Todd Allcock

At 24 Apr 2008 20:34:24 -0700 SMS wrote:

> > When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta) nationwide,
> > you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP router
> > that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
> > $10 extra per month.

>
> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m.
> off-peak Verizon account, and my OneSuite account. In fact I rarely
> use up $10 on OneSuite in six months.


The idea is to replace your landline with it.

My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons and
fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to a
cellco, though, and saving $20/month.

 

Todd Allcock

At 25 Apr 2008 03:07:25 +0000 danny burstein wrote:

> Whoaaaaaaa... I thought D.T. bought up Western Wireless.
> Was it a split up, with some going to one and the
> rest to another?

IIRC, Voicestream and Western Wireless were run by the same guy. He sold
Voicestream to DT who renamed it T-Mobile, and a few years later sold WW to
Alltel.


> Oh, and another reason to "leave some GSM capacity up"
> is to prevent the FCC, on behalf of a competitor, pulling
> a "you didn't use it, now you've lost it" line.


Alltel is already using the bandwidth for CDMA. But, as a rural carrier,
they have more capacity than they need, and from what I understand, just
leave a few channels of GSM running for roaming use alongside their CDMA
system.

SMS

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 24 Apr 2008 20:34:24 -0700 SMS wrote:
>
>>> When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta) nationwide,
>>> you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP router
>>> that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for just
>>> $10 extra per month.
>
>> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m.
>> off-peak Verizon account, and my OneSuite account. In fact I rarely
>> use up $10 on OneSuite in six months.
>
>
> The idea is to replace your landline with it.

Yes, if naked DSL was the same price as bundled DSL it would work.

> My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
> voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons and
> fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to a
> cellco, though, and saving $20/month.

My local AT&T line is under $17 per month, including taxes and fees.

Dennis Ferguson

On 2008-04-25, Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:
> At 25 Apr 2008 03:07:25 +0000 danny burstein wrote:
>> Oh, and another reason to "leave some GSM capacity up"
>> is to prevent the FCC, on behalf of a competitor, pulling
>> a "you didn't use it, now you've lost it" line.
>
> Alltel is already using the bandwidth for CDMA. But, as a rural carrier,
> they have more capacity than they need, and from what I understand, just
> leave a few channels of GSM running for roaming use alongside their CDMA
> system.

All available evidence I have says there's not a lot of money to be
made providing roaming service these days, however. As far as I can
tell the trend now is to drive intercarrier charges for roaming down
close to nothing and to make your money not from other carriers'
customers' use your network, but rather from your customers' use of
other carrier's networks. That is, the value of roaming agreements isn't
the revenue from other carriers, it is the cheap access to other
carriers' networks that you can sell to your own customers.

What this means is that providing roaming service using a technology
your own customers don't use doesn't usually make sense. You won't
make much money from other carriers' customers, and you won't make any
more money from your own customers since they can't use the other carrier's
network. I'll hence bet that Western Wireless may actually have
had some GSM customers or other contractual commitments that are forcing
Alltel to keep the network up.

Also as far as I can tell (and it isn't what I would have guessed)
running a dual-technology network actually seems to add significant
costs. I know Movistar shut down the CDMA half of the network they
acquired in Mexico (taking pretty much all CDMA coverage along highways
in rural northern Mexico with it), and the amount Telefonica claimed
in their financial reports to have saved by doing this was surprisingly
large. I also know that the difference between the highly profitable
China Mobile and the never profitable China Unicom, two companies which
started out at pretty much the same place, is widely blamed on the additional
costs China Unicom took on to build and maintain their dual-mode
CDMA/GSM network. It seems to cost real money to do that.

Dennis Ferguson

Todd Allcock

At 25 Apr 2008 16:14:13 +0000 Dennis Ferguson wrote:

> What this means is that providing roaming service using a technology
> your own customers don't use doesn't usually make sense. You won't
> make much money from other carriers' customers, and you won't make any
> more money from your own customers since they can't use the other
carrier's
> network. I'll hence bet that Western Wireless may actually have
> had some GSM customers or other contractual commitments that are forcing
> Alltel to keep the network up.


That makes sense- I assume when Alltel bought WW, they'd have inherited
it's contractual obligations as well, like providing roaming service until
year X.

