Review by priller  - Location: Gainesville, Prince William, VA, USA
- Cost Contract price not specified.
Flexible Plans; No Contract; Outstanding Customer Service; BYOD
No Simultaneous Ring
One of the beter VoIP providers going
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
|
Callcentic is one of the growing number of providers that allows you to Bring-Your-Own-Device (BYOD). They provide sample configurations for many common ATA's, SIP phones and Softphones. A couple of entries and you're making calls. Callcentric has the standard "Unlimited" calling plans. However, they also have Pay Per Call (or PAYG) plans. Pay only for what you use. This is more than sufficient for many people. NOTE: Incoming and Outgoing calling plans are purchased separately. For example, you can have an unlimited outgoing plan and a PAYG incoming plan. This allows you to customize your service to your needs. There are no contracts, no monthly minimum. If you want to cancel, just open a trouble ticket ... no "retention" agents to fight with. I use Callcentric for outbound calling only, no DID, no incoming plan. They will set your outbound CID to a real number by opening a trouble ticket. They are a sponsor of SIPbroker, so you can place calls to people on other "open" networks totally free. Support: I've opened two tickets with them. One was to change my CID number, the other to close a different free account that I did not use. On both cases, I received a response within 20 minutes. The user portal is the best I've seen ... and I've tried many different VoIP providers. Call quality has been excellent. Highly recommend you give them a look! ------------- Update 2/2008: I added a FAX line and have no problems. This is direct to my fax machine, not using their fax server. Using a Linksys SPA9000. (Note: I later dropped this DID, because I no longer needed it) ------------- Update 6/2008: Callcentric continues to perform. No issues after months of service. ------------- Update 9/29/2008: You have to love Callcentric's reliability and call quality; absolutely nothing negative to say. What continues to frustrate me is their lack of CNAM. More VoIP providers are offering CNAM as an optional service on a per look up basis .... voip.ms for example. I don't care about somebody's name showing up if they are in my phone book, I already know that ... it's the numbers I don't recognize that I need the name. ------------- Update 01/03/2009: Still a great performer. I'm a big fan of CC. However, when it finally came time to leave Vonage after 6 years, I just couldn't port my primary number over to Callcentric due to the lack of CNAM and no Simultaneous Ring (I ending up going to voip.ms). I checked with support and it sounds like Simultaneous Ring will be coming soon, but zero plans for CNAM. I will continue to use CC in a very limited way. ------------- Update 02/23/2009: I decided to add a DID. The website allows you to specify the rate center you want the number from. After I was assigned a number, I did a look up and the number was from a different rate center than I had ordered. When I opened a support ticket CC confirmed that the number was not in the rate center I had order, but it was in the same LATA so they did a substitution without saying anything to me. This the SECOND time they pulled this on me, so I pushed back and requested that they order a DID for the rate center I had requested. They did and I had a correct number within 24 hours. Note to CC: Just because you have numbers in stock, doesn't mean you should pull a substitution without at least letting the customer know. ------------- Update 03/26/2009: Got CNAM! That's great news. I would still need Simultaneous Ring for CC to be considered as my primary provider. ------------- Update 03/27/2009: Unable to get their new "Pass Caller ID in SIP INVITE message" feature working with my SPA9000 IP PBX. I can do the same thing successfully with other providers. CC support claims it's not their problem. » Callcentric - "Pass Caller ID in SIP INVITE message" ------------
member for 23.5 years, 3879 visits, last login: 14.2 years ago
updated 15 years ago
1 edit |
Excellent ServiceI've been using Callcentric for 19 days. I made 30 long distance phone calls this month.
My bill taxes and fees are $0.
Call Treatments feature is very good.
Calling Card is excellent.
Thanks Callcentric! Keep Up The Great Work | |
| | |
CallCentric review and CNAMThanks, priller, for excellent review. Agree that CC is fine provider.
Regarding CNAM, I have found that CNAM is less and less useful. I have a Verizon landline at my business, and half of the CNAM's show up as "cellphone", "Private Name", "Unknown", or "Incomplete Data".
And I have found that CNAM from VoIP providers tends to have an additional problem: Inaccurate databases. On an Optimum Voice (cable company VoIP) line that I have at my office, incoming calls from the local hospital show up on CNAM as being from a realtor.
I can see that the total lack of CNAM would be an issue for a business phone line. For residential, though, for many folks it would not matter that much.
In fact, CallCentric has an advantage because you can program the CNAM yourself. So when my wife calls me on her cellphone, I can program the CallCentric CNAM to show her name, whereas when she calls my Verizon phone, Verizon's CNAM will just say Cellphone-NJ.
I do agree that they should try to offer it as an option, and in fact I believe they are working on this.
Overall, as you said, CallCentric is a fine provider.
I think these days (January 2009) that CallCentric may be best choice for the BYOD crowd (bring your own device), and that VOIPo may evolve into the best for the DISCO crowd (device is supplied by company). | |
|  | priller
join:2000-10-20
Gainesville, VA |
Re: CallCentric review and CNAM
1/19/2009
I checked with CC support again and was told that they have no plans to offer CNAM, at this time. Definitely puts them at a competitive disadvantage.
I also inquired about simultaneous ring. It sounds like this is a coming feature, but no commitment as to when.
| |
|
1 edit |
CallCentricpriller's review said:
"...I decided to add a DID. The website allows you to specify the rate center you want the number from. After I was assigned a number, I did a look up and the number was from a different rate center than I had ordered. When I opened a support ticket CC confirmed that the number was not in the rate center I had order, but it was in the same LATA so they did a substitution without saying anything to me. This the SECOND time they pulled this on me, so I pushed back and requested that they order a DID for the rate center I had requested. They did and I had a correct number within 24 hours..."
