NEWS: More Americans go for cell phones, drop landlines

At 17 May 2007 01:27:10 -0700 SMS wrote:

> Yeah, if Skype reported their customer count in 2007, after the free
> deal ended, it'd be a lot less. I made a few calls on the free account
> last year.

As did I, but mostly for gee-whiz testing purposes, because, as you said
(below) most of us already get our "free" LD from cellular.


> I guess if you have broadband cable internet then Skype is a pretty
> good deal at $68/year for incoming and outgoing. For $30 you can buy
> a box that hooks your home phone wiring to a computer. Does anyone
> make a box that connects your home phone wiring directly to the cable,
> with some sort of embedded controller rather than a PC?


Not yet at least, but I do have a couple of SIP boxes that work
standalone for SIP-compliant services like Voicestick and Stanaphone.


> If you have DSL, then Skype is probably not such a great deal as there
> is almost no difference in cost between naked DSL and DSL plus landline
> service. It'd be hard to spend $30/year on long distance when most long
> distance calling is done
> on cell phones at no extra cost, or from a landline at about 2¢ per
> minute.

True enough. However, if you have a lot of international Skype contacts,
it's good for free Skype-to-Skype calls.


> Vonage is history, so few people would pay such a high monthly rate
> when Skype is so much less.
They're certainly in a bit of trouble (legally at the moment) but they
might survive if they get their rates a little lower. Their rats aren't
that far out of line for an unlimited SIP-compatible service that doesn't
require a PC. Skype's an anomaly- although dirt-cheap, they're non-
standard, needing a PC or dedicate Wi-Fi handset and require more "geek
love" to use than SIP-compliant services.

---

› See More: NEWS: More Americans go for cell phones, drop landlines

On 2007-05-17, Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote:
> require a PC. Skype's an anomaly- although dirt-cheap, they're non-
> standard, needing a PC or dedicate Wi-Fi handset and require more "geek
> love" to use than SIP-compliant services.

I don't know, I don't really find Skype all that cheap for calls that
are more than the $0.021 come-on rate. The rates I get on Cingular's
international long distance add-on often meet or beat a lot of the rest
of Skype's rates, in particular for calls to European mobiles and
Caribbean and Latin American countries.

I use Skype because I have use for international inbound numbers,
which Skype sells fairly cheaply, and because for travel I find it
less likely to be blocked (or blockable) than standard SIP when
used on hotel Internet service or at WiFi hotspots. I also forward
the Skype account to local mobiles to keep my regular numbers alive
but this, while convenient and (for me) reliable, can be more expensive
than I think it should be in countries where calls to mobiles are more
costly than the $0.021 rate.

Dennis Ferguson

At 17 May 2007 16:17:55 -0500 Dennis Ferguson wrote:

> I don't know, I don't really find Skype all that cheap for calls that
> are more than the $0.021 come-on rate.

Agreed- I was referring to their unlimited outgoing to US/Canada for $15-
30/year (depending on when you purchased.)

Even the "low" 2.1-cent rate is commonly beaten by other VoIPs.

> The rates I get on Cingular's
> international long distance add-on often meet or beat a lot of the rest
> of Skype's rates, in particular for calls to European mobiles and
> Caribbean and Latin American countries.

But, arguably, the new trend in lower cellular international rates is due
partly to competitive pressures from VoIP providers, so we can probably
thank Skype and their ilk, even if we don't use them! ;-)


> I use Skype because I have use for international inbound numbers,
> which Skype sells fairly cheaply, and because for travel I find it
> less likely to be blocked (or blockable) than standard SIP when
> used on hotel Internet service or at WiFi hotspots.

While I'm ordinarily against non-standard implementations, in this case
I agree wholeheartedly. Skype works over any high-speed connection I've
ever tried, but "standard" SIP VoIP ports are sometimes blocked.

> I also forward
> the Skype account to local mobiles to keep my regular numbers alive
> but this, while convenient and (for me) reliable, can be more expensive
> than I think it should be in countries where calls to mobiles are more
> costly than the $0.021 rate.