Todd Allcock

At 25 Apr 2008 06:41:49 -0700 SMS wrote:

> > The idea is to replace your landline with it.
>
> Yes, if naked DSL was the same price as bundled DSL it would work.


Here in Denver, naked DSL is only $5 more than bundled.

> > My local Qwest number costs me $36/month including taxes and fees for
> > voice. I've hesitated porting it to VoIP both for reliability reasons
and
> > fear of being able to port it out again. I wouldn't mind porting it to
a
> > cellco, though, and saving $20/month.
>
> My local AT&T line is under $17 per month, including taxes and fees.


For $17, I wouldn't be looking for replacements either! ;-)

Todd Allcock

"Zar" <zahirletap@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:75f96df9-f9e6-46e9-80bf-0deed2cd71c0@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com...


>> > When T-Mo launches "Talk Forever" (currently in beta)
>> > nationwide, you can add an unlimited domestic VoIP line (a UMA VoIP
>> > router that takes a T-Mo SIM) to your T-Mobile cellular account for
>> > just
>> > $10 extra per month.
>>
>> I never spend $10 per month in long-distance, between my 8 p.m. off-peak
>> Verizon account, and myOneSuiteaccount. In fact I rarely use up $10
>> onOneSuitein six months.
>
> Same here...unless I call outside the country my $10 on Onesuite
> usually last about 6 months.

That really wasn't my point- I was making the case that "Talk Forever" at
$10/month could replace the $30/month a POTS line costs. The "free" LD
would just be gravy.

In SMS' case, he gets a really good deal on POTS (<$20/month), and I'd agree
with him that the convenience and reliabilty of a landline isn't worth
dumping to save $5-10/month. In my case, Qwest in Denver charges me about
$35 including junk fees and taxes, so a $10/month unlimited service would
make more sense. I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
$20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for internet
if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net savings would be $10
rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline reliability. T-Mo's
service would save me $20/month which would justify switching. IMO.

Larry

"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:_BFWj.70$Ci1.57@fe099.usenetserver.com:

> I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
> $20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for
> internet if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net
> savings would be $10 rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline
> reliability.

Wow...I'm only paying $US2.065/month for Skype Out Unlimited to any phone
or sellphone in the USA/Canada/AK/HI/PR. It isn't really unlimited at
10,000 minutes per month, but if you overrun that you have serious
personal issues Skype can't help you with.


http://skype.com/allfeatures/subscri...ubscriptionTab

When you buy Skype Unlimited, they take $30 off each of the incoming
Skype In phone numbers you buy. That came to about $24/number for the
two numbers in my system, one in Charleston, SC and one in London, UK.
that's the PER YEAR rate, not per month. So, the total monthly fee for
US and Canadian customers is 2.065out + 2 in = $4.065 for really
unlimited incoming calls plus 10000 minutes/month calling out.

All the other features like Skype-to-Skype with full motion color video,
video conferencing, all of Skype's online services are free. FREE is our
FRIEND.

The Skype phones have become kind of BIZARRE, lately. You have a
sellphone, so if you're not a hobbleware Verizon slave, you can install
Skype Mobile or PDA versions right on your sellphone and have an all-in-
one VoIP device...right in your pocket, even on the road, saving big
money compared to sellphone LD to Timbuctoo. I have my old Netgear Skype
phone in the bedroom, a really nice USB headset for the mainframe, Skype
on my Nokia N800 Linux tablet (which also runs mobile over BT to the
sellphone data on Alltel EVDO).

New Skype Phones include:
http://skype.com/mobile/

....I kid you not........
SKYPE ON THE PLAYSTATION PORTABLE!
I installed it on 3 PSPs belonging to my buddy's 11, 14 and 16 year old
girls. Even a teenager hasn't trashed 10000 minutes/month. All they
need is wifi Daddy already has or any wifi the PSP can find wherever they
are! NO MORE $300 sellphone bills from the kiddies! Each girl has her
own Skype Unlimited/Skype In phone number....$4.065/month for 10000 min
out and unlimited min in.
http://skype.com/allfeatures/skypeonpsp/
They've all learned to dial +1-areacode-number, now, after some really
embarrassing calls dialing 843-number on Skype, which calls odd people in
VIETNAM (+84 country code)....(c;
The girls have a list of "acceptable restaurants and places" that have
free wifi for their phones. We eat often at Atlanta or Panera Bread but
never Starbucks any more....no free wifi for Skype.

I've called Vietnam many times in haste, too....(c;

VoIP doesn't HAVE to cost $20+/month before you make the first call.
Works great!

Todd Allcock

At 15 May 2008 03:25:23 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > I've resisted VoIP so far, since unlimited runs about
> > $20/month, and the $10 difference (Qwest charges $5/month more for
> > internet if you drop local phone service for DSL only, so my net
> > savings would be $10 rather than $15) doesn't justify losing landline
> > reliability.
>
> Wow...I'm only paying $US2.065/month for Skype Out Unlimited to any phone
> or sellphone in the USA/Canada/AK/HI/PR. It isn't really unlimited at
> 10,000 minutes per month, but if you overrun that you have serious
> personal issues Skype can't help you with.


Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
(although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of E911
compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't integrate
into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned "running PC.")

That also eliminates MagicJack (which I already own and subscribe to at
$20/year unlimited in/out, but it's RJ-11 interface hardware requires a
running PC as well.)


> The Skype phones have become kind of BIZARRE, lately. You have a
> sellphone, so if you're not a hobbleware Verizon slave, you can install
> Skype Mobile or PDA versions right on your sellphone and have an all-in-
> one VoIP device...right in your pocket, even on the road, saving big
> money compared to sellphone LD to Timbuctoo.

Yes. My WinMo phone has Skype, Fring and SIP clients installed, supporting
four of my VoIP accounts in addition to my T-Mo cellphone account.


> VoIP doesn't HAVE to cost $20+/month before you make the first call.
> Works great!

If I lived alone I'd be on the same page as you. In a family of five with
three kids ranging from four through ten, I want the phones to work like Ma
Bell intended- 911, no country codes for local calls, etc. T-Mobile will
give me that for $10/month (over and above my cellphone bill), through my
existing home wiring, with 911 capability, when Talk Forever launches
nationwide.

Larry

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:GtOWj.260$gi1.248@fe107.usenetserver.com:

> Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
> (although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of
> E911 compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't
> integrate into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned
> "running PC.")
>
>

You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!
Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.

Now, if you read the rest, you don't have to have a PC running, AT ALL,
to use Skype anywhere in the house. That's what wifi is for! The RJ-11
interface with some Vonage BS phone company is FAR more expensive than
Skype phones on wifi. I took out all the wires....my wifi covers my
whole neighborhood from the node up the tree!

My SELLphone is my Skype phone because I have my Skype In number
FORWARDED to my SEllphone number if I don't answer Skype calls....even
Skype-to-Skype calls! So, if a friend in Japan, for instance, wants to
call me, he calls me on Skype-to-Skype, my SELLphone rings and I talk to
him....from anywhere I happen to be, without a Skype phone, by just using
airtime if he calls me from Japan at 3AM in the morning! If he calls me
on Skype-to-Skype at NOON in Japan, I'm on free N/W airtime on Alltel and
that call costs both of us NOTHING! My bill has LOTS of evening
"Unknown" calls from the Skype-to-Skype callers.....long winded calls...
(c;

You don't need a single piece of extra equipment to use Skype from what
you already own....*****ew the wired phones in the house.

Todd Allcock

At 15 May 2008 04:02:21 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > Yep. I've eliminated Skype from contention as a landline replacement
> > (although I use it from time-to-time) for a number of reasons- lack of
> > E911 compliance, needs a running PC or proprietary phone, and doesn't
> > integrate into existing RJ-11 home wiring (without the aforementioned
> > "running PC.")
> >
> >
>
> You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!

> Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.


Did you miss the "three kids ages four to ten" part?

> Now, if you read the rest, you don't have to have a PC running, AT ALL,
> to use Skype anywhere in the house. That's what wifi is for!

I'm quite familiar with how Skype works and how it doesn't.

> The RJ-11
> interface with some Vonage BS phone company is FAR more expensive than
> Skype phones on wifi.

Yes, it is. But again, I'm intending to use T-Mo's Talk Forever router with
SIM card slot for $120/year. Sure, it's 2-3 times as expensive as Skype,
but it meets MY requirements I listed earlier: no PC needed to have RJ-11
compatibility, E911, and no special dialing requirements ("Daddy, where's
the '+' on this phone...")

> I took out all the wires....my wifi covers my
> whole neighborhood from the node up the tree!


Again, if I lived alone, I'd be on the same (or at least a similar) page.


> My SELLphone is my Skype phone because I have my Skype In number
> FORWARDED to my SEllphone number if I don't answer Skype calls....even
> Skype-to-Skype calls!

Can Skype be trained to report your Skype-in number as the CID number on
forwarded calls? If so, that could be your "Circle" number and they'd all
be free.

> You don't need a single piece of extra equipment to use Skype from what
> you already own.....


To use it like _I_ want to, rather than how _you_ have it, I do. In
addition, AFAIK, Skype desn't port. Keeping my four-year old home number
is critial for the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor- another system design
parameter you no longer have to factor in...) ;-)


> Screw the wired phones in the house.


I'm old school- phones plug into jacks- even cordless ones! ;-)

Larry

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:34TWj.103$xb2.91@fe103.usenetserver.com:

> Can Skype be trained to report your Skype-in number as the CID number
> on forwarded calls? If so, that could be your "Circle" number and
> they'd all be free.
>
>

One of Skype's GREATEST ASSETS is its inability to report your telephone
number you don't have to anyone...cops, Homeland Security, Council On
Foreign Relations, FBI, Illuminati, the spammers, whoever you call
including those goddamned 800 number bloodsuckers selling your
number....noone. Skype Out has no number and isn't hooked to Skype In
where the number you are given is in the SAME block of numbers as AOHell's
huge racks of dialup modems so the spammers don't waste their time dialing
modem after modem after modem selling nothing. Other than the errant,
irate British wifey calling me by error because my London phone number is
one digit off the number for the Hook And Nail Pub, which is more
entertaining than ANY computer software I own and wouldn't trade it for
anything, I've never gotten a single COLD CALL from even Experian wanting
to ask me about my credit rating....a great asset to the Skype system.

Nope....Skype in calls are forwarded through Skype Out so they all come up
with the number 000-123-4567, which I haven't tried to put into My Circle,
yet.

Every Skyper has the same Caller ID...(c;

Steve Sobol

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.verizon.]
On 2008-05-15, Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote:

>> You paid big money, and continue to pay big money, for an E911 SELLPHONE!
>
>> Why do you need more than that? That's crazy.
>
> Did you miss the "three kids ages four to ten" part?

Skype's right for him, so by extension it must be right for everyone else in
the world, too.

--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol

Todd Allcock

At 15 May 2008 16:44:38 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > Can Skype be trained to report your Skype-in number as the CID number
> > on forwarded calls? If so, that could be your "Circle" number and
> > they'd all be free.
>
>
> One of Skype's GREATEST ASSETS is its inability to report your telephone
> number you don't have to anyone...cops, Homeland Security, Council On
> Foreign Relations, FBI, Illuminati, the spammers...

So, in a word, "No." I get that it's convenient to Be anonymous, but it'd
be equally convenient to have a choice. Grandcentral, for example allows
you to select whether you want the CID on forwarded calls to display the
caller being forwarded (if you want to know who's calling) or the GC number
itself (if you want those calls to be a "free" circle/fave.)

So, if you're willing to give up caller ID, you can make any circle/fave
plan an unlimited free incoming plan By simply giving out your GC number
instead of your cellphone number.


> Nope....Skype in calls are forwarded through Skype Out so they all come
up
> with the number 000-123-4567, which I haven't tried to put into My
Circle,
> yet.

T-Mo won't accept "000" as a valid area code as a "fave," so you get the
worst of both worlds forwarding Skype- you don't now who's calling AND you
can't leverage your circle/fave plan.


> Every Skyper has the same Caller ID...(c;


I knew that was the default behavior- I just wondered if you could override
it to your advantage...

Larry

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AmericaOnLine.com> wrote in
news:tr%Wj.162$qQ5.159@fe091.usenetserver.com:

> I knew that was the default behavior- I just wondered if you could
> override it to your advantage.

I guess not. I've still not figured out what all the free toys will do.

I'm just curious and this isn't any kind of jab, but why are you so anti-
Skype, which is 95% free? You come across as really hating it for some
reason. I always find it hard to trash free stuff....