On Apr 3, 5:30*pm, wrote:
On Apr 3, 9:25*am, Stephen Furley wrote:

Ok, so when cell phones came out widely, did Britain convert to that
scheme? *What about older landline Touch Tone and rotary phones--did
the dial ring have to be converted?
Sorry, I don't understand this; what does the introduction of cell
phones have to do with letters/numbers, and converting other 'phones?

The letter/number matchup on US dials/keypads has been the same since
letters were introduced in the 1920s.

I understand that historically Britain used a different matchup.
Thus, when cellphones came out with the US matchup, there was some
sort of 'conversion' between historical British practice and modern
units. *That's what I'm trying to put into perspective.

I see what you're saying now. The fact that the Mitel IP 'phone
conforms to the same standard as cell 'phones suggests that this is
standard on all new 'phones. There was a considerable period when new
British 'phones didn't have letters at all, from the introduction of
all-figure dialing around the late '60s, until well into the push-
button era. Most of the button 'phones in my collection are 10 button
LD (pulse) models and most if not all of these lack letters, I don't
have all of them to hand to check. Many later 12 button DTMF or dual
signalling models also lack letters. Later, letters were re-
introduced, in the same pattern as on cell 'phones, which enabled
things like the TAXICAB example, but this is much less common here
than in the US. Because there was a long gap between the phasing out
of exchange names in numbers, such as ABBey 1234 and the use of
letters for other purposes the minor changes to the positions of a
couple of letters didn't really cause confusion. Most of the last
'phones to have letters on, or around, the dial would have been out of
use years before the re-introduction of letters to a slightly
different pattern, in fairly recent times.

Nobody seems to have mentioned New Zeeland, where the 0 is in the same
place, but the other digits run clockwise round the dial, so the 5 is
also in the same place, but all of the other digits are different.
The mechanism is the same as on a normal dial, so that dialing a digit
n generates 10-n pulses.

I'm pretty sure Britain used exchange names as the US did. *When did
Britain go to all number calling? *(The last US city 'converted' in
1980, but it took a long time for old habits and signage to die.)
Then, businesses used the letters to give themselves memorable phone
numbers, such as TAXICAB.

[interesting history snip]

Things like your TAXICAB example were not common here. The letters
letters were not put on later dial plates, or on the rings outside
them, after all-figure numbers were introduced, so many people
wouldn't have known how to dial them. *Even in candlestick and
Bakelite days *many instruments were fitted with the 'F' versions of
the 10 and 12 dials, which did not have letters on them.
Interestingly, I've got a modern Mitel 5304 IP telephone in front of
me. *It has both a 'Z', on the 9 button, and a 'Q' on the 7 button,
whereas the 21L dial which I have at home added the Q to the 0 hole.

Before the 5304 Mitel made a similar IP model without a display, and
SIP only. *The model number of this was 5302, which probably means
something to our older American readers; a very different telephone.

Thanks for the explanation.

As mentioned, US dials stayed the same, and after exchange names were
phased out 'business names' were used. *They're popular in toll free
numbers. *(Amtrak is USARAIL).

Another big difference is that the US stayed at 10 digit numbers which
were introduced as the standard format in the early 1950s, but took
years to implement. *Today, many callers must dial 10 digits for every
call, though some areas need only 7 if in the same area code.

(Going back some years, people in small towns had a 10-digit phone
number, but for local calls needed to dial only 5 digits.)