Ahh, but at what price convenience, right? :-)

Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in news:f2go26$8ca$4
@aioe.org:

> I'm not knocking Skype- I'm just saying their number of users claims
are
> inflated because many people will create a "free" account of ANY
service
> then rarely, if ever use it. Kind of how a free newspaper can claim
> "millions of readers" when the vast majority of their papers are
probably
> used for birdcage/catbox liners and fire starters! ;-)
>
>

That's true. I created a Skype account at our local Circuit City on a
laptop that has a built-in webcam....autoanswers anyone...(c; Circuit
City leaves everything running 24/7 so I can call it at 0200 and hear
what's going on in the store at 2AM. During business hours, I can see
who's looking at the computer...and, of course, actually talk to them,
which is fun. Store has free broadband wireless for everyone, including
my little spycam. One of the new salesmen came up to me while I was
chatting on the spycam with a friend in Kyoto, Japan, with video of
course. He'd never seen Skype, but has it at home, now. The look on his
face when my Japanese friend asked him about his funny shirt was
PRICELESS...(c;

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

SMS <[email protected]> wrote in news:464c11dd$0$27190
[email protected]:

> Does anyone make a box
> that connects your home phone wiring directly to the cable, with some
> sort of embedded controller rather than a PC?
>

This is mine:

http://www.netgear.com/Products/Comm...pe/SPH101.aspx
Connects direct to your wifi router on broadband at home....no computer.

No computer or wires necessary. Works great anywhere it can find a free
wifi that doesn't require webpage logon, which it doesn't support. It's
very thin, much thinner than my E815 cellphone. I'm amazed all the
places it finds. A little diner near home has no wifi. The bar next
door has a linksys wireless router on some kind of broadband it locks
onto just fine in the diner....even in the parking lot!

For those other places you want a Skype to Skype call...just use:
http://www.mobivox.com/
Mobivox is free to other Mobivox users, on Skype or their registered
numbers. Mobivox is free to ANY Skype users on the planet....straight
from your cellphone. It even uses your Skype contact list it gets from
the Skype server. Way cool with voice interface, which is great while
driving. Server based, no computer is necessary for it, either. To
phones in civilized places, it's 1.9c/min...cheap! You call an access
number from your cell (not even local because LD is free on cellular,
now). It recognizes your caller ID so doesn't ask for user/password and
you can just tell it who you want to talk to on skype or phone or just
tell it the number you want to call (with country code and area code, of
course). Calling Japan on Mobivox at 1.9c/min beats $1.50/min on a cell
carrier hands down! If you call the access number from another phone, it
asks for your username and password.


Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> wrote in newsPY2i.11618$j63.4334
@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:

> and not as good of
> quality.
>

I keep hearing this nonsense, which just isn't true. Skype to phoneline
from my little netgear phone at HIGH sample rates just eats the crap out
of cellphone to phoneline on LOW sample rates every time! Skype uses
broadband, about 110Kbps, far above cellphone's poor 8 or 11Kbps codecs.

Just listen to music on hold on your crappy cellphone and on Skype
connected to a cable modem or DSL (not trying to use Skype on dialup it
isn't made for). Music on hold on my CDMA sounds like crap! People on
the phoneline ask me how I get the 000-012-3456 caller ID they're seeing
on their caller ID box. "Oh, I'm on Skype on the internet. Every Skype
caller will show 000-012-3456 caller ID". They are astonished having
already heard this bull**** that VoIP sounds awful and breaks up and has
some kind of awful lag. It's just NOT TRUE! Try it for yourself, on
broadband!

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

Larry <[email protected]> writes:

> DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob> wrote in newsPY2i.11618$j63.4334
> @newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net:
>
> > and not as good of
> > quality.
> >
>
> I keep hearing this nonsense, which just isn't true. Skype to phoneline
> from my little netgear phone at HIGH sample rates just eats the crap out
> of cellphone to phoneline on LOW sample rates every time! Skype uses
> broadband, about 110Kbps, far above cellphone's poor 8 or 11Kbps
> codecs.

But latency that it simply cannot control.

> Just listen to music on hold on your crappy cellphone

Cellphones are crap, it is true.

> and on Skype connected to a cable modem or DSL (not trying to use
> Skype on dialup it isn't made for). Music on hold on my CDMA sounds
> like crap! People on the phoneline ask me how I get the
> 000-012-3456 caller ID they're seeing on their caller ID box. "Oh,
> I'm on Skype on the internet. Every Skype caller will show
> 000-012-3456 caller ID". They are astonished having already heard
> this bull**** that VoIP sounds awful and breaks up and has some kind
> of awful lag. It's just NOT TRUE! Try it for yourself, on
> broadband!

VOIP often does sound like crap though is the problem. Sometimes good
where you can't notice it at all, but a non-trivial portion of the
time, latency bites em in the butt. Half the team I work with are on
broadband connected VOIP, and we hear strangeness from at least one of
them on at least most conference calls.

Nothing involving the internet can beat the reliability, constency and
voice quality of the POTS network.

The cost savings are significant though, and for many folks it's "good
enough." But don't try to paint it as a panacea.

--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/

Larry wrote:
> SMS <[email protected]> wrote in news:464c11dd$0$27190
> [email protected]:
>
>> Does anyone make a box
>> that connects your home phone wiring directly to the cable, with some
>> sort of embedded controller rather than a PC?
>>
>
> This is mine:
>
> http://www.netgear.com/Products/Comm...pe/SPH101.aspx
> Connects direct to your wifi router on broadband at home....no computer.

No, I mean a box that connects between your wireless router and the your
house's phone wiring.

They have them for other VOIP systems.

At 18 May 2007 22:39:39 +0000 Larry wrote:

> > Does anyone make a box
> > that connects your home phone wiring directly to the cable, with some
> > sort of embedded controller rather than a PC?
>
> This is mine:
>
> http://www.netgear.com/Products/Comm...pe/SPH101.aspx
> Connects direct to your wifi router on broadband at home....no computer.


But it doesn't "connect to your home phone wiring directly" which was the
question asked.

AFAIK, there is no Skype to RJ-11 interface that doesn't require a PC to
operate Skype for you, like there is for SIP VoIPs like Vonage,
Sunrocket, Voicestick, etc.

I have a Skype-to-RJ11 box but it needs a PC.


> No computer or wires necessary. Works great anywhere it can find a
> free
> wifi that doesn't require webpage logon, which it doesn't support.

Which makes it G-D useless IMHO. Except at home and when "borrowing"
your neighbor's Wi-Fi, perhaps.

Most free "commercial" Wi-Fi at hotels, coffee shops, etc. have at least
a T&C page you need to "accept" with a browser before gaining access. To
build a Wi-Fi phone without some type of low-end browser is just stupid.


> It's very thin...

Good, so you won't mind carrying it's useless a** around as much after it
fails to connect at the coffeeshop...

<Snip the rest of Larry's tired Skype commercials...>

SMS <[email protected]> wrote in news:464e37f4$0$27179
[email protected]:

> No, I mean a box that connects between your wireless router and the
your
> house's phone wiring.
>
>

http://www.voip-news-net.com/2006/12...otherboar.html
http://www.actiontec.com/products/co..._usb/index.php

There's lots of them. Go to Google and enter:

Skype for house phones

into the search box. I'll let them spam YOUR browser, not mine...(c;

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

Todd Allcock <[email protected]> wrote in news:f2ldkj$8qv$4
@aioe.org:

> Which makes it G-D useless IMHO. Except at home and when "borrowing"
> your neighbor's Wi-Fi, perhaps.
>

zzzzZZZZ.....ask Google:

Skype for house phones.....

Lots of them around the planet.

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

[email protected] (Todd H.) wrote in news:[email protected]:

> VOIP often does sound like crap though is the problem. Sometimes good
> where you can't notice it at all, but a non-trivial portion of the
> time, latency bites em in the butt. Half the team I work with are on
> broadband connected VOIP, and we hear strangeness from at least one of
> them on at least most conference calls.
>

You need a new carrier....

to Skype.com:
4 24.96.110.57 10ms 11ms 12ms TTL: 0 (ge.0-1-0.cr-
Char.SC.knology.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
5 24.214.0.5 22ms 22ms 21ms TTL: 0 (so.2-1-1.cr-
Atla.GA.US.knology.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
6 24.214.0.53 21ms 19ms 19ms TTL: 0 (ge.0-2-2.cr-
Atla.GA.US.knology.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
7 63.211.121.29 21ms 19ms 21ms TTL: 0 (ge-7-3-
105.car1.Atlanta1.Level3.net ok)
8 4.68.103.129 21ms 24ms 23ms TTL: 0 (ae-1-
55.bbr1.Atlanta1.Level3.net ok)
9 4.68.128.210 33ms 34ms 35ms TTL: 0 (ae-0-
0.bbr2.Washington1.Level3.net ok)
10 4.68.121.48 35ms 38ms 144ms TTL: 0 (ae-23-
52.car3.Washington1.Level3.net ok)
11 129.250.9.113 168ms 37ms * TTL: 0 (xe-1-
2.r04.asbnva01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net ok)
12 129.250.2.180 39ms 39ms 39ms TTL: 0 (xe-1-1-
0.r21.asbnva01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net ok)
13 129.250.2.8 42ms 44ms 43ms TTL: 0 (as-
0.r21.nycmny01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net ok)
14 129.250.5.4 52ms 57ms 52ms TTL: 0 (p64-0-3-
0.r21.chcgil09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net ok)
15 129.250.2.237 50ms 53ms 52ms TTL: 0 (xe-0-0-
0.r20.chcgil09.us.bb.gin.ntt.net ok)
16 129.250.16.11 52ms 54ms 53ms TTL: 0 (p16-3-0-
0.a00.chcgil01.us.ra.gin.ntt.net probable bogus rDNS: No DNS)
17 129.250.223.66 104ms 63ms 59ms TTL: 0 (ge-2-1-
0.a00.chcgil01.us.ce.gin.ntt.net ok)
18 198.173.5.35 60ms 59ms 58ms TTL: 46 (No rDNS)

I'm 60ms from Skype's Chicago system....across the internet from
Knology.net's furthest East system in Charleston. TTL is only 46

You need a new carrier....

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

[email protected] (Todd H.) wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Nothing involving the internet can beat the reliability, constency and
> voice quality of the POTS network.
>
>

Nothing on cellular can beat the FM quality and fidelity of an AMPS
bagphone, either. But, that's not reality any more....no system operator
gives a crap what your call sounds like, just how much money he can scam
from it.

Larry
--
Grade School Physics Factoid:
A building cannot freefall into its own footprint without
skilled demolition.

At 19 May 2007 03:47:04 +0000 Larry wrote:

> >
> > No, I mean a box that connects between your wireless router and the
> > your house's phone wiring.
>
>
> http://www.voip-news-net.com/2006/12...otherboar.html
> http://www.actiontec.com/products/co..._usb/index.php


What part of "without a computer" don't you understand? The first link
is to a device that sits INSIDE a PC, and the second is an external USB
device.


> There's lots of them. Go to Google and enter:
>
> Skype for house phones
>
> into the search box. I'll let them spam YOUR browser, not mine...(c;

Obviously you're so afraid of "browser spam" that you didn't actually look.

Yes, Larry, there are lots of Skype-to-RJ11 boxes. And EVERY ONE
requires connection to a PC running Skype.

So, again, to answer SMS' question: no, there no Skype ATAs that do not
require a PC, like there are for SIP-compliant providers.

Larry <[email protected]> writes:

> [email protected] (Todd H.) wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> > VOIP often does sound like crap though is the problem. Sometimes good
> > where you can't notice it at all, but a non-trivial portion of the
> > time, latency bites em in the butt. Half the team I work with are on
> > broadband connected VOIP, and we hear strangeness from at least one of
> > them on at least most conference calls.
> >
>
> You need a new carrier....

No, I don't actually--I have POTS and don't have these problems.

I hereby give you a cookie for your ping latencies though Larry.

--
Todd H.
http://toddh.net/