dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
24440
share rss forum feed

macman4hire

join:2009-03-30
Port Saint Lucie, FL

1 edit

Magic Beans Adds Features To magicJack

A new software application was recently released that enhances the magicJack users experience by adding key features. Some of the features are extended ring tones(you can set up it for more than 4 rings), call blocking based CID, do not disturb(calls goto VM immediately).

»magicjackbeans.com/


ronny_b

join:2004-10-10
Saint Louis, MO

After reading the Terms and Conditions, there is no way in hell I would even consider buying this. As I read it, even if it causes damage, you sue and win, you still agree not to colect the judgment.

Ron


sabresfan
Sabresfan

join:2009-05-03
Buffalo, NY
reply to macman4hire

I have been using magicbeans for a week now and I have to say it's not a bad deal. It adds some nice features to MJ and I have not had any problems with it on either of my computers. The call block features work nicely and it's a breeze to install. It just makes me wonder why MJ would not want to come up with a program like this to sell on their own as an extra add on to MJ. I have to give these guys credit for making a good program that works and gives MJ features now that Vonage doesn't have yet. I look forward to any future updates with more features but I can say for the price it's fine just the way it is.



Gork
Ou812ic

join:2001-10-06
Bountiful, UT
reply to macman4hire

Interesting feature set. Unless I missed it, I didn't see call waiting caller id though. That might lure me in.



Magic Jackie

@verizon.net

Call waiting caller ID is already a standard feature of Magic Jack.



Gork
Ou812ic

join:2001-10-06
Bountiful, UT

1 edit

I know that normal caller id is, and that call waiting is, but when I received my device less than a year ago call waiting caller id wasn't. It's not working on my system still... When was call waiting caller id added as a feature?


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by Gork:

I know that normal caller id is, and that call waiting is, but when I received my device less than a year ago call waiting caller id wasn't. It's not working on my system still... When was call waiting caller id added as a feature?
AFAIK, I've always had callerID when I have an incoming call (while on another call).

I don't get many calls like that, but I know I've seen incoming calls displaying callerID while I was talking to someone else.

I think I'd contact chatty support after confirming that you really don't get it.

Mark


Gork
Ou812ic

join:2001-10-06
Bountiful, UT
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
reply to macman4hire

Well thanks, interesting... When I first signed up for MJ their forums were official and I read they didn't have call waiting caller id. I've not heard that anything's changed, and I do get tones when someone calls while I'm on the phone but no caller ID. I'll double check next time I receive a call while on a call (though I'm pretty sure I always do anyway) and call chatty afterwards and see what happens. Not having call waiting caller id has been the only persistent thorn in my side with regard to magicjack since I started using it.



Gork
Ou812ic

join:2001-10-06
Bountiful, UT
Reviews:
·magicjack.com

1 edit

I'm kind of hi-jacking this thread, sorry 'bout that - but I think I'm done now. According to chatty, magicJack doesn't offer the "call waiting with caller id" feature:

Gork: Hello. I was under the impression that magicJack does not offer "caller id with call waiting" but I'm being told otherwise. It doesn't work for me and I would like to know if this is one of the features offered.

mj rep: may I know if you are referring to the caller ID feature of your phone Gork?

Gork: No, my telephone is caller id with call waiting capable. I would like to know if magicJack is. Meaning: If I am on my telephone which is attached via magicJack... If I am on the phone and a call comes in, I receive a tone letting me know that a second call is incoming. I only get the tone, I do not get a caller id telling me who is calling. My phone is capable of this feature, but I've never gotten it to work with magicJack. I was under the impression magicJack doesn't offer this feature. I would like to know whether or not it is a feature magicJack offers.

mj rep: That is not offered Gork. . The magicjack does have a caller ID feature however, you will not see the incoming number if you are already in a call.

Gork: Thank you, that answers my question.


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by Gork:

I only get the tone, I do not get a caller id telling me who is calling. My phone is capable of this feature,
I misunderstood what you were asking. The softphone displays caller ID when notifying of call waiting (an incoming call while you're on a call).

But, you're right that it doesn't pass caller ID to an attached handset when a call is waiting.

I think we misunderstood you because these "wrapper" programs to enhance the softphone couldn't do anything to affect the dongle's interface to a handset. I assumed you were talking about the softphone.

Mark


Gork
Ou812ic

join:2001-10-06
Bountiful, UT

Ah, indeed. The softphone does receive the information. Sorry I wasn't more clear, and thanks again.


macman4hire

join:2009-03-30
Port Saint Lucie, FL

2 edits
reply to macman4hire

More information about MagicBeans features.

