dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer

spacer




how-to block ads



Callcentric page on DSLReports
Six Month Rating

Reviews:
bullet 195 reviews (158 good) (2 bad)
bullet Submit a review by email click here
bullet login for new review notification feature

Review by ConstantineM See Profile

  • Location: San Jose,Santa Clara,CA
  • Cost: $6 per month
  • Install: about 7 days
Good "AS27537; an old-timer who's too big to fail, so your numbers are safe :-)"
Bad "lots of bugs and “features” all around; web-site is quite buggy"
Overall "a decent bang for the buck from an established company"
Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)

After moving outside of the service area, I've ported my Kitchener-Waterloo mobile phone number to them. The service is overall decent, but there are a number of inconveniences here and there: click2dial is broken and poorly designed to start with, not much documentation on stuff that actually matters to you, clunky web-site with half-functioning features, lack of an iOS app that doesn't suck (their half-baked iOS app from summer 2011 is a joke), lack of SMS support etc.

My biggest complaint is that they don't allow multiple concurrent SIP registrations. This complicates a lot of use cases; I had to get a free OnSIP account in order to use more than one SIP device with Callcentric; but that works, since Callcentric allows you to simultaneously ring up to 3 different numbers (e.g. the local account and two OnSIP.com numbers, whereas each OnSIP number can be configured on multiple devices, so you won't fall short). Second biggest complaint is that they don't provide the "+" prefix on incoming Caller ID.

Overall, they're pretty decent, wholly located in North America (with all local support), and generally seem to care about their customers.

Other than my phonetic KW DID that I buy from Callcentric and occasional international dialling from them, I am using Callcentric as a hub between my free OnSIP accounts that are provisioned on several SIP phones, and IPKall with GV on the other end (unfortunately, GV only allows US-based numbers to be added to the account, and I'm too cheap to pay CC for another NANP DID from Callcentric, otherwise, I'd drop IPKall).

member for 2.8 years, 435 visits, last login: 40 days ago
updated 2.7 years ago

Comments:
PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

1 edit

1 recommendation

Astounded.

I've never found their website "buggy" after 3 years of heavy use.

And I am curious: If you are so unfulfilled with CC, who do you think is better ??

We have to live in the real world.

Yes, it's the 21st century---but not yet the 24th. No warp drive or teleportation yet.

I agree that multiple SIP registrations would be nice---but you can open up as many free CC "IP Freedom" accounts as you wish, instead of using an outside source like OnSip.

And major companies like AT&T and Verizon certainly don't include a [+] or [00] in their caller ID schemes----even though they charge several dollars extra for the caller ID service.

Also---they have an astounding amount of documentation on their website. Generally far more than most of their competitors. Hundreds of help files and "Question Mark" functions. I don't know how you can possibly say they are weak in that area.
ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA

click2dial

I don't see why you are so astounded. My overall rating for CC at the time of your reply is 75% (I actually gave them a little less to start with, but felt bad, seeing all the other 90%+ reviews), e.g. it's not like I don't like Callcentric at all (in fact, I specifically outlined that even with all their problems, they're not so bad overall, and I'm using them as my primary hub, which is a pretty good indication that I'm hardly suggesting that it's to be avoided or anything).

But just to give you a four-paragraph example:

0. The click2dial is unbelievably buggy. In fact, I recently (yesterday, in fact) had an interaction with their support, where, prior to the manager stepping in, I was suggested all sorts of random troubleshooting that were entirely irrelevant to the case (simply wasting my time), and their support both misunderstood me and their own click2dial feature, getting me very disappointed with useless interaction and wasted time.

1. One of their suggested click2dial troubleshooting suggestions made exactly zero sense in and of itself, no matter the big or small picture: they suggested removing call treatment for simul-ringing my OnSIP account, when I was complaining that I wasn't getting any calls forwarded to OnSIP when using click2dial in the first place. WTF? Makes exactly zero sense! I can't even think of what it would prove. Their assumption was that I was trying to connect from one OnSIP account to the very same one through call-treatments and click2dial by means of my CC number, which doesn't make much sense to start with, either; I re-read my messages, and they are pretty clear and give zero indication that I was doing anything like what they've assumed. Their other troubleshooting suggestion was simply not much relevant for the situation and should have been discarded based on prior info, but was not nearly as outrageously irrelevant. I ignored both; they later didn't deny I was in the right for ignoring them.