I agree. They should not be doing this!
It's good that they fixed it quickly, but it should not have happened. It is surprising, considering how customer-oriented they are generally. | |
| | | |
CallC
Anon
2009-Feb-23 2:28 pm
Re: CallCentricGentlemen, I'm trying to separate oranges off of apples  ) Please let me understand what issue had exactly been "fixed" what was "surprising" and what should not have happened... Please find below my analysis and comment if a common logic/sense would perform the same differently: - our system fully AUTOMATICALLY (no manual labor involved, therefore no "substitutions" performed) assigns DIDs based on a selected rate-center, in a REAL-TIME; - if the rate-center ordered is not readily available in our local DID pool, the rate-center of assigned DID is always chosen from LOCAL calling area (based on NANPA recommendations) to the rate-center on order; - if the rate-center within a local calling area is not available in our local DID pool - our system opens a trouble-ticket on the subscriber's account offering either readily available substitute areas or temporary substitute DID while the requested rate-center is being pending delivery or just suggest a waiting time for delivery. Our system explicitly tells the subscriber that without regard to their selected choice - the waiting time will be compensated based on a prorated cost of the DID; - again - all the above is done automatically in a real-time, within minutes after the order was placed 24x7x365; Please note that MOST providers usually won't deliver anything within less than 24 hours; - if the order was not fulfilled to 100% subscriber's satisfaction (like in issue at hand) - as it was admitted by "priller" - within less than 24 hours after opening the trouble-ticket - our personnel (this time manually) had allocated a new DID number, this time to complete satisfaction (correct me if I'm being wrong here, please); - again - neither our system nor our personnel make arbitrary "substitutes" - our system logic simply follows NANPA LOCAL AREA assignment recommendations which, in most cases, would satisfy majority of requests; in a case of mistake (which rarely, but may happen) or even when a subscriber simply does not like a combination of digits - our personnel offers a manual replacement while providing information of what other DIDs are available for the requested area code; Just as an example - in NYC, LOCAL area codes 212, 347, 646, 917 and 718 cover Manhattan, Bronx, Queens, Brooklyn and Staten Island while 212 was a long time ago exhausted and "interleaved" with 646 and 347, in most cases all those areas are allocated interchangeably with some preferences for 646 for Manhattan and 718 for anything else... it's a common logic followed by most carriers (this is also true for allocations made by our carriers when we order replenishment to our own local DID pools. Your comments are welcome. Thank you. | |
| | | | |
Re: CallCentricI know that I have high respect for CallCentric, and from what priller has written in reviews and posts, I believe that he does also.
He laid out a certain scenario, and gave his opinions in regard to that. In turn, I responded to what he had described.
Sociologists used to talk about "the revolution of rising expectations". CallCentric has, quite properly, an excellent reputation for customer service. But one paradox of such an excellent reputation are those high expectations. Simply put, if there is one thing perceived as a little off, whether or not that perception is justified, it attracts attention. After all, we tend to be more critical of those we love the most.
Regarding the rate center question, I think this is where the issue comes up. Let us consider 3 rate centers here in New Jersey, called A, B, and C, representing various towns. Let us station them along a horizontal line (east-west). And place the customer in rate center B.
Our POTS company, Verizon, says that calls between A and B are local (included in flat-rate calling plan). And calls between B and C are also local. But calls between A and C are regional toll calls, charged at between 10 cents and 25 cents a minute depending on the POTS local plan selected.
So if Priller lives in ratecenter B, and requests a ratecenter B number, he expects that people calling him from A or B or C, on a POTS line, will be making local calls. But if he is assigned a ratecenter A number, he's still OK from ratecenter B, but the people calling him from ratecenter C will have those toll charges (10-25 cents per minute). Even if those people live a block away.
That's why in much of the country, this rate center assignment is so important. It reflects the arbitrary nature of POTS billing.
And to circle back to where we started, I would just quote this line from the long-running show "The Fantasticks":
Without a hurt the heart is hollow.
| |
| | | priller
join:2000-10-20
Gainesville, VA
1 edit |
to CallC
I'd like to elaborate and try to put focus on what transpired, from a customer expectations point of view. My hope is that CC will consider the feedback as a way to further improve customer service.
1) Your website lists CITY_A as a offered rate center. I placed the order accordingly.
2) I was not provided a number in "real time".
3) When I did receive an email with the new DID number, there was no mention that it was not for CITY_A. I did a look up and discovered that it was for CITY_B, which is in the same LATA (local calling area) but for a town 25 miles away.
4) I opened a support ticket and was given this response.
"We've ordered a CITY_A number for you, and it should be supplied late tonight or tomorrow.
That said, we just wanted to mention that CITY_A and CITY_B have the exact same local calling area (which is I believe why the substitution was made)"
5) 7 hours later, a DID for the rate center I had ordered was assigned.
All support correspondence was professional and the "issue" was resolved to my satisfaction, 100%.
As I mentioned in my review, this is second time this has occurred. The first time, the DID I was assigned was from the same rate center as you were offering Dirt Cheap "over stock" DID's from .... but I was paying "full price". That did not sit well at all.
What are the expectations from a customer's point of view? If I specifically place an order for CITY_A, I expect ....
(a) a DID for CITY_A
or
(b) somebody to ask me if I want to substitute or wait for one to be ordered.
....Neither one happened, either time. I felt like CC had the attitude that 99% of the customers will never know the difference so screw it.
I'm still a CC customer, I still recommend CC, I believe CC is a good reliable operation, but this switching without customer notification is inappropriate. | |
|
| |
|
) Please let me understand what issue had exactly been "fixed" what was "surprising" and what should not have happened... Please find below my analysis and comment if a common logic/sense would perform the same differently:
