dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
1165

Zabrowski
@91.227.222.x

Zabrowski

Anon

Some Comparisons

said by bbbc:

With all due respect, VoIP.ms very much lacks with their fifty ways of support.

They haven't lacked on the few occasions I needed to contact them.

Callcentric is a company that actually provides decent support at a great price.

I agree they have good support, but not at a great price, unless by 'great' you mean high. As a couple of people have mentioned, you may pay, depending on how you use Callcentric, twice what Voip.Ms charges.

A reliable connection that sounds good is, if not yet standard, close to being standard, judging by what I read here. And the price for that seems to be lower each year.

If, in addition to a reliable connection that sounds good, you need things like IVR, SMS, useful filtering, and other bells and whistles, Voip.ms, Anveo, and Callcentric (when they finally get the IVR and SMS put in) seem like the top contenders. Anveo's prices beat the other two, and if I could make sense of their website I might even have used them; and Voip.ms beats Callcentric hands down.

In the face of the competition, which will probably get tougher over time, I think Callcentric's prices will tend to shut them out, and if all that Lucent equipment makes for an unavoidably high overhead so that they cannot lower prices, they may get out of residential voip altogether (please straighten me out if I am talking nonsense).

Fortunately for Voip.ms, Anveo's diagrams are so difficult for the average user to make sense of, that Voip.ms probably does not have to worry about them as far as residential customers go.
tbrummell2
join:2002-02-09
Ottawa, ON

tbrummell2

Member

said by Zabrowski :

Anveo's diagrams are so difficult for the average user to make sense of

Amen brother! That flow builder thing they have is absolutely puzzling! I went with Voip.ms because of their simple, Asterisk like, settings. That was much easier to wrap my head around.
wideglide36
join:2003-11-08
Altoona, PA

wideglide36

Member

said by tbrummell2:

said by Zabrowski :

Anveo's diagrams are so difficult for the average user to make sense of

Amen brother! That flow builder thing they have is absolutely puzzling! I went with Voip.ms because of their simple, Asterisk like, settings. That was much easier to wrap my head around.

Wow! I thought I was the only one who thought that flow builder was puzzling.

I really wanted to use Anveo at one time, but every time I went to their web site and tried to figure out that flow builder thingy, and other things, like what they charge for various services, my head hurt.

They seem like an excellent company, but they're way over my head.

I'm sure they're geared more towards the business community as one poster mentioned previously.

KISS is my motto.

That's why I'm still learning how to use Voip.ms and Callcentric.

As far as support goes, I have had excellent experiences at both Voip.ms and Callcentric.

Voip.ms will definitely go the extra mile when it comes to support.

At least for me they did.........................
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

2 edits

PX Eliezer1 to Zabrowski

Premium Member

to Zabrowski
Speaking of comparisons:

Looks to me like Denetron is more expensive:
»denetron.com/voice/home

And what about these guys....pretty costly indeed:
»www.simplivoip.com/voip- ··· or-home/
»www.simplivoip.com/voip- ··· usiness/

You can always find cheaper, and you can always find more expensive.
juleso
join:2009-06-04

juleso to Zabrowski

Member

to Zabrowski
I too was a bit confused when I first saw the ANVEO interface and call flow builder.

Now, I understand how powerful it is and frankly it really isn't rocket science if you just want to setup a basic extension / call flow. Perhaps I am bit more savvy than the average user, but I think people are inclined to write-it-off as complicated too easily.

That being said, voip.ms offers comparable service (IMHO) at comparable prices with more readily available support (I believe their online chat is always or frequently available?) so if that option works for people, so be it.

I use both services.
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

OzarkEdge

Member

said by juleso:

I too was a bit confused when I first saw the ANVEO interface and call flow builder.

Now, I understand how powerful it is and frankly it really isn't rocket science if you just want to setup a basic extension / call flow. Perhaps I am bit more savvy than the average user, but I think people are inclined to write-it-off as complicated too easily.

Anveo configuration could be both complicated/confusing and powerful. It could reflect a small development team whereby the developer's familiarity with the subject/tools overlooks the user's unfamiliarity with same. The residential VoIP convert may not want to become a service provider expert just to switch and maintain their phone service, even though they could.

OE
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

said by OzarkEdge:

The residential VoIP convert may not want to become a service provider expert just to switch and maintain their phone service, even though they could.

