dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-01-04 18:09:27: We just got done noting how the carrier SMS cash cow is slowing dying, with the decline impacting foreign earlier adoption countries first and then impacting America's giant carriers starting over the next few years. ..


elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

More like De-Evolution

Using more spectrum, via your wireless broadband connection, to make the same phone call, simply to escape cellphone minute charges, seems rather backward to me.

GraysonPeddi
Grayson Peddie

join:2010-06-28
Tallahassee, FL

What About Sprint and/or T-Mobile?

I don't care for AT&T and Verizon. No way!

I'd just want to use only one phone number and that's it! I have ENUM and Asterisk PBX connected to Anveo. Well, going from smartphone via 3G to Asterisk server at home just to call my family via G.711 won't do any good for right now. I'm with Virgin Mobile (Sprint's network), though.
--
Current Soft Phone (temp): Ekiga (ordered Yealink T22P to switch from Ekiga)
Phone System: Asterisk 1.8; Server: Ubuntu Server 10.04 with Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard as guest

bugabuga

join:2004-06-10
Austin, TX

Yes but...

Keeping data up and running all the time and constant pinging of "traditional" VoiP seems to be way too inefficient at this point (versus carrier-based stuff where, as I understand, normal signaling is used to indicate you're having an incoming call, after which data session is initiated and call is connected). You can do it, but your battery life will shrink significantly.

Plus, 2GB of data is quite a lot for VoiP. Unless you're in 200Mb it's irrelevant. Video playback would be more data intensive.

Now, outgoing VOIP calls, that's a whole different story. But that is primarily for foreign calls

Or am I misreading something?
--
Hyperom: Rants about life, politics, technology

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Not a big deal

Most people don't want to and won't use mobile VOIP, except for maybe international calls, if even that.

With the glutton of mobile minutes now available (unlimited anymobile, rollover, night and weekends, etc), there isn't much incentive to the customer to use anything like this, and carriers know that they can just force a voice plan with more minutes than anyone known what to do with in order to have a smartphone, so they will win no matter what.

The real issue at hand is that we have been trained to expect mobile data for $25 or $30/mo, which drives 95% of the network traffic, when voice and text together are $60/mo, which just makes no sense. With the mobile data surge, the companies need that kind of money to keep these massive nationwide networks running, but they are being dishonest about where the real costs are.


Guspaz
Guspaz
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-05
Montreal, QC
kudos:23
reply to elray

Re: More like De-Evolution

Why would it use more spectrum? The amounts of overhead when comparing SIP over 3G or LTE to native UMTS voice calls or IMS over LTE (LTE's eventual native voice format) shouldn't be that different... Heck, IMS over LTE is basically VoIP anyhow...
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org


SysOp

join:2001-04-18
Douglasville, GA
Reviews:
·MetroPCS

3 edits

VoLTE

Voice over LTE essentially is voip.

The carriers FEAR becoming just a WISP. If you could choose from any VoIP provider, they become just a dumb pipe.

I took advantage of the deal T-Mobile has out right now to attract new activations. Pre-paid monthly 4G $30 5gb plan. Comes with 100 voice and unlimited SMS/MMS. After that it's ten cents a minute.

Combine that with Google Voice + Sipdroid + pbxes.org for free VoIP. For personal use it works ok on 3G, good on 4G and great on WiFi.

Looking at VOIP.MS as a long term provider since GV lacks native sip support and codec choices. The GV sip work around adds latency and at best is experimental. It really is cool, since it's free.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to elray

Re: More like De-Evolution

said by elray:

Using more spectrum, via your wireless broadband connection, to make the same phone call, simply to escape cellphone minute charges, seems rather backward to me.

Call it whatever you want. I would much rather be able to use a data package over my phone and make call over data and not pay for minutes at all.

Would save me a lot of money.


Matt3
All noise, no signal.
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12
reply to SysOp

Re: VoLTE

said by SysOp:

Combine that with Google Voice + Sipdroid + pbxes.org for free VoIP. For personal use it works ok on 3G, good on 4G and great on WiFi.

Hey, thanks for this tip. I have it up and running on my Bionic.

What are the limitations on inbound/outbound calling?

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 edit
reply to Guspaz

Re: More like De-Evolution

said by Guspaz:

Why would it use more spectrum? The amounts of overhead when comparing SIP over 3G or LTE to native UMTS voice calls or IMS over LTE (LTE's eventual native voice format) shouldn't be that different... Heck, IMS over LTE is basically VoIP anyhow...

Maybe i misinterpreted the specifications over the years - I'm not an EE,. But doesn't Skype, Sipdroid, G.729 et al, take at least 30kbps, while traditional cellphone vocoders use 8-13kbps?


sapo
Cruising Down Memory Lane
Premium
join:2002-09-16
Sacramento, CA
kudos:1
reply to SysOp

Re: VoLTE

I use voip.ms with sipdroid. Works well and is really powerful. Only thing GV does better is the voicemail if you like visual voicemail.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to elray

Re: More like De-Evolution

said by elray:

Maybe i misinterpreted the specifications over the years - I'm not an EE,. But doesn't Skype, Sipdroid, G.729 et al, take at least 30kbps, while traditional cellphone vocoders use 8-13kbps?