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=GReFeAEDIM8


JoelR

@24.138.205.x
reply to macman4hire

I bought MagicBeans and firmly say that it is not worth the money, first of all they should offer a free trial or a money back guaranteed. I do not recommend this product.

Don't buy!!


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by JoelR :

I bought MagicBeans and firmly say that it is not worth the money, first of all they should offer a free trial or a money back guaranteed. I do not recommend this product.

Don't buy!!
I have to agree. I haven't looked at it. But, I remember a few months ago when the author was pumping it on magicjacksupport.com. He was claiming it would have call forwarding and some other features which I felt were impossible to do just by front-ending the vendor's UI.

From what I gather here, those features aren't present, and it's more like what anyone can do just front-ending the vendor's UI.

With no trial offer, it sounds like a problem too.

Anyone can automate the MJ UI using a tool like AutoIT. I even wrote a tool to selectively block or ignore calls depending on phone numbers the user provides. It's about 80% complete.

I thought about completing it, and put it on SourceForge as an open source project anyone could contribute to. But, I don't know if there would be much interest in that.

Mark

barbiegal7

join:2009-11-11
Temecula, CA

I agree - DON'T BUY IT. I couldn't even get it to work at first, so I emailed customer service. The boob that wrote the thing called me, and he spent more time telling me about features of the program (WHO CARES since the program doesn't WORK!) and blowing his own horn about what a great computer guy he is than actually helping me. He didn't even know what "that thing is at the bottom of the screen where all the programs you have open" is. Um, you mean the TOOLBAR? Are you friggin' kidding me? He wanted me to open something in the control panel but didn't know where it was because he wasn't that "familiar with Vista." This is the same guy who insulted my computer guy and told me that only 2% of computer "guys" are any good but HE'S been at it for 30 years and how great he is.

After over an hour on the phone and NO HELP from this guy, I told him thanks but no thanks. I just wanted to block some telemarketers, not build a space station. He told me if I ran a complete system scan with a virus program HE recommended ONLY (one I had to BUY, no less, after just wasting $12.95 on this piece o'krap), then he'd consider giving me SOME money back if I couldn't get it to work. Isn't that sweet of him?

So my lowly computer guy (that he said was such a loser for installing a FREE antivirus program on my computer that works quite well, thank you) comes over and figures out the problem. I still have an issue of some error box popping up about twice a day and shutting the program down, but there is no way I'm calling back to see if the all-mighty programmer knows how to fix it. I'm pretty sure he doesn't.

AVOID! Not at ALL worth the hassle.


pagemen

join:2008-12-28
planet earth

1 edit
reply to amigo_boy

Click for full size
AutoIt Inside?
AutoIt inside?

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by pagemen:

AutoIt inside?
Thanks. I ruffled that guys feathers over on the magicjacksupport.com forum back when it was just vaporware. I questioned some of his claimed features, such as call forwarding. I said I didn't believe it was possible for him to do things like that, intercepting an incoming call, and routing it elsewhere.

The other features I said were entirely possible, and that I'd written some autoIT code to do many of them. (Retaining focus, hiding the dialer, ignoring or blocking incoming numbers, and anonymous callers). That's all easy stuff to do with autoIT. I had it about 80% complete.

Some of the other features, like changing the ring tones can be done in AutoIT with some trickery applied to the MJ DLLs. But, changing the number of rings can't be done, unless there's a way to adjust a MJ value in the registry or in a DLL.

Anyway, he was perfectly defensive about the whole thing. Insisting that he wasn't using AutoIT, and he had been a developer since 1897, and was working with low-level codes (I assumed to mean the win32 API accessed with a lower-level language, such as C#.).

He struck me as conceited. He oversold the capabilities. Very defensive about anyone ripping him off (no free trials because someone would abuse it, and he wouldn't get his $10.).

But, the worst thing that he insisted it wasn't AutoIT. He was justified in being closed-source, selfish with free trials, and charging a fee because it was supposed to be "low-level" programming, accessing the Windows API natively. Not using a high-level scripting language like AutoIT.

And now the truth comes out. It's AutoIT.

I could still bring my effort to a finished state if there was much interest in a collaborative, open-source "Beans like" tool.

The benefit of such a thing would be that thousands of eyes could assure that there are no spyware/malware characteristics buried inside. (To me, that was the big risk with this guy's tool. AutoIT makes it easy to do keystroke logging, file snooping, credential stealing. That's why anti-malware programs report any AutoIT *script* as malware.). And, people could adjust it to meet their particular needs.

But, I think most people would just prefer to pay the $10.

