10 Digit Numbers Coming, and a new Area Code

[FlamesKickAss]

so then in 5-10 years give calgary a new area code, cant be that hard

[4X4]

As much as I want to be annoyed by this, I can't. It's unfeasible for area codes to define geograpical anymore. Remember when Bonavista was 278 XXXX and Woodbine was 281 XXXX? Not anymore. They gave it up because people want to take their phone numbers with them. Well now, people take their numbers with them because it's assigned to a cell phone in their pocket.

Even if they did do what you guys are talking about, they'll need to further split area codes again in a few years. What would annoy you more: having to face the future and start remembering 10 digits, or getting a call in 5 years telling you that your area code is changing, so call your friends and get new cards.

[worth]

I have an idea to double the amount of numbers in Alberta.

Assign 1 phone number for every 2 people!

Whoever answers the phone first gets to talk to the person calling!

[FlamesKickAss]

or if they know they will need a new area code, do it to calgary now

[KTrain]

If they changed the numbers to "regional" numbers businesses would be bent over. Spending thousands of dollars on a Yellow Pages ad only to have your contact numbers become obsolete would prove to be more than a little annoying.

They way they're doing it is the best way they can with the state of the phones today. As 4x4 said, cell phones have changed the way these sort of changes can occur.

[FlamesKickAss]

then make cell phones a seperate area code. thats they way it is where my dad lives in NJ. he lives in 973 area code and his cell is 201

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by 4X4

As much as I want to be annoyed by this, I can't. It's unfeasible for area codes to define geograpical anymore. Remember when Bonavista was 278 XXXX and Woodbine was 281 XXXX? Not anymore.

So, what you are saying is two wrongs now make a right?

When I moved from Deer Run to McKenzie Towne, I asked for a number change, because I had a 271 number and I wanted a 257 number.

Instead of messing up everybody; how about making those people who move be the ones who have things messed up?

Some good ideas have been bounced around. Give cells all a new area code is a great idea; also splitting up Calgary into 2 codes now is also a great plan. Make everybody switch once and be done with it.

As for my Richmond example; obviously I don't know Vancouver geography, but you get my point.

[Stranger]

Originally Posted by FlamesKickAss

then make cell phones a seperate area code. thats they way it is where my dad lives in NJ. he lives in 973 area code and his cell is 201

I was just going to post that same idea. That way everyone knows to dial 587 before a cell number. But I guess when the number of cells increase it could cause confusion as to what area code to dial.

[Madman]

My problem is that how will I know when to dial 1 before the 587??

I could have a 587 in Southern Alberta and be trying to call someone else with a 587, but they are from Uber North Alberta.

Why not add three or four new area codes then? Split the province into thirds and North/Central/South Rural each get an area code, then Edmonton/Red Deer/Calgary each get one as well.

It's totally useless that an AREA code is no longer tied to area.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Madman

My problem is that how will I know when to dial 1 before the 587??

I could have a 587 in Southern Alberta and be trying to call someone else with a 587, but they are from Uber North Alberta.

Why not add three or four new area codes then? Split the province into thirds and North/Central/South Rural each get an area code, then Edmonton/Red Deer/Calgary each get one as well.

It's totally useless that an AREA code is no longer tied to area.

Okay, a few points:
1) You'd probably know to dial 1 becasue you'd be calling across the province. If you don't know where the number you're calling is, then big deal, serioulsy how often do you not know the location of the person you're calling?

2) who cares if its called an area code? It's all just sematics at this point anyway.

I don't like the new system either, but I'm sure there are a lot of folks who went through the pros and cons of a bunch of ways of doing it, and this one is the least disruptive. Or does it seem more liekly, that everyone on CP (who doesn't work in the telecome business, sorry firefly) is smarter than people who get paid to work on these things?

[FireFly]

I don't work in telecom anymore.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by FireFly

I don't work in telecom anymore.

Oops, I guess I'm behind the times.
My bad.

[Kipru]

Infomercial: But how will I remember all those numbers? Well, scientists have discovered that even monkeys can memorize ten numbers. Are you stupider than a monkey?
Chief Wiggum: How big of a monkey?
Infomercial: Ha, ha. Of course you're not.

YOu should split the town to New calgary and Old calgary and make a wall out of carbage and get The Who to play there. Remember to use chloroform. That's what you should do.

[LChoy]

Cut and pasted from the Service Alberta e-mail we got:

To meet the growing demand for telephone numbers, two new area codes will be introduced: 778 in BC and 587 in Alberta. These new codes will enable the creation of millions of telephone numbers. The new codes will be assigned to new numbers only; existing numbers will remain unchanged.
The new codes will be available beginning September 12, 2008. Telephone numbers under the current 250, 403 and 780 area codes will continue to be assigned to customers until no more numbers are available. The new area codes will coexist with the current codes, and will cover the same geographic area. New area codes can only be introduced once 10-digit local dialling has been implemented. The same 7-digit telephone number can then exist in each of the area codes.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Okay, a few points:
1) You'd probably know to dial 1 becasue you'd be calling across the province. If you don't know where the number you're calling is, then big deal, serioulsy how often do you not know the location of the person you're calling?

The issue is that when I call you from my cell phone, the number will still show up as 1-403-555-1212; not 403-555-1212. For years Telus et al have been telling us to go ahead and put that "1" in front of cell numbers. Now when I return a call using the 1, suddenly I could be facing long distance charges because I didn't know my buddy decided to register his cell in Edmonton instead of Calgary.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The issue is that when I call you from my cell phone, the number will still show up as 1-403-555-1212; not 403-555-1212. For years Telus et al have been telling us to go ahead and put that "1" in front of cell numbers. Now when I return a call using the 1, suddenly I could be facing long distance charges because I didn't know my buddy decided to register his cell in Edmonton instead of Calgary.

It still comes down to knowing where you are phoning.
If you don't know, sure you could end up paying long distance charges without knowing it, but if you want to talk to to someone, you'll be paying long distance either way, so what difference does it make?

If you're really that concerned, put the number in without the 1 and if it tells you you have to dial long distance for it, just add the 1.

A lot of the opposition to this seems to be based on the mentality that this is going to be a minor inconvenience to me instead of a big inconveneince to a bunch of folks you don't know, so it must be a horrible way of doing things.

[4X4]

I'm starting to think that long distance charges are a bit of a scam. I haven't really thought this through, but I'm formulating the opinion that if we're going to have arbitrary area codes within provincial boundaries, calling within the province should be considered local.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I'm starting to think that long distance charges are a bit of a scam. I haven't really thought this through, but I'm formulating the opinion that if we're going to have arbitrary area codes within provincial boundaries, calling within the province should be considered local.

I was thinking the same thing actually. If some 587 calls are local and some are long distance then it seems like we are getting scammed somehow!

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Slava

I was thinking the same thing actually. If some 587 calls are local and some are long distance then it seems like we are getting scammed somehow!

How is that a scam?
As it is now, some 403 numbers are long distance and others are local.

If I want to call Medicine Hat from Calgary, they're both 403 numbers, but it's still long dissance.

How is the 587 any different than that?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I'm starting to think that long distance charges are a bit of a scam. I haven't really thought this through, but I'm formulating the opinion that if we're going to have arbitrary area codes within provincial boundaries, calling within the province should be considered local.

Why should calls witin the province be local?
You're still calling the same distance from Calgary to Edmonton as you did before.
It was long distance then the whole province was 403, it's long distance now that one is 403 and the other is 780, and it'll be long distance in the future when it could be any combinatin of caling from 403/587 to 780/587.