jchambers28
join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR | cheaper
hopefully it will be cheaper that vonage |
|
tenorsaw1
join:2003-07-10
Brooklyn, NY | I'm happy
Thank goodness! I love CallVantage. |
|
hayabusa3303
Over 200 mph
Premium
join:2005-06-29
clubs: |  .
Cant want to see all the taxes and fee they add in on this one. Might get interesting. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
 ·North State Commun..
|  Good Move
I think this is a good move for them, although I'll be curious to see pricing. I can't see them pricing it much lower than the digital voice products from the MSOs ... and I'll fall out of my seat if it's less than any of the indie VoIP companies.
--
Linux Haters Unite! |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| Any info on why?
It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure for a byob voip product, only to introduce another one shortly thereafter. Why go through this transition?
Are they looking to kill the CallVantage infrastructure for some reason (too expensive, not scaleable, wrong architecture, ...???) Are they trying to introduce a different set of technology? If so why not do it under the CallVantage branding and ordering/provisioning/support scheme?
Do they simply want to re-launch the same infrastructure with a different brand??
Or is there some other twist I'm not seeing? I'm pretty puzzled at this move. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
 ·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| said by MyDogHsFleas  :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure remember cingular? people liked that company.
remember sbc? although not liked to the same level, that name and corporate attitude was definitely liked more than at&t.
forget all the $ spent on branding and general marketing. let's just turn everything back into at&t.
add callvantage to the list. kill it. resurrect it in a more horrible form. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to Matt
Re: Good Move
You might be surprised. AT&T is probably tired of losing their bread and butter landline business to MSOs and other VoIP providers. This is AT&T's chance to undercut the competition and regain customers. AT&T's expense to deploy a new VoIP service is minimal, so we may be lucky and see some competitive pricing. |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: Any info on why?
said by MyDogHsFleas :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure for a byob voip product, only to introduce another one shortly thereafter. Why go through this transition? To eventually force all the CallVantage customers to a higher tier and/or not have a point of comparison for the newly introduced, higher priced tier?
My guess is they'll say there is a technical issue, which I completely believe. I think they'll use that justification to roll out a cheaper product, using less expensive equipment, at a higher price point.
--
Linux Haters Unite! |
|
Matt
Take me down to the paradise city
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to openbox9
Re: Good Move
said by openbox9 :You might be surprised. AT&T is probably tired of losing their bread and butter landline business to MSOs and other VoIP providers. This is AT&T's chance to undercut the competition and regain customers. AT&T's expense to deploy a new VoIP service is minimal, so we may be lucky and see some competitive pricing. I certainly hope you are correct, but so far, they've never come in cheaper, even with a subpar product. (See: U-Verse)
--
Linux Haters Unite! |
|
rmrper
join:2006-06-13
Garland, TX
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·Verizon FIOS
| Hopefully it will be as good as CallVantage
I've been a happy user, even though it's been more expensive than others like Vonage, simply because it's pretty reliable for the near 2 years I've had it. Hopefully this new service will be priced comparably and won't have a bunch of service/quality issues until it becomes mature in market. |
|
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
1 edit | reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: Any info on why?
Probably under a new brand.
Call Vantage was originally designed for business.
This 'new' one, I suspect will be a cheap imitation of Call Vantage (and probably more difficult to get support on) product, with completely different ToS.
Personally, I'd be happy if AT&T brought out something similar to femtocell or T-mobile's service
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
meh37
@verizon.net | A rose...
by another name...
(AT&T -> at&t. CallVantage -> ???.) |
|
scots
Can we have Twinkies?
Premium
join:1999-12-06
Raleigh, NC
·AT&T U-Verse
·ooma
·RoadRunner Cable
·AT&T CallVantage
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
Re: Any info on why?
AT&T made a statement (I believe it was around a year ago) that CallVantage was having "capacity issues." They never went into any detail as to what exactly that meant, or what would/could be done about it (if anything). It may be easier and/or more cost effective for them to come up with something new than to try to expand and/or fix CallVantage's "capacity issue." I hope that whatever they replace it with works as well as CallVantage does. It's been the best VoIP service I've used, and I've never had any problems with it. |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to morbo
said by morbo :said by MyDogHsFleas :It seems strange that they would kill an established brand and infrastructure remember cingular? people liked that company. agree -- but that really was just a rebranding. it was still cingular, just with a different name.
remember sbc? although not liked to the same level, that name and corporate attitude was definitely liked more than at&t.
Disagree -- SBC was hated, AT&T had a generally positive branding. Only here in dslreports.com does insane AT&T hatred fester. Check it out in the real world.
forget all the $ spent on branding and general marketing. let's just turn everything back into at&t.
add callvantage to the list. kill it. resurrect it in a more horrible form.
??? well that has not at all informative. I was looking for INFORMATION. That was pretty much just some random spew. |
|
mrg123
join:2004-02-05
Berthoud, CO | Callvantage has worked great for me...
I've had CallVantage for almost 3 years. I'm a very satisfied customer; I've had almost no problems in all that time other than a few attributed to my ISP. I'd hate to see it go... |
|
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to en102
Re: Any info on why?
scots, en102 -- good posts
I do remember them now complaining about "capacity limits" but they brought out Release 2 of their infrastructure to fix that. CV now has two completely different sets of servers, old and new. In fact I have one TA on the old, and one on the new.
I also recall now that CV was originally designed as a business offering. IBM, which is good buddies with AT&T, provides CV to their home office employees (of which I am one).
Maybe it will be femtocell linked to AT&T Wireless (nee Cingular) using your broadband as an alternative backhaul. That would actually be really sweet. No more multiple phones and phone numbers for me and my family! Too good to actually be true, I fear. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to MyDogHsFleas
rebranding is killing the established brand, especially when you aren't tweaking the brand but renaming it after old ma-bell.
who says at&t had a more positive branding than sbc? the reason they went to at&t was people were more aware of the name at&t over sbc. not it had a more positive view from the public. the public doesn't forget the old monopoly days. everyone does know who at&t is though.
in addition, the at&t wireless brand that was milked in its final months of all that was good (customer service, call quality, etc.) the at&t name was trashed for several months if not longer, while the corporate structure essentially sold out the consumers.
even if you disagree with the sbc comments, just look at how they took the cingular brand and threw a sack of crap on top of it, renaming it 'at&t wireless'. |
|
odreian615
join:2006-01-18
Chicago, IL | Is this the 40 dollar phone and DSL package
I seen it on TV 2 weeks ago ? |
|
Rob2647
join:2008-08-12
Rochester, MI | No Thanks
I'll keep my Vonage |
|
ILuvCallV
join:2008-08-18
USA
| re: CallVantage being "replaced"
I don't understand most of these comments. Note that the name is AT&T CallVantage (similar to AT&T Wireless), so there is no need to change the name.
AT&T CallVantage was always targeted at the consumer and not the business market. They have a different product targeted at the business VoIP market.
There are many telephone adaptors (TA's) supported on the platform -- I don't know why you would think there is more than one platform.
I also don't understand capacity issues to a service that hasn't been advertised in years and according to most voip news items is not growing.
Whatever the reason, it will be interesting to see. Will we all have to return our TAs and get something new?
From my perspective, I cannot imagine this being a good thing. |
|
