|
Home > Archive > Voice Over IP in UK > August 2005 > How long to get your money back?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]Pages: Pages: [1] 2
| Author |
How long to get your money back?
|
|
| David W.E. Roberts 2005-08-16, 7:45 am |
| Hi,
just contemplating getting two VOIP routers (one for home and one for
'live away' location).
I could then have free voice calls between two houses (ignoring costs of
Broadband links which I would have regardless).
However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each router than for a
non-VOIP router.
Seems to me it could take quite a long time to get this money back
compared to the costs of fixed or mobile telephony on a reasonably good
deal.
What does the team think?
Regards
Dave R
| |
|
| David W.E. Roberts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> just contemplating getting two VOIP routers (one for home and one for
> 'live away' location).
>
> I could then have free voice calls between two houses (ignoring costs of
> Broadband links which I would have regardless).
>
> However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each router than for a
> non-VOIP router.
>
> Seems to me it could take quite a long time to get this money back
> compared to the costs of fixed or mobile telephony on a reasonably good
> deal.
>
> What does the team think?
>
> Regards
>
> Dave R
You can get a Linksys PAP2 for £46 delivered, and get a router for
£30ish delivered. This would cut setup cost a bit i think, and it
depends on how many calls you make to how much you think you could save.
It also depends on if it would be helpful to have a second 'line' at the
properties.. If not it would probably be easier and cheaper to use
something like 1899.com, 3p per call
| |
| Mathew Curtis 2005-08-16, 7:45 am |
|
David W.E. Roberts wrote:
> Hi,
>
> just contemplating getting two VOIP routers (one for home and one for
> 'live away' location).
>
> I could then have free voice calls between two houses (ignoring costs of
> Broadband links which I would have regardless).
>
> However I am likely to pay about =A3100 more for each router than for a
> non-VOIP router.
>
> Seems to me it could take quite a long time to get this money back
> compared to the costs of fixed or mobile telephony on a reasonably good
> deal.
>
> What does the team think?
>
> Regards
>
> Dave R
If you have your broadband connection why not just use a softphone then
you wont have any extra costs=20
Mat
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-08-16, 5:45 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 13:24:32 +0100, "David W.E. Roberts"
<nospam@talk21.com> wrote:
>However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each router than for a
>non-VOIP router.
if you already have routers in place simple ATAs would suffice. Or a
cheap router and an ATA rather than a premium VoIP router.
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-08-16, 5:45 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 13:24:32 +0100, "David W.E. Roberts"
<nospam@talk21.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>just contemplating getting two VOIP routers (one for home and one for
>'live away' location).
>
>I could then have free voice calls between two houses (ignoring costs of
>Broadband links which I would have regardless).
>
>However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each router than for a
>non-VOIP router.
>
>Seems to me it could take quite a long time to get this money back
>compared to the costs of fixed or mobile telephony on a reasonably good
>deal.
>
>What does the team think?
It depends on where the two houses are. In different parts of town,
different parts of the country, or different parts of the world? If
they're just a local call away from each other then I doubt you would
ever justify it on call cost savings alone.
Chris
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-16, 5:45 pm |
|
"David W.E. Roberts" <nospam@talk21.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.08.16.12.24.30.992000@talk21.com
> Hi,
>
> just contemplating getting two VOIP routers (one for home
> and one for 'live away' location).
>
> I could then have free voice calls between two houses
> (ignoring costs of Broadband links which I would have
> regardless).
>
> However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each
> router than for a non-VOIP router.
>
> Seems to me it could take quite a long time to get this
> money back compared to the costs of fixed or mobile
> telephony on a reasonably good deal.
>
> What does the team think?
>
> Regards
>
> Dave R
Personally I didn't get into VoIP for cost savings. In actual fact I make
relatively few calls but I am interested in the technology involved so I
have spent quite a bit of money which I doubt I will get back in cost
savings anytime soon.
Having said that, as others have said it all depends on the amount of
traffic you will generate between the two locations. If you're on the
phone for hours at a time or running a business, you'll see a return a lot
faster than if you just make the odd call now and again.
If you already have routers in place at each location, then a simple ATA
will suffice. My personal favourite is the Sipura 2000 but YMMV as they
say.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <3mebgeF158rjqU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> Personally I didn't get into VoIP for cost savings. In actual fact I make
> relatively few calls but I am interested in the technology involved so I
> have spent quite a bit of money which I doubt I will get back in cost
> savings anytime soon.
I buy things that are going to do something either cheaper than what I
already got or better than something I have already got.
I got myself a DVD recorder, because it is better than VHS, it is not
going to save me any money, but the quality is better and the disks do
not take so much room up.
My telephone makes calls and receive calls, which is all people need
from a telephone, I suppose that is one of the reasons I will not update
my mobile phone. I can recieve calls and make calls and at the end of
the day that is what a mobile phone is suppose to be for.
I too am interested in technology, but I will not buy something if it do
not do a job better.
>
> Having said that, as others have said it all depends on the amount of
> traffic you will generate between the two locations. If you're on the
> phone for hours at a time or running a business, you'll see a return a lot
> faster than if you just make the odd call now and again.
>
> If you already have routers in place at each location, then a simple ATA
> will suffice. My personal favourite is the Sipura 2000 but YMMV as they
> say.
But is it going to work as it should if the router have not got QOS?
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-16, 5:45 pm |
|
"Ad C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6c3bff771ac0ee989832@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3mebgeF158rjqU1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
>
> I buy things that are going to do something either
> cheaper than what I already got or better than something
> I have already got.
Well there we differ, I often do this, but I also buy things I am
interested in. As well as telephone systems I am also interested in
amateur radio, now I am never going to make money or save money with that,
but it is an interesting mode of communