Talk:Area code
 | This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page: • Telephone numbering plan Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:Telephone numbering plan |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Comments
[edit]Removed "The United States is stuck with 3 digit area codes, because it was one of the first countries to have area codes and is so stuck with old technology." because it didn't sound NPOV and IMO was not correct.
Perhaps it ought to have said that fixed number of digits in the area code or that the subscribers number is fixed at 7 digits and can not be extended to 8 digits as has been done recently in London. See ["http://www.lincmad.com/whynot8.html"].
I haven't heard of the plan that was described for adding a 9; if this exists, I believe it is at most still a proposal.
Somewhere this article should explain (better) why NPAs fill up.
Personally, I think we should think about unallocating unused numbers, usused being any number which is not published for dial-in. For example, many companies have a block of numbers in a roll-over group, of which they only use one. Modems used for dial-out only. Perhaps (to make the phone companies happy) we could charge for having a number. But for now in most cases the telcos don't differentiate between a circuit and a phone number (T1s and other high volume circuits being the exception).
Eventually I'd like to see the numbers we have to remember reduced, perhaps by some form of global LDAP style service enabled from phone sets. Instead of having to remember (or ever know) Fred's number at work, I just press the speed dial button on my phone for fred@work and if the phone doesn't know the number it looks it up. - Justfred
Is it really that hard for the U.S. to switch the number of digits in their telephone numbers? In Australia around 5 years ago all fixed lines went from being 6-7 digits to being 8 digits long, and most of the area codes got reassigned (we went from 100 odd area codes to about 5). If we can do it, why can't Americans? Surely we can't have better telephone switches than they do? -- SJK
Yes. In the US we have an enormous amount of infrastructure built up around 10-digit numbers, especially in computer programs that processes phonecalls. Maybe I just think about this because it would affect me (I create phone bills using data from PBXs or telcos). But the big deal is we really don't NEED to add digits, if we handled the numbers we're handing out now properly. There are plenty of phone numbers out there assigned in monster blocks of 10,000 when only a few hundred are used - but when the phone companies "run out" and have to add area codes or eventually add digits they blame it on consumers with faxes, modems and cellphones so we'll buy off on the expense of having to convert stationary, old phone equipment, etc. --Justfred
Is there a reason area code also exists? -- Minesweeper 06:08 19 May 2003 (UTC)
Just history. The two articles contain slightly different info but they should be merged and one of them made into a redirect. -- Derek Ross 06:16 19 May 2003 (UTC)
"areacode"
[edit]The usage and topic of areacode is under discussion, see Talk:Areekode -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:16, 18 October 2015 (UTC)