mob (banned)On the next level.. join:2000-10-07 San Jose, CA |
mob (banned)
Member
2010-Dec-21 9:28 am
When will this arrive for Google App users?Seriously, when will be available for my personal domain? I f'n PAY for their services, and I don't get it. | |
|
| FFH5 Premium Member join:2002-03-03 Tavistock NJ |
FFH5
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 9:53 am
Re: When will this arrive for Google App users?said by mob:Seriously, when will be available for my personal domain? I f'n PAY for their services, and I don't get it. Can't you just use regular Gmail to make your free calls in the meantime until they make it available to Google Apps users. | |
|
| | |
Re: When will this arrive for Google App users?It works on my personal domain, and 2 others I created last week for friends. | |
|
| | | |
Re: When will this arrive for Google App users?same here. But if you Pay you don't have the option for some reason. I know someone that PAYS for google apps but they don't get the option. The new "features" are hit or miss with App users. | |
|
| duh join:2008-08-18 Atlanta, GA |
duh to mob
Member
2010-Dec-21 12:56 pm
to mob
said by mob:Seriously, when will be available for my personal domain? I f'n PAY for their services, and I don't get it. You may have to transition to the new Google Apps account infrastructure before you can get it. This is because the dialer feature in Gmail is intertwined with Google Voice, which is not available with not-yet-transitioned domains. » www.google.com/support/a ··· er=72709 | |
|
Ben Premium Member join:2007-06-17 Fort Worth, TX |
Ben
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 10:07 am
They Will Never Reach Those Numbers ...unless they change their service so it's not necessary to log in via a browser. In other words, their efforts to take aim at Skype (560 million registered and 124 million active users) aren't quite at the level they'd hoped for -- something that's to every Gmail user's benefit next year. I don't think they'll ever see the numbers that Skype has unless they offer a stand-alone application like Skype, or offer some means to connect to their service through a preexisting application, like a SIP client (a VOIP protocol for the uninitiated). | |
|
| GlennLouEarl3 brothers, 1 gone Premium Member join:2002-11-17 Richmond, VA |
Re: They Will Never Reach Those NumbersI actually find using a browser interface instead of having to install another "stand-alone" [dedicated desktop] app to be more convenient, and the Google Talk plug-in provides all the control I need (for selecting the audio input/output etc.). The Skype client does lots of additional stuff that I really don't need. (And since I use Firefox Portable for my Gmail account and little else, it's practically a dedicated client anyway... but then Gmail is a pre-existing interface for me.) | |
|
| David Premium Member join:2002-05-30 Granite City, IL |
David to Ben
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 7:36 pm
to Ben
said by Ben: ...unless they change their service so it's not necessary to log in via a browser. In other words, their efforts to take aim at Skype (560 million registered and 124 million active users) aren't quite at the level they'd hoped for -- something that's to every Gmail user's benefit next year. I don't think they'll ever see the numbers that Skype has unless they offer a stand-alone application like Skype, or offer some means to connect to their service through a preexisting application, like a SIP client (a VOIP protocol for the uninitiated). I wonder if they added the word "beta" if it would attract more people. | |
|
| SeleniaGentoo Convert Premium Member join:2006-09-22 Fort Smith, AR |
to Ben
said by Ben: ...unless they change their service so it's not necessary to log in via a browser. In other words, their efforts to take aim at Skype (560 million registered and 124 million active users) aren't quite at the level they'd hoped for -- something that's to every Gmail user's benefit next year. I don't think they'll ever see the numbers that Skype has unless they offer a stand-alone application like Skype, or offer some means to connect to their service through a preexisting application, like a SIP client (a VOIP protocol for the uninitiated). You can use an SIP client with a trunk from pbxes.org. I tried it for shots and giggles on my cell phone by forwarding my GV number to Token also. I changed back to my trunk using my sipgate account after the experiment was done. I use sipdroid, for those who are curious. | |
|
RR ConductorRidin' the rails Premium Member join:2002-04-02 Redwood Valley, CA |
Wow, that many moths huh?Many Moths ago, our caterpillars brought forth... | |
|
| |
Re: Wow, that many moths huh?google needs to get the voice quality up to skypes level then they will be a threat to skype. Just because something is offered as free dosent mean its better. | |
|
| | GlennLouEarl3 brothers, 1 gone Premium Member join:2002-11-17 Richmond, VA |
Re: Wow, that many moths huh?Nothing [yet] beats Skype-to-Skype [stereo] quality. Skype-phone, however, is VoIP like just about every other VoIP; I've had no problems with Google Voice/GTalk call quality--it's been very, very good for me. After all, it only as to approach land-line quality, and it does that. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Wow, that many moths huh?Agreed, skype to skype calling is the best but skype voip is basically the same as google talk quality. I like google talk more because I can call from my browser on any computer with a browser (of course mic and speakers) and forward any calls to the number to any phone. OPTIONS | |
|
| |
kpfx join:2005-10-28 San Antonio, TX |
kpfx
Member
2010-Dec-21 10:49 am
Good, but still like a BETA productHonestly I don't think they could charge for it even if they wanted to.
I've been using GV as my primary personal number for close to a year now and I absolutely love it. With one number I get unified text and voicemail to my office, cell, home land-line (old school), and even computer.
HOWEVER it still has some quirks and glitches. There have been several significant outages this year and major call quality issues at times.... meaning that I would never consider using it for a business and would take a close look at other options if I had to pay for it.
So I'm glad they're keeping it free again in 2011. If they shore up the quality and add some missing features (voice dialing, picture mail, call routing) then I would be very open to some kind of pay model. | |
|
| |
Re: Good, but still like a BETA producteverything is a Beta product. That way they don't provide support. Just a dead email address that you'll never get anything back from. | |
|
|
It sucksIt cannot call mobile phones, and half the time it can`t make the call at all. Ill stick to skype. | |
|
| AVDRespice, Adspice, Prospice Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Onion, NJ |
AVD
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 11:34 am
Re: It suckssaid by gruntlord6:It cannot call mobile phones, and half the time it can`t make the call at all. Ill stick to skype. you're kidding right? | |
|
| | firephotoTruth and reality matters Premium Member join:2003-03-18 Brewster, WA |
firephoto
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 12:37 pm
Re: It suckssaid by AVD:said by gruntlord6:It cannot call mobile phones, and half the time it can`t make the call at all. Ill stick to skype. you're kidding right? They're in Canada so maybe they don't realize that this service is for US gmail users. said by thefriendlyarticle : Calling in Gmail is currently only available to U.S. based Gmail users.
| |
|
| | | vanDSLuserfrom Vancouver 2010 Premium Member join:2004-07-28 White Rock, BC |
Re: It sucksExcept it works just fine in Canada.... | |
|
| | | | teddy join:2002-02-20 Kingston, ON |
teddy
Member
2010-Dec-21 8:43 pm
Re: It sucksUnless I'm mistaken, you can't get incoming calls from google voice in Canada. At the very least, you can't get a DID number because Google doesn't pass the E911 requirements up here. | |
|
| | | | | vanDSLuserfrom Vancouver 2010 Premium Member join:2004-07-28 White Rock, BC |
Re: It sucksYou can, it's a US DID however. It just takes a little geoIP trickery to get the number to start with (or in my case, a hotel room in the US when I signed up) | |
|
| | MyEyeThe eyes have it Premium Member join:2004-06-07 Natick, MA |
MyEye to AVD
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 7:52 pm
to AVD
Interesting. I tested it on my own T-Mobile account across the room from my iMac and it worked fine, but when I call Verizon folks I can hear them, but they can't hear me. Otherwise, non-mobile calls (including more than a few conference ones) have been excellent. | |
|
| |
n2jtx join:2001-01-13 Glen Head, NY |
n2jtx
Member
2010-Dec-21 11:06 am
App WantedIf Google released (and Apple approved) an application like Skype for the iPod/iPhone I would be on it in a flash. As it is now, I use the Google Voice application on my iPod to initiate calls to my landline. | |
|
| AVDRespice, Adspice, Prospice Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Onion, NJ |
AVD
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 11:35 am
Re: App WantedWinMo has had GV integrated into the standard dialer for years now. | |
|
| | duh join:2008-08-18 Atlanta, GA |
duh
Member
2010-Dec-21 12:52 pm
Re: App Wantedsaid by AVD:WinMo has had GV integrated into the standard dialer for years now. *checking calendar* No, it's not April 1. Care to elaborate? (In other words, "no, it hasn't," obviously.) | |
|
| | | AVDRespice, Adspice, Prospice Premium Member join:2003-02-06 Onion, NJ |
AVD
Premium Member
2010-Dec-22 12:08 pm
Re: App Wantedsorry, what I meant was that there are several WinMo dialer apps that can automatically dial through GV . | |
|
| SparkDawg Premium Member join:2005-01-06 Ypsilanti, MI |
to n2jtx
said by n2jtx:If Google released (and Apple approved) an application like Skype for the iPod/iPhone I would be on it in a flash. As it is now, I use the Google Voice application on my iPod to initiate calls to my landline. Get Talkatone from the app store. You must call out on Gmail's page first ( but only once) so it can call out on Talkatone. No call forwarding required!! | |
|
duh join:2008-08-18 Atlanta, GA |
duh
Member
2010-Dec-21 1:02 pm
Google Voice and US/Canada free callingGiven that the Gmail dialer is deeply interwoven with Google Voice, this concerns me. Previously, the free calling within this area had been publicized as "permanent". However, an announcement that the free calling period is "extended" (even if the announcement refers to the Gmail dialer) might indicate that GV will introduce per-minute charges for calls to the US and Canada at some point. | |
|
| |
Re: Google Voice and US/Canada free callingGoogle never publicized free Gmail or Google Voice calling as being "permanent". In fact, it was stated that free calling in Gmail would only through 2010. They have also worded Google Voice in such a way that made future billing a very remote possibility.
You are misremembering things. | |
|
| | duh join:2008-08-18 Atlanta, GA |
duh
Member
2010-Dec-22 1:34 am
Re: Google Voice and US/Canada free callingsaid by dualsub2006:Google never publicized free Gmail or Google Voice calling as being "permanent". Perhaps not, but my Google Voice account dates back to pre-acquisition GrandCentral. It was advertised as free US/Canada calling then, without timeframes on it. | |
|
| | rchandraStargate Universe fan Premium Member join:2000-11-09 14225-2105 ARRIS ONT1000GJ4 EnGenius EAP1250
|
to dualsub2006
Though verbage such as "permanent" (or perpetually, or whatever) was never included, nor were any time limits stated either, implying perpetuity. That is, none at all were mentioned until the GMail (or was that GoogleTalk?) integration announcement. I guess you might count me among the people desperately clinging onto the hope, albeit perhaps irrationally, that the announcement as stated means just what it says and nothing more...meaning for whatever reasons, only the GM or GT interfaces might incur charges at some point, but the other, previously established and used interfaces (e.g., the Web pages) will continue to be free of charge. It's plausible to imply when charging starts it will apply to the entire gamut of GV services, but so far I haven't seen an explicit announcement saying the Web pages I use will at some point no longer be free.
Of course, I guess you could say the same thing about Free World Dialup. They started out as free, announced as free, with no announced ending date for that freedom. But eventually, they instituted an annual service fee. I'm not sure what happened to them after that; I wasn't interested. But I think they differ from Google in that they didn't have a business model to support their operation. Google has pretty much been built on advertising and data mining, enough I would guess to support many ventures which do not support themselves. | |
|
elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2010-Dec-21 1:54 pm
YawnTake your pick: latency, disconnects, random disappearing numbers, lack of local numbers, no SIP client, no customer service, no port-in for mortals. All "features" of this wonderful beta product from Google.
Skype has major issues as well, especially the lack of a standalone product after FIVE YEARS, but the voice quality is decent.
Neither is ready for prime time. | |
|
slckusr Premium Member join:2003-03-17 Greenville, SC |
slckusr
Premium Member
2010-Dec-21 4:34 pm
mehIf my google voice number weren't free I wouldn't pay for it.
Its been nice to have and works great as a hand out at the bar/facebook, or just general number to list or give to people you dont want to have your real number. But thats all it is for me. | |
|
|
HmmmIsn't this predatory pricing? | |
|
| elray join:2000-12-16 Santa Monica, CA |
elray
Member
2010-Dec-22 3:56 am
Re: HmmmOnly if you can show that Google's practice is actually driving viable competitors (Skype, Ooma, Vonage, MagicJack?) out of the same/similar line of business. For that to happen, I'd think they'd have to have an actual, viable, commercial product - which GV isn't. Without port-in, there isn't an audit trail of formerly-paid POTS/Cell/CableVoice services to tally and propose damages. You'd also have to show Google's intent. And after all, we know they can't be evil. Given the tenor of the current administration, Google probably has to worry more about their clever 3% net corporate income tax level in a 35% country, than they do persecution for privacy issues or anti-trust. | |
|
| | |
Re: Hmmmsaid by elray:Only if you can show that Google's practice is actually driving viable competitors (Skype, Ooma, Vonage, MagicJack?) out of the same/similar line of business. For that to happen, I'd think they'd have to have an actual, viable, commercial product - which GV isn't. Google certainly must be taking away free skype-to-skype customers. They're offering much more than communicating to users of the same system. (Although, I'm sure Skype is more reliable.). magicJack's customers tend to be budget-minded. Free versus $20 for essentially the same service would resonate with them. MJ customers are accustomed to outages and quality problems, although things have been pretty good the last few months. MJ customers are also accustomed to non-existent support. (Chat support exists, but it's rarely highly praised. There are quite a few reports of people getting no help.). I don't think I'd call it predatory. It's a different, advertising-based revenue model. Something MJ has said they'll implement 3 years ago (but still haven't). Nothing's stopping MJ or Skype from implementing advertising to subsidize the cost of their service. | |
|
|
|