http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CallCentric-review-and-CNAM-21687031 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:33:59 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:33:59 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CallCentric-review-and-CNAM-21758892 1/19/2009

I checked with CC support again and was told that they have no plans to offer CNAM, at this time. Definitely puts them at a competitive disadvantage.

I also inquired about simultaneous ring. It sounds like this is a coming feature, but no commitment as to when.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-CallCentric-review-and-CNAM-21758892 Sat, 17 Jan 2009 14:38:13 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/CallCentric-review-and-CNAM-21687031
Regarding CNAM, I have found that CNAM is less and less useful. I have a Verizon landline at my business, and half of the CNAM's show up as "cellphone", "Private Name", "Unknown", or "Incomplete Data".

And I have found that CNAM from VoIP providers tends to have an additional problem: Inaccurate databases. On an Optimum Voice (cable company VoIP) line that I have at my office, incoming calls from the local hospital show up on CNAM as being from a realtor.

I can see that the total lack of CNAM would be an issue for a business phone line. For residential, though, for many folks it would not matter that much.

In fact, CallCentric has an advantage because you can program the CNAM yourself. So when my wife calls me on her cellphone, I can program the CallCentric CNAM to show her name, whereas when she calls my Verizon phone, Verizon's CNAM will just say Cellphone-NJ.

I do agree that they should try to offer it as an option, and in fact I believe they are working on this.

Overall, as you said, CallCentric is a fine provider.

I think these days (January 2009) that CallCentric may be best choice for the BYOD crowd (bring your own device), and that VOIPo may evolve into the best for the DISCO crowd (device is supplied by company).]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/CallCentric-review-and-CNAM-21687031 Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:48:24 EDT