Review by filostrato  - Location: Sacramento,Sacramento,CA
- Cost Contract price not specified.
Overall "Avoid"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
Sep 29
I have Callcentric as a second line, using it occasionally for
outgoing calls to use up the few dollars I have in it.
Their servers are in one place, and a problem with that, which they found
out about during the hurricane, is that if they lose power or
have some other disaster, their entire company is offline.
Not forgotten either was their spokesman's insistence that their
single server location, and no generator backup, was perfectly ok
and people had no business complaining about it. I feel uncomfortable
relying on such a company.
Another potential problem for them, at least from what I read here,
is that it is difficult to accommodate the equipment they use to
useful new features or to making their servers geographically
redundant.
They need to mature in terms of equipment allowing them to be more
flexible - and in their attitude.
In a word: if you can find something equivalent or better (and it
is easy to do that), avoid Callcentric until they have grown up a
bit.
member for 333 days, 4 visits, last login: 3 days ago
updated 6 days ago
Comments:
 Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
 ·AT&T Wireless Br..
·Suddenlink
| Technically... All those natural things you listed that could happen to Callcentric (burst water pipes, fire, power problems), they could still happen to a provider even if they have geographically diverse servers.
Sure, the chance is much much lower, but you can't say for *sure* that nothing could go wrong at all those data centers owned by the same company.
Different disasters at all those data centers could come together to bring down a diversely-hosted provider (fires at one center, burst water pipe at another, etc.).
Not to mention just general overload of the servers and random glitches that can happen sometimes.
It doesn't matter how many differently-located data centers you've got, you would know that nothing is fool-proof and everything fails eventually. You would not be saying you're immune to being taken offline, because the Universe loves a challenge.
This is just another of those posts decrying Callcentric for being hosted in one place, which I'm sure you would have noticed before since you are obviously concerned about them going down. | |
|  | nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2
1 recommendation | Re: Technically... said by XANAVirus:Different disasters at all those data centers could come together to bring down a diversely-hosted provider (fires at one center, burst water pipe at another, etc.). The chance of a disaster bringing down two completely different data centers at two completely different geographic locations at the same time is almost none. | |
|
Reviews:
·callwithus
·Callcentric
| Beating a dead horse.... Oh, me, oh, my.
Yet another "paired" review in which one person posts a very positive review of Voip.MS and a very negative review of CallCentric, as though those are the only two companies out there.
Actually, over the past year, CallCentric has been rock-solid, whereas it is Voip.MS that has had to reinvigorate much of its basic underpinnings.
Regarding Hurricane Sandy, that's beating such a dead horse, how multiple backup measures failed in that superstorm.
But since you bring it up again, be advised that CallCentric [is] enhancing its offsite backup and its onsite power supply even further:
»www.myvoipnews.com/4/post/2013/0···ion.html
As far as features, CallCentric is quite good there, having added subaccounts this year. Final development proceeds on IVR as well.
The lack of credibility of the review is shown by the low scores for website, ease of installation, call quality, etc. That shows to longtime readers of this site what this "review" is all about, because the reviewer did not even otherwise comment on those areas (and indeed cannot without looking silly).
Some Voip.MS enthusiasts like to post gratuitously negative reviews of CallCentric.
CallCentric enthusiasts are courteous enough to refrain from trashing Voip.MS, thus far. | |
| |  Arne BolenHappy Anveo customerPremium
join:2009-06-21
Planet Earth
kudos:4
·voip.ms
·Anveo
·callwithus
·Callcentric
| Re: Beating a dead horse.... said by Gershom 1624:Actually, over the past year, CallCentric has been rock-solid, whereas it is Voip.MS that has had to reinvigorate much of its basic underpinnings. +1
said by Gershom 1624:Regarding Hurricane Sandy, that's beating such a dead horse, how multiple backup measures failed in that superstorm. It's amazing that Hurricane Sandy still is used to bash Callcentric. My ISP was offline for less than a couple of days due to Hurricane Sandy and I see no reason to complain about that. Same with Callcentric, being offline for less than a couple of days during the hurricane is no reason for complaining.
--
My VoIP News | |
| | | |
| cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL | I actually agree on the redundancy issue that's why I am giving them 50% on reliability too for the time being but the rest of the rating is completely out of line and an obvious attempt to tear down a competitor. | |
|
| | | | |  NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
·Comcast
·ooma
·Callcentric
 ·Site5.com
| Re: Another misleading review said by cb14:said by Nightfall:If there is anything that needs to be fixed when it comes to ISP reviews, it is misleading or bad reviews.
There is also a very significant number of misleading positive reviews. Unfortunately, that's a problem not confined just to this web site.  Two wrongs don't make a right. In most cases, the misleading positive reviews are trashed. Just like reviews like this should be trashed. I guess it takes talent to write an informative review.
I am just saying that the OP could have made this review a lot better. In fact this seems like a shill review if anything.
--
My domain - Nightfall.net | |
| | | | | | | | | | Why isn't anyone allowed to give a true opinion about callcentric? I Remember when I did, I got messages that wanted me to change my ratings and comments and such. Don't forget about the issues before the hurricane thing. | |
| | | | | IscreamPremium
join:2009-02-17
New York, NY
kudos:5 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
1 recommendation | Re: Another misleading review Dear "nonamesleft" below is my highly emotional answer to your obviously good question.
Well, how about some details of OP's record:
The member "filostrato":
Joined: 2012-11-06
(1st year!)
email: Not public.
Membership: Regular
Location: Sacramento, CA
Reviews:
·Callcentric
·voip.ms
Posts: 2
Last seen: 2013-10-02 14:46:41
Visits: 4
Is it correct to say that the OP has joined the DSLRs, posted "perfect" review for Voip.MS (1st visit), then posted a trashing review about Callcentric (next day - 2nd visit), then 10 months later has again visited (3rd time) the DSLRs to leave (update) already perfect review for Voip.MS and then next day (4th visit) - came here again and trashed Callcentric again.
Anybody to say I'm wrong, am I?
Speaking of yourself - you've actually been a customer of Callcentric, you've not liked _what_ your experienced during last October's DDoS, well - you didn't want to recognize that sometimes some countries, lands as well as companies/businesses are at war and must protect themselves while being under heavy fire and pressure... Well - it's up to you.
BUT (and my BIG THANKs to YOU), you have had NO trashing or vendetta plans regarding your provider - you simply moved away while left a short message in place of your former review!
Another reason - Callcentric, as the company who provides public service during last 12 years is highly visible Internet target. And sure - during these years there were not only friends around it...
But being a small company with a very good reliability/service record prior Oct. 2012 and the same good record (just search those boards) after that, and knowing that there are LIVE people inside it, who love their job and who is committed to excellence in providing their service - is it a good idea to leave/support a review which says in BOLD letters "AVOID"? Huh?
Is it in general good, for your own sake, to have a choice when it comes to telephone service - to say "AVOID" about some one company while saying "BEST" regarding some other one?
There was a recently completed very serious investigation (and a related sentence) of a group of "PR" companies whose only business was to increase Google's ratings of some companies while trashing their competitors...
Thank you. | |
| | | | | |
| |
|