That wouldn't surprise me.

I much prefer VOIP because the sound quality is so much better. Carriers cramming voice over 8kbps makes total sense.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to DataRiker
said by DataRiker:

Would save me a lot of money.

Until the carriers catch up with monetizing the emerging technology

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to Matt3

Re: VoLTE

How is pbxes.org? I've read some not so good stuff in the past. I've got GrooVeIP on my DX. It seems to work ok for what it's doing.


jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Avon, OH
reply to openbox9

Re: More like De-Evolution

like capped data plan packages instead of unlimited


jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Avon, OH
reply to BiggA

Re: Not a big deal

have you tried to make a call from another country such as canada to the states? The rates are quite high. From a roaming perspective mobile voip (over wifi here) is great.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to jgkolt

Re: More like De-Evolution

That's the first iteration. They'll eventually come up with a way to monetize you using VoIP over WiFi in lieu of consuming your allotment of voice dialing from your carrier.

Tim Cashman

join:2011-07-14
Carlsbad, CA

Response on Mobile VoIP users tripple

There is no doubt about the fact that mobile VoIP services are growing. However, what most of us forget is that none of the leading internet phone services like »www.vonage.com , »www.ooma.com or »www.axvoice.com have provided this service to their subscribers. And secondly, dedicated mobile VoIP services like »www.Rebtel.com are very hard to find. Lastly, if figures are to say something, $11.23 annual savings on one mobile VoIP user to the subscribers is not even peanuts. So before we all get carried away by the news, look at the lucrativeness of the market. Ask some dedicated mobile VoIP service about its revenues and you will know that it is still a long way to go as far as mobile VoIP service provider's success is concerned.

BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH
reply to jgkolt

Re: Not a big deal

Yeah, it's useful for that, but an occasional international call doesn't fundamentally undermine the carrier's business model. You could also do basically the same thing with GV.


rajivashrav

@kpn-eurorings.net

funny thing is...

that mobilevoip app in the bb/android/symbian/iphone market is actually on of the most overlooked apps so far, it offers good quality and supports labels with the cheapest rates. i think theyre actually much bigger than rebtel and others. maybe even bigger than skype?


SysOp

join:2001-04-18
Douglasville, GA
reply to Matt3

Re: VoLTE

Monthly Bandwidth Usage
2000 minutes


SysOp

join:2001-04-18
Douglasville, GA
reply to sapo
Thanks for the feedback. GV is working but I feel the latency could be better if I pony up for the paid service from voip.ms


SysOp

join:2001-04-18
Douglasville, GA
reply to openbox9
My free account on pbxes.org is stable. Using GV as a trunk has its limitations since GV is not intended to be used this way!


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to openbox9

Re: More like De-Evolution

said by openbox9:

That's the first iteration. They'll eventually come up with a way to monetize you using VoIP over WiFi in lieu of consuming your allotment of voice dialing from your carrier.

I don't really see how. Voice takes up a very tiny amount of data and I don't see how they could possibly restrict it.

Just goes to show how cheaply carriers could process voice if they had proper motivation.


Paladin
Sage of the light

join:2001-08-17
Chester, IL
reply to SysOp

Re: VoLTE

That isn't going to happen IMO. From the early testing of carrier side VoLTE, there's going to be significantly better QoS on the carrier side. Sure, OOT VoIP solutions like Skype might save some money on minutes but in the end it will not have the battery life or QoS that carrier side VoLTE boosted by HD Voice will offer. The real issue the carriers face is meeting demand on the data side. That's going to be a challenge, one that will require a lot more spectrum acquisition.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to DataRiker

Re: More like De-Evolution

My guess is that it will be a combination of indirect methods as well as continuing to require some tier of voice minutes with mobile phone plans...or maybe even all data plans

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to DataRiker
said by DataRiker:

said by elray:

Maybe i misinterpreted the specifications over the years - I'm not an EE,. But doesn't Skype, Sipdroid, G.729 et al, take at least 30kbps, while traditional cellphone vocoders use 8-13kbps?

That wouldn't surprise me.

I much prefer VOIP because the sound quality is so much better. Carriers cramming voice over 8kbps makes total sense.

I avoid cellphone usage for most calls, whenever possible, since most of my contacts speak English as a 3rd language, and poorly - makes anything beyond rudimentary chat improbable.

If you stick with an older CDMA phone, you can still force 13k vocoding, which improves things a bit, at least on VZW network.

I'd welcome an "HD Voice" option for regular cellphone service - if a 16K codec does the trick, I'd pay extra for HD premium minutes. I'm sure existing protocols could handle it, but I suspect Cellco found the billing and PR issues difficult.