Mark

pagemen

join:2008-12-28
planet earth
reply to macman4hire

Click for full size
unpacked then ultraedit
To be sure, I installed it in VMware, as I didn't put a soundcard in the VM at first, it gave an error msg box with AutoIt in title, so at least the installer is made by AutoIt.

For the main program, also confirmed to be AutoIt after "upx -d"(the standard AutoIt packer).

Anyway, being an AutoIt fan, I see no problem to sell a software built by AutoIt -- regardless of the tools, does c/c++/autoit really matter -- he has put considerable amount of work in the software and that's his right to charge for it. But please be honest and get some better trial/refund policy at least.

amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by pagemen:

Anyway, being an AutoIt fan, I see no problem to sell a software built by AutoIt -- regardless of the tools, does c/c++/autoit really matter -- he has put considerable amount of work in the software and that's his right to charge for it.
The only problems I had with it were:

1. Hyping features (like call-forwarding) in July that were impossible to do with AutoIT (and, I doubt even with native, low-level programming).

2. Denying (emphatically) that it was written in AutoIT.

3. AutoIT is so easy to use that literally anyone could write a softphone front-end to do things like softphone hiding, focus retention, call blocking/ignoring. It seemed uncouth to charge for something like that when so many people have volunteered their time to help other MJ users. (And, uncouth when you consider how inexpensive MJ is by itself.).

Especially uncouth to be so obsessed with how everyone was out to rip him off, steal his ideas, unleash a hacked copy.

His justification was that it (emphatically) wasn't written in AutoIT, and he dared anyone to do what he was doing with "low-level codes" (enabling him to do features he insisted nobody could do in AutoIT, some of which don't exist in the final product.).

said by pagemen:

But please be honest and get some better trial/refund policy at least.
I agree. Give away a crippleware version with some features like ignore/blocking for a 3-5 phone numbers.

Now that we see it's written in AutoIT it explains his paranoia about free versions being hacked, etc. It probably wouldn't take much for someone to hack a crippled script, changing a "demo" flag to unlock the full capabilities. He'd have to have a truly separate demo script with no additional (conditional) functionality.

Mark

Wingfat5

join:2004-05-06
Lake Worth, FL

A few angry people around here?

Well I just purchased Magic Beans and installed it on a new Windows 7 Ultimate computer and It does everything described in the documentation. I did have to check "run as Administrator" to bypass a "error message" when checking for updates.

I really don't care what or how its written if it works... and it does so very well.

I did also receive excellent customer service and a timely call back from the author.

You guys can bitch all you want... Now I have a REALLY useful MagicJack...

Looking foward for upcoming updates

WF



Paul Beanyun

@verizon.net

I agree with you.

If it is "so easy" to make a program like Magic Beans, and it is so wrong to charge for it, then why don't I see a comparable program being handed out for free?

I say: Put up, or shut up.


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by Paul Beanyun :

If it is "so easy" to make a program like Magic Beans, and it is so wrong to charge for it, then why don't I see a comparable program being handed out for free?
Conversely, if AutoIT doesn't make it remarkably easier, why did the author make such a big scene to obscure the fact that he was really using AutoIT?

Mark


Paul Beanyun

@verizon.net

I don't know what AutoIT is. It doesn't matter to me. I don't care if it's Auto or Manual IT. I don't care if it's made with stone knives and bear skins.

I do know that you haven't provided a link where I can download a comparable program for free.

You've said that "literally anyone" could do it. You even said that yours is 80% complete. Apparently that work was done months ago.

I'm saying, please provide me a link to your finished product. It can't be a matter of not having the time, because it's so easy to do, and you're almost done anyway. Don't be selfish. Give us your work for free. After all, it's not hard.

I sincerely want these features for free.

Thank you.


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

said by Paul Beanyun :

You've said that "literally anyone" could do it.
They can. Here's the link to AutoIT's online docs.

It's a very high-level interpreted scripting language to interface to Windows GUI programs. The softphone UI can be easily minimized, moved to an off-screen location, detected that it maximized (and minimized again), locked to prevent maximization.

The pop-up "incoming call" window can be detected the instant it appears, and minimized. The phone number displayed in that window can be accessed, and checked against phone numbers specified by the user (to be ignored, blocked, etc.).

AutoIT also comes with a high-level, interpreted GUI-construction tool. Trivial to create a GUI for users to specify phone numbers (to block or ignore), settings to be respected by the softphone front-end.

The only point I've made is that, when the author was challenged on this back in June, he made an enormous thing about how it wasn't being written in AutoIT. It was going to require *much, much*, more work than that. All very low-level programming, Windows internals, specialized experience from his years of programming.

It's revealing that it turns out it was AutoIT.

Why has nobody delivered a free softphone front end? I don't know. Maybe they will now that MagicBeans isn't everything the author said it would be back in June (and, more people become familiar with the very powerful and easy-to-use AutoIT scripting language.).

For me, I dropped what I was working on because, 1) the author of MagicBeans indicated he was unemployed and I didn't want to hinder his ability to make an income, at least for awhile. And, 2) I'm not sure there would be much participation for a collaborative, open-source softphone UI. It wasn't something I wanted to be solely responsible for (even though I was prepared to do the initial development.).

Mark


Paul Beanyun

@verizon.net

Okay, so it doesn't matter what he used. It's easy, but you don't want to do it.

So why do we keep hearing about this from you? What does it matter?

I want these features for free, and right now, the only place I can get them is to pay $13 for Magic Beans.

It doesn't hurt anyone.

Let's just leave it alone, unless you can deliver.

Please post when that happens.

Thank you.


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

1 edit

said by Paul Beanyun :

So why do we keep hearing about this from you? What does it matter?
You haven't heard anything about it from me between June and just recently, when it became evident that some of the over-the-top features which the MagicBeans author promised didn't exist in the released product. (Features he used as proof that nobody could do with AutoIT what he was allegedly doing with low-level programming.).

I commented on that, and suggested it was because, despite his adamant assertions to the contrary, he really did use AutoIT.

And now, in the past few days, I've remarked again on the topic when someone posted proof that MagicBeans really did use AutoIT.

I think AutoIT is a great tool. I'm glad he's using it. I just think it speaks volumes about his character (and supports the complaints people have posted about their dealings with him). He went to great lengths to obfuscate (and literally deny) that he was using it, claiming it would be the product of low-level programming which would produce features that couldn't be attained in AutoIT.

You ask why nobody has produced an AutoIT front-end to the MJ softphone? Perhaps because they were misled for 3 months? Believing MagicBeans was going to be much more than what anyone could do in AutoIT? Maybe if the author had been honest in his dealings, someone would have had some motivation to play with AutoIT and produce something for the user community.

It might still happen as this story is told, and retold. So, delight in its telling! You might just get that free tool because of the exposure!

Mark


Paul Beanyun

@verizon.net

I would be delighted to see "someone" (I infer you still don't mean you.) step forward to perform this simple task.

Is the reason that there is no free alternative really because the masses were so misled by the programmer? I don't understand why that would have stopped you from creating your own, if you are so confident in the ease and ability of AutoIT. How about someone just trying to put some honest competition in the market? No, they were misled. No one would dare compete, even with millions of potential customers on the line, because some posts made in a forum scared them.

Oh wait, you suggested in your previous post that the only reason you didn't follow through with the last 20% of your own project, was because you felt so sorry for this person whose character you now impugn without hesitation. So, was it because you wanted this lying scoundrel to make some needed cash, or because he misled you about the software's abilities that you didn't finish your easy project? It's hard to keep track of your story.

You say that your opinion of him is supported by some monumental outpouring of complaint posts. I've seen many posts of praise. I'm pretty sure anytime one must deal with the public, there will be a mix of opinions. Hecklers, complainers, and even jack asses are never in short supply.

Perhaps he didn't have the time to deal with annoying, non-productive hecklers, and said what he did about AutoIT, as a simple way to shut them up. Perhaps his methods combined AutoIT with low-level programming. Can you prove otherwise?

You could prove otherwise, if you would simply put up or shut up, as the saying goes.


amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22

1 edit

said by Paul Beanyun :

because you felt so sorry for this person whose character you now impugn without hesitation.
I don't think I'm impugning the character of the author of MagicBeans by simply pointing out what he did, said, etc. If you feel he's impugned, it must be because those things reflect badly upon him.

I'd feel sorry for anyone who's unemployed regardless of their character. Had he been honest about his use of AutoIT (instead of violently denying it) I would have still backed off my open-source effort to help him out. Even suspecting he wasn't being honest, I backed off to help him out.

Like I said in the post you replied to, I think it's great that he's using AutoIT. But, his behavior back in June, violently denying he was using it gives a great deal of credence to complaints from his customers about their dealings with him.

That's all I've said.

Mark

PX Eliezer7
Premium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13
Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP

I just have a practical question.

On the previous page, "pagemen" said that the program generated a malware warning from his security program.

If this be the case, and if various security programs generate alerts in regard to MagicBeans, isn't that an issue for the folks selling it. That is, won't there be a lot of confused or upset customers?



Paul Beanyun

@verizon.net
reply to amigo_boy

This is silly.

How can you say you don't think you are impugning his character?

That's pretty much your whole theme. Well, that, and the "It's so easy, I could do it, but I'm not."

That is indeed, all you've said.