Years ago when I first started using VoIP, I thought that described me. I've since discovered that the better I understand the technology, and the more control I have over it, the better my service performs. My home setup surpassed the performance of a simple POTS line years ago, and it improves even more every time I learn something new. I don't use technical support any more because I use service providers and equipment that allow me enough control over my setup that I can fix problems by myself (though I rarely have problems).

I don't argue that my VoIP setup is more complicated than plugging a handset into a POTS line, but I think it's proportionately better.

m.
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

OzarkEdge

Member

said by Mango:

Years ago when I first started using VoIP, I thought that described me. I've since discovered that the better I understand the technology, and the more control I have over it, the better my service performs. My home setup surpassed the performance of a simple POTS line years ago, and it improves even more every time I learn something new. I don't use technical support any more because I use service providers and equipment that allow me enough control over my setup that I can fix problems by myself (though I rarely have problems).

I don't argue that my VoIP setup is more complicated than plugging a handset into a POTS line, but I think it's proportionately better.

Did your progression in VoIP proficiency lead you to remove your VoIP.ms review from your Reviews list?

OE
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

Indirectly. I haven't used them in a few years, and reviews that are more than two years old do not appear in the user's reviews list (but still exist).

Noah123
@68.183.195.x

Noah123 to tbrummell2

Anon

to tbrummell2
said by tbrummell2:

said by Zabrowski :

That flow builder thing they have is absolutely puzzling!


The flow builder was actually one of the things that attracted me to Anveo!

mugurd
join:2001-05-24
Ottawa, ON
·Bell Fibe Internet
·Fido
(Software) pfSense
Netgear RAX50
Netgear R7000

mugurd

Member

said by Noah123 :

The flow builder was actually one of the things that attracted me to Anveo!

Same here...I'm no Einstein, but I don't find it complex for people that spend time on this forum.
Plus, the things I can do with it....

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude - check the "official" replies to see what I mean - and a greedy pricing scheme. I'm sorry, but vwhen they charge 4 (four) times more than AVERAGE for local calls, something is wrong.

I'm a happy Anveo customer and if they didn't exist, I would go with Voip.ms.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by mugurd:

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude - check the "official" replies to see what I mean - and a greedy pricing scheme. I'm sorry, but vwhen they charge 4 (four) times more than AVERAGE for local calls, something is wrong.

You'd be touchy too if people saw your company as a piñata.

OK, this is from Voip.MS website:

USA 48 Premium tier-1 @ 1¢ per minute ($0.01)
Canada starting as low as ½ ¢ per minute ($0.0052)
Canada Premium tier-1 @ 1¢ per minute ($0.01)

By which we see that the lowest Voip.MS rate is [not] for Tier-1 (by their own description) and that in any event it's only for the Canadian market.

That's a very important market especially for Canadians but it's only 1/10 of the NorthAm market.

Now, any kind of volume user is going to take a CC bundle.

So: The 500 minute outbound bundle is 6.95, but that includes 911 service. Subtracting out 1.50 to account for that, leaves 5.45.

And to be fair I'll assume that someone is only using 400 minutes of the 500 minute package.

5.45 / 400 = 0.013625 thus about 1.36 cents.

So for Tier-1 to Tier-1 comparison, CC is higher than VMS, but not anything like "4 (four) times more" as you said.
PX Eliezer1

PX Eliezer1 to mugurd

Premium Member

to mugurd
said by mugurd:

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude - check the "official" replies to see what I mean - and a greedy pricing scheme.

You know what's funny too.

CC gives free calling capabilities to people all over the world with their IP Freedom accounts, and also full support for SIP URI calling. And people [do] use these free services, eg from the Philippines to the USA/Canada.

CC also offers the free NY DID's which many people have used.

CC never charges for customer service, even for free accounts.

Anveo has lots of extra charges, even for trouble tickets as I understand it.

So this is another reason that I disagree with your assessment.

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

1 recommendation

cb14 to mugurd

Member

to mugurd
said by mugurd:

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude - check the "official" replies to see what I mean - and a greedy pricing scheme. I'm sorry, but vwhen they charge 4 (four) times more than AVERAGE for local calls, something is wrong.

I'm a happy Anveo customer and if they didn't exist, I would go with Voip.ms.

