8230; bbbb&#8230;bbbase.. not ccccase&#8230; too much work.. sry ^^</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roflcopter</title>
		<link>http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048002</link>
		<dc:creator>Roflcopter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Mar 2008 13:06:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2008/03/06/phone-holder-has-bell-in-base/#comment-1048002</guid>
		<description>No way!... its... in the ... base... the bell is... in the case... and all other stuff which is not handle... is ... in the .. case... ;-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No way!&#8230; its&#8230; in the &#8230; base&#8230; the bell is&#8230; in the case&#8230; and all other stuff which is not handle&#8230; is &#8230; in the .. case&#8230; <img src='http://blog.modernmechanix.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';-)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