2. In the end, they did find a bug (turns out, unlike documented and specified, the "moderator" field within click2dial was mangling SIP addresses, and it never worked) and also suddenly acknowledged that the other part I was complaining about (lack of call treatment taking effect) was actually a design feature, which they themselves haven't seem to have been aware of in the initial interaction (and, the fact that it's "as designed", makes that outrageous troubleshooting I've outlined above, even more outrageous!).

3. This just shows you how poor or non-existent their documentation and engineering is. When the error was occurring, there was not even any error message presented anywhere to the user, or even to the tech support. Only the engineering could troubleshoot such a simple issue. Their click2dial gives zero indication whether any part of click2dial succeeds or not. They did fix the mangling part extremely fast (like within a few hours after the tech support manager called me; I told them I didn't really care, simply wanted to report that it was broken and have them take care of it), so, they're not so bad overall, and I really do see that they care very much about their customers (which I did include in my review as well), but, overall, they could definitely improve in some areas. I pointed out a major bug in one of their prominent features, it turned out to indeed be their bug, yet they wasted more than 1 hour of my time with ineffective troubleshooting suggestions and ineffective communication. Their web-interface overall is quite cumbersome and dated. But would I drop them? Nope, not this time. At least I know what to expect with them. Their network and DID have been pretty reliable, too; only the web-site that gives me headaches every now and then.

Major companies like AT&T Mobility and Rogers always include "+" in their incoming Caller ID information on their GSM/UMTS networks, especially for non-NANP numbers, so please let's not go there. In any case, let's leave that discussion to the separate thread: »Where's the "+" prefix on incoming Caller ID @ Callcentric?

And, yes, Callcentric has plenty of documentation! However, most of it is pretty basic and somewhat useless, and also somewhat dated, too. There's not a single article about TCP, and whether they support TCP registrations. The list goes on. Just because they have a lot of articles, doesn't mean that what you need is actually there.
riparian

join:2011-06-15
Los Angeles, CA
Reviews:
·Callcentric

Simplistic

If I understand you rightly, you should have checked out Voip.ms: they allow you to have any number of sub-accounts on one basic sip account. You can use their extremely flexible call-handling to do almost anything you want with a call - it is about as close as you can get to having a pbx without actually having one.

I agree that Callcentric's website is clunky. Its features, such as 'call-treatments', are simplistic.

It has been reliable however for me.
PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

Re: Simplistic

I use both companies. I agree that for the reviewer's needs, Voip.MS is a good option for their subaccounts and PBX-type functions.

I am always puzzled by the term "clunky" which was introduced by a former Canadian member. I always find CallCentric's website accurate, responsive, well designed, and a pleasure to use.

Although Voip.MS has more functions, their website is much more tedious.
engineerdan

join:2006-12-07
Manassas, VA

I Agree with Part of this Review

Although I disagree with many of your comments, I wholeheartedly agree with this, which is arguably your best point:

Overall... [they] ...generally seem to care about their customers.

I'll add that they have gone the extra mile for me. They went to Herculean efforts to resolve what most providers would have brushed-off as a non-issue.
ConstantineM

join:2011-09-02
San Jose, CA

Re: I Agree with Part of this Review

Yes, I'm sometimes surprised on how much patience they have to explain some things in detail. (-:
liquidman

join:2003-11-07
Boynton Beach, FL

Re: I Agree with Part of this Review

I'd like to commend you on your posts. For whatever reason, PX Eliezer is very combative and defensive about the companies he feels are good and constantly argues his point. You're entitled to your opinion and you defended it well. Thanks for your post
PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms

Re: I Agree with Part of this Review

said by liquidman:

For whatever reason, PX Eliezer is very combative and defensive about the companies he feels are good and constantly argues his point.

Well, no matter what I write, you may say I'm being combative.

But there is a difference between opinions and facts.

As the saying goes, people are entitled to their own opinions, but not to their own facts.

BTW, I do NOT only defend companies that I like. I also defend companies that I don't like.