It always depends on needs and expectations. I am a great fan of Localphone, but I will be the first one admitting that their VOIP service will be too feature poor for many users.
For me, Callcentric's free NYC DID is a great deal, having for $ 1.50/month E911 service, unlimited incoming DID and a great, feature rich service on PAYG basis as a back up or whenever I need features my other providers do not offer.Neither VOIP.ms nor anveohave anything like that.
For someone with a lot of Canada calling and no calls to European countries VOIP.ms may be a great deal,other calling patterns may find their home with Anveo,especially if they find a way to deal with their customer service.
On edit: four times average? For times more than Localphone,but certainly not average.

bbbc
join:2001-10-02
NorthAmerica

4 edits

bbbc to Zabrowski

Member

to Zabrowski
said by Zabrowski :

They haven't lacked on the few occasions I needed to contact them.

Good for you anonymous user. I had shitty service recently where the lazy ass owners were too meek to touch base with me.

I agree they have good support, but not at a great price, unless by 'great' you mean high. As a couple of people have mentioned, you may pay, depending on how you use Callcentric, twice what Voip.Ms charges.

Listen, you may dig the Walmart of VoIP, but as I've stated before, you get Walmart service.

In the face of the competition, which will probably get tougher over time, I think Callcentric's prices will tend to shut them out, and if all that Lucent equipment makes for an unavoidably high overhead so that they cannot lower prices, they may get out of residential voip altogether (please straighten me out if I am talking nonsense).

CC could probably charge less if they did most of their work out of Mexico. Hell, Walmart gets most of its stuff produced in a cheap country too.

I feel special an anonymous user responds to me out of the blue with a new thread.
said by mugurd :

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude

Interesting, I got the elitist attitude from MartinM when I tried to politely touch base with a member of VoIP.ms' management. I'm still amazed they (VoIP.ms) were weenies and just didn't call me back to iron out my ongoing issues.

I've been tame trying not to bash VoIP.ms in recent times, but I will state in this forum a response to other threads that I had a rough (to put it politely) time with VoIP.ms in 2014 when others state things are just hunky-dory.
Ole Juul
join:2013-04-27
Princeton, BC

2 recommendations

Ole Juul to mugurd

Member

to mugurd
said by mugurd:

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude -

I can work with that. I'm an elitist. That's why I hang around here. Of course I could post on Ask.com or Facebook when I have VoIP questions....

Schlegel
@193.107.90.x

Schlegel to PX Eliezer1

Anon

to PX Eliezer1
said by PX Eliezer1:

said by mugurd:

CC is plagued by an "elitist" attitude - check the "official" replies to see what I mean - and a greedy pricing scheme. I'm sorry, but vwhen they charge 4 (four) times more than AVERAGE for local calls, something is wrong.

You'd be touchy too if people saw your company as a piñata.

If you mean cc is bashed a lot around here, I disagree: they seem to be treated with kid gloves by most of the posters I have seen. And yes, the 'official' cc attitude is insufferably arrogant.

OK, this is from Voip.MS website:

USA 48 Premium tier-1 @ 1¢ per minute ($0.01)
Canada starting as low as ½ ¢ per minute ($0.0052)
Canada Premium tier-1 @ 1¢ per minute ($0.01)

By which we see that the lowest Voip.MS rate is [not] for Tier-1 (by their own description) and that in any event it's only for the Canadian market.[/
That's a very important market especially for Canadians but it's only 1/10 of the NorthAm market.

Voip.ms's tier-1 price for Canada *and* the US is 1¢ per minute, while cc's price is 1.98¢ per minute, almost twice voip.ms's. It is not 4 times that of CC, but *only* twice as much.

Now, any kind of volume user is going to take a CC bundle.

So: The 500 minute outbound bundle is 6.95, but that includes 911 service. Subtracting out 1.50 to account for that, leaves 5.45.

And to be fair I'll assume that someone is only using 400 minutes of the 500 minute package.

5.45 / 400 = 0.013625 thus about 1.36 cents.

Right, and voip.ms charges $5.00 + $1.50 for 911 = $6.50. Leaving out the 911 charge, it is $5.00.

Dividing that by 400 gives 1.25¢ per minute.

So for Tier-1 to Tier-1 comparison, CC is higher than VMS, but not anything like "4 (four) times more" as you said.

Correct, if you buy the 500-minute cc bundle, it is 1.36¢ per minute versus 1.25¢ per minute for voip.ms pay-as-you-go. So a volume user who uses 400 minutes a month does better using voip.ms.

And if you are using pay-as-you-go with cc, voip.ms is an even better bargain: cc charges *twice* as much for outgoing as voip.ms.

But wait, there's more! CC charges 1.5¢ per minute for incoming, while voip.ms charges 1¢ per minute.

And cc charges $1.95 per month to maintain a DID, while voip.ms charges 99¢.

And still more! CC charges for a full minute, even if you use 5 seconds, while voip.ms charges in six-second increments. If a telemarketer call shows up and you have your filters set to demand that the telemarketer enter a digit, then with cc you will pay for a full minute, even if the business takes 20 seconds to conclude.

So with this example, cc would charge 1.5¢ while voip.ms would charge .3¢ (3/10 of a cent). CC is charging *5 times more*!

If you get a lot of telemarketer calls, that difference adds up.

Aside from telemarketer calls, if you are a chatty individual, the difference in increments won't make much of a difference in price, but if you do a lot of short calls, you will soon see the difference.

What do you get for the higher cc price:

They both sound good and work with few problems.

Both have a good set of filters and routing choices, but I think anyone who has tried both will agree that voip.ms's are better.

Not to mention that voip.ms has a very useful IVR.

On the other hand, CC's telemarketer block is built-in and works out of the box, and has provision to randomize the digit requested. Very nice indeed.

Both have good support people; Fortunately, neither service requires support very much in my experience.

Taken all in all, or even taking just a few parts, voip.ms is the clear choice for me.
drivel
join:2013-07-12
Santa Clara, CA

drivel

Member

said by Schlegel :

What do you get for the higher cc price:

Many persons, including me, don't consider price important. I would prefer if voip.ms raised their prices and used the additional money for more development.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to Schlegel

Premium Member

to Schlegel
said by Schlegel :

Taken all in all, or even taking just a few parts, voip.ms is the clear choice for me.

I'm glad that it works well for you and for the other people in Poland where you are posting from at 4 AM US EDT.

Thanks so much for caring about the North American market. CallCentric obviously is important, otherwise the enthusiasts of other services would not spend so much energy on discussing it.

[btw I already said that Voip.MS had some price advantages (just not fourfold) depending on actual usage and on the outbound options and inbound options chosen. But there is more to the decision than price. After all, some folks these days make Voip.MS seem expensive....]

Anyway I suspect that other interesting things will be happening down the road a bit.

mugurd
join:2001-05-24
Ottawa, ON

mugurd to Zabrowski

Member

to Zabrowski
I think we'd be better off closing this thread as it goes downhill fast with references to geography and how "some" are better than "others"....yea, that's "elitist" too.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by mugurd:

I think we'd be better off closing this thread as it goes downhill fast with references to geography and how "some" are better than "others"....yea, that's "elitist" too.

"Elitist"

-----

Reminds me of the Kurt Vonnegut story "Harrison Bergeron" where no one was allowed to be different.

It is the year 2081. Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger or faster than anyone else. The Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced.

The government forces citizens to wear "handicaps" (such as a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ha ··· Bergeron

mugurd
join:2001-05-24
Ottawa, ON
·Bell Fibe Internet
·Fido
(Software) pfSense
Netgear RAX50
Netgear R7000

mugurd

Member

You seem to have a tendency to take bits and pieces from quotes and build "arguments" on that.

I was actually right when I said CC is 4x more expensive than ANVEO (where did I compare CC with Voip.ms?) And yes, for that negligible 10% of NA only (of which I'm part).
Also, I mentioned "geography" when I asked for the thread to be closed as it becomes a meaningless dispute. Yet, you latched onto one word and enlightened me on egalitarian theories... Nietzsche much?

Really...to each his own. If you're better served by CC - good for you. That does not make it a better choice for everyone - nor will I be convinced otherwise by the postings here vs my personal experience.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by mugurd:

Really...to each his own. If you're better served by CC - good for you. That does not make it a better choice for everyone - nor will I be convinced otherwise by the postings here vs my personal experience.

I've never said otherwise. In fact, it seems to me that I've said on more than one occasion that if someone is doing well with company "X" then that's a good outcome.

And I sometimes suggest other companies to people---such as Voipo. I recently said to someone that for their particular needs CC would [not] be a good fit.

