dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer

spacer




how-to block ads



Callcentric page on DSLReports
Six Month Rating

Reviews:
bullet 199 reviews (160 good) (3 bad)
bullet Submit a review by email click here
bullet login for new review notification feature

Review by batfell See Profile

  • Location: Ann Arbor,Washtenaw,MI
  • Cost Contract price not specified.
Bad "Simplistic, expensive"
Overall "There are better yet cheaper voip providers"
Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)

My Other Reviews

·voip.ms
2014 08 02
Not much to change. They are ok but charge too much for what they provide.

2013 05 31
I am glad to say that CC is getting out of the doldrums and has put in sub-accounts, and they say they are working on an IVR of some sort. Good for them.

If they keep this up, I may consider using them for more than a backup.

Update 2012 12 24
Callcentric continues to be reliable and to sound good. I use it for
occasional outgoing calls, and as a backup if my main vosp, voip.ms,
should fail, which hasn't yet happened.

But every year that goes by shows Callcentric looking clunkier and
stodgier, with its poor call-handling, and that it is unlikely to
change any time soon.

Update 2012 05 23
Callcentric continues to be a decent service, but one that is kind
of clunky and simple-minded. The website has gotten better, though.

I use it for a backup, which I never need, but I have a few dollars
in it so might as well keep the credentials.

Original Review
I have been trying Callcentric as a second line for a few months and
it is not bad but nothing to write home about.

It is like a slightly shabby corner store that has the basic food -
the milk, bread, etc., but that you do not go to unless you ran
out of something at the last minute and can not get to the super
market.

The website is pretty good, and suited to the features it offers.

The features are the problem. CC does a basic job and even has
disa and callback.

What it does not have, or has in an inferior way are:

Simplistic callerid processing. I would have to spend all
day setting up the callerid routing that I can do within minutes
using Voipo, Voip.ms, or Anveo.

No IVR. An amazing lack. Even 2 years ago, the lack of an
IVR would not condemn a voip provider to the second-tier category,
but not having one at this point in voip development marks CC as
fit only for the most undemanding users.

And when I say 'IVR', I am including the call flow processing
that goes with it, things like a time condition, another IVR, call
forwarding, sip url, ring group, etc.

CC has some of these, usually in a rudimentary form compared
to the three voip providers mentioned above.

Its calling rates and monthly DID charge are rather expensive. On
the other hand, it allows you to set up a free account and then
call CC to CC for no charge.

If you are someone who will never grow out of a simplistic voip
provider, then CC is for you; if you are someone who will grow out
of that and will grow into a provider with up-to-date features, then
give CC a pass.



member for 2.6 years, 13 visits, last login: 89 days ago
updated 76 days ago

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

1 recommendation

Hmmmm.

I have used around 10-12 providers and consider myself pretty experienced in VoIP.

There is no doubt that if you need IVR or subaccounts, then CC is not for you.

But aside from that, they are a very complete provider, known for high reliability and great customer service.

For most purposes, I much prefer the CallCentric dashboard to that of Voip.MS

For example, I can one-click from the list of received calls to create a pre-populated phone book entry, or create a pre-populated call treatment.

After you posted your review, CallCentric introduced additional outbound calling plans. They are [not] the cheapest provider, they do not intend to be, but they are competitive and they give fine service.