 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 | SBC were not for your safety This is soooo dumb for SBC, so they dont care about peoples safety. Maybe that can be there new logo. |
|
 icp1Premium
join:2000-10-13
Saint Louis, MO | said by DaveDude:This is soooo dumb for SBC, so they dont care about peoples safety. Maybe that can be there new logo. I guess I have to repeat myself:
"Vonage goes live without real 911 capabilities, and in trying to figure it out later, they can't get what they want for nothing, so it's SBC's fault. Please."
Vonage are the losers who have a phone service without adequate 911 service, that has nothing to do with SBC.
If you want to blame someone for poor safety record, blame Vonage for not have E911 before they went live. |
|
 knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | said by icp1:said by DaveDude:This is soooo dumb for SBC, so they dont care about peoples safety. Maybe that can be there new logo. I guess I have to repeat myself: "Vonage goes live without real 911 capabilities, and in trying to figure it out later, they can't get what they want for nothing, so it's SBC's fault. Please." Vonage are the losers who have a phone service without adequate 911 service, that has nothing to do with SBC. If you want to blame someone for poor safety record, blame Vonage for not have E911 before they went live. "Vonage solves world hunger and cures cancer"
I can make quotes are great as the next guy, just nothing to back it up as much as the next guy  |
|
| reply to DaveDude
said by DaveDude:This is soooo dumb for SBC, so they dont care about peoples safety. SBC has 911 service, Vonage doesn't. Sounds like Vonage is the stupid one. Maybe they should have thought of this before they started selling service.
Maybe Vonage can have a new logo...
--
"I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." |
|
DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Vonage
·ViaTalk
| said by burgermeister:said by DaveDude:This is soooo dumb for SBC, so they dont care about peoples safety. SBC has 911 service, Vonage doesn't. Sounds like Vonage is the stupid one. Maybe they should have thought of this before they started selling service. Maybe Vonage can have a new logo... Yes that might be true, however it doesnt help SBC image for announcing we dont care about your safety, and more about our lame 911 advantage, which really isnt one. |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
2 edits | reply to icp1
Here, for those too lazy to read the linked article, is the crux of the matter: Vonage approached SBC with an offer “to test and deploy a joint VoIP E-911” service in a February 18 letter from CEO Jeffrey Citron to SBC CEO Edward Whitacre. “We cannot resolve fundamental issues associated with providing a native E-911 service to VoIP users without your assistance,” he said.
Mr. Citron received a response on March 25 from Christopher Rice, SBC’s Executive Vice President of Network Planning & Engineering. “SBC would welcome the opportunity to have its 911 expert meet with Vonage to explain SBC’s current 911 offerings,” said Mr. Rice. “We cannot agree, however, to participate in a separate, proprietary trial with Vonage.” (my emphasis) What this boils down to is Vonage maneuvering for their own solution instead of paying to use what is already available. This was not lost on an analyst a couple paragraphs later:Some analysts call Vonage’s request to SBC unreasonable. “Vonage is SBC’s competition. Why would SBC feel that it has to do anything to help Vonage?” asked William Stofega, an analyst at IDC.
“Vonage has the money to do so much advertising. They need to put the money into making the system bulletproof,” said Mr. Stofega. “The argument that these services can replicate everything for free is a bunch of crap. Vonage needs to take care of this. But once they do, it will cut down on their price advantage.” So, who are the greedy bastards who don't care about people's safety?"Vonage needs to take yes for an answer. We have 9-1-1 solutions in place for VoIP providers today. Vonage appears more concerned about finding ways to provide E9-1-1 on the cheap."
Warnock told me that according to Rice,"SBC is actively working with numerous industry organizations on enhancing E9-1-1 interface solutions. The telecom industry has always sought solutions through industry-standards-setting organizations. That’s how it s done on the scale we’re talking about. Rather than dismiss it, Vonage should embrace it and work within it like the ‘broadband phone company’ it claims to be." There are Vonage ads on TV every night with that "some people do the stupidest things" theme. It seems one of those is to believe the ad. |
|
| reply to DaveDude
To me, it makes Vonage look lame for not caring enough to have 911 in the first place. I guess to each their own...
--
"I've learned that depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." |
|
| reply to RadioDoc
I think you nailed it. They don't like the existing 911 structure/product so they expect SBC to expend money and resources to change it to meet THEIR wishes. Why is the onus on SBC to outlay money and resources when they already did for other providers?
I think Vonage is the one with the problem here. |
|
|
|
| reply to DaveDude
Not to mention, when I transferred my number to Vonage, SBC totally dropped me. There is no more dial tone.
If SBC was truly looking out for my safety, they would allow you to dial 911 whether your a paying customer or not, but that's my .02 cents. |
|
 calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | reply to Yougotit
Hey, wait a minute!
9-1-1 is a GOVERNMENT service.
Why should Vonage have to pay SBC ANYTHING for 9-1-1 operability?
Who put SBC in the position of 9-1-1 intermediary?
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | reply to knightmb
I think the best headline is something along the lines of:
"Vonage refuses to pay SBC extortionate fees to operate as a telecom carrier...."
Calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | reply to burgermeister
So all competitors should just pay SBC anything SBC demands, regardless of the fact that SBC is charging for what should be a government connection?
Sheesh.
With an approach like that, we may as well throw in the towel on competition.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
 DennisPremium,Mod
join:2001-01-26
Algonquin, IL
kudos:5
Chicago
Users find Hot Deals
Users find Hot Dea..
Requests for Hot D..
Home Improvement
| reply to jpjackso
said by jpjackso:If SBC was truly looking out for my safety, they would allow you to dial 911 whether your a paying customer or not, but that's my .02 cents. There are finite numbers of copper pair buried in the ground, not everyone can have a pair.
That and SBC is a business and not in the habit of giving out free 911 service to every house.
Want free 911? Go find a payphone.
--
My Blog. Because I desperately need the acknowledgement of others.
Mainegirl and my Beer Review's |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to calvoiper
The "government" did. The local phone company is contracted to provide the infrastructure. Vonage should be paying the GOVERNMENT via those neat little E911 fees every month. They aren't. Therefore, no service. |
|
| said by RadioDoc:The "government" did. The local phone company is contracted to provide the infrastructure. Vonage should be paying the GOVERNMENT via those neat little E911 fees every month. They aren't. Therefore, no service. I agree that Vonage should pay for E-911 through their Customer bills; however, SBC is pushing this issue as if SBC is the one that has outlaid the money for E-911.
Again, trying to take credit for something they neither own or funded.
--
Playing the Tuba isn't an art, it's an adventure! http://www.lakesidepride.org |
|
RadioDoc58ef2c0Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Where do you see that? |
|
| That is the general tone I get from the news stories...
Again, I am 100% in agreement that Vonage needs to contribute to the E-911 fund, but the way SBC is quoted in the story, they are treating E-911 in their region that it is "their" network, and others that want to play need to pay them handsomely for such access.
--
Playing the Tuba isn't an art, it's an adventure! http://www.lakesidepride.org |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | Exactly.
SBC has it's own little fiefdom of 9-1-1 that works, their relationship with the local governments is cozy, and they are in no hurry to agree to "industry standards" that would be fair to all players.
In the meantime, they criticize other carriers for not immediately jumping at the chance to lick up the crumbs SBC throws and pay handsomely for it. Additionally, they refuse trials which might assist the "industry standards" setting process and might lead to less one-sided 9-1-1 fee structures.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA | reply to Dennis
The problem, knowitall, is that SBC shouldn't be controlling 9-1-1 AT ALL.
Like everything else the ILECs have controlled, they use it to unfairly leverage their monopoly and then want to charge others for it.
In the '90's, Pacific Bell charged competitors between $15,000 and $25,000 just to assign them an NXX, claiming that PB "reprogramming" costs ran that much. It took literally millions of dollars in legal fees and regulatory proceedings to wrestle the NXX assignment process away from the RBOCs.
It's easy to tell that SBC is now doing similar things with the 9-1-1 network, i.e., charging carriers for the "privilege" of competing with them.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! |
|