But if you don't think that at least some of the grousing about CC is the result of specific efforts then you've missed observing some important clues. One such example is laserfocusing on the IVR issue along with posting a great review of VMS and a very bad review of CC at the exact same time by a brand new member....and that's occurred more than once.

TL/DR: By calling for debate to end, you are basically saying that the piñata does not have the right to fight back, especially if it makes a good case.

pquesinb
join:2009-04-20
Severn, MD

1 recommendation

pquesinb to drivel

Member

to drivel
said by drivel:

said by Schlegel :

What do you get for the higher cc price:

Many persons, including me, don't consider price important. I would prefer if voip.ms raised their prices and used the additional money for more development.

I'm not sure that I would lobby for higher prices, but it depends upon what you're looking for.

I feel that CC's prices are pretty high, but I'm *REALLY* glad that they're here. In the past, when I've needed to terminate a fax or data call (postage meter refill, for example), I've always been able to count on CC to get that call to complete successfully while almost never being able to complete such a call with another carrier.

CC being/having their own CLEC means higher overhead but it also confers many advantages to their customers as mentioned above, even if one of those advantages isn't (ahem..), geographic redundancy.

- Phil

cb14
join:2013-02-04
Miami Beach, FL

cb14 to mugurd

Member

to mugurd
We are getting into repetition here. As said, it's the personal usage which decides which carrier is the best and we are lucky enough to nhave all the great choices from smaller providers outside of big telco/cable business.
In my specific case, it would be absurd to replace CC with Anveo or VOIP.ms. That may work differently for other people. But generalizations for propaganda purposes are wrong.
I am not a fan boy. I do not remember when was it the last time I gave full 100% rating on all counts to anyone.

Zabrowski
@91.227.222.x

Zabrowski to PX Eliezer1

Anon

to PX Eliezer1
I hear that CC is about ready to unveil its own IVR, so nobody will be able to beat up CC about that.

arpawocky
Premium Member
join:2014-04-13
Columbus, OH

arpawocky to pquesinb

Premium Member

to pquesinb
said by pquesinb:

In the past, when I've needed to terminate a fax or data call (postage meter refill, for example), I've always been able to count on CC to get that call to complete successfully while almost never being able to complete such a call with another carrier.

I used to be able to use CallWithUs to refill my Pitney-Bowes meter, but that fails now - I'll have to give CallCentric a try.

My USPS "inspection" is due and I cant seem to get the meter to connect via *any* of the usual toll-free termination providers that otherwise work even for data calls.
arpawocky

4 recommendations

arpawocky to Zabrowski

Premium Member

to Zabrowski
said by Zabrowski :

I hear that CC is about ready to unveil its own IVR, so nobody will be able to beat up CC about that.

In which case, people will beat up CC for having an IVR instead of beating them up for not having one....

pquesinb
join:2009-04-20
Severn, MD

pquesinb to arpawocky

Member

to arpawocky
said by arpawocky:

I used to be able to use CallWithUs to refill my Pitney-Bowes meter, but that fails now - I'll have to give CallCentric a try.

My USPS "inspection" is due and I cant seem to get the meter to connect via *any* of the usual toll-free termination providers that otherwise work even for data calls.

I've been able to get postage meters to connect by using CC's paid toll-free (yeah, seems kind of ridiculous) termination. At least they charge less for toll-free termination than for non toll-free.

Still... if it has to work and other alternatives are leaving you high and dry, then you pay and be thankful that the option is available.

After having some odd intermittent difficulties with another termination provider/aggregator, we've just hooked up with SIPRoutes which gives us access to a number of carriers and much more control over which ones are actually used to complete a particular call. With this in mind, I'm looking forward to seeing how they work out for fax and data. According to the rep, a number of ITSPs are using them to terminate T.38 calls which are problematic through other providers.

If I uncover any stellar performers, I'll post who they are so hopefully you can use that info to try and find termination providers who use/provide access to those carriers.

- Phil
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

said by pquesinb:

I've been able to get postage meters to connect by using CC's paid toll-free....

Have you tried it with CC by using the Sipbroker calling which is free?

**275*1800xxxxxxx or
**275*1888xxxxxxx

And so forth.

Dial plan has to be modified of course.

Always very clear for my TF calls.

Of course for the brief calls to Pitney-Bowes it's not a big cost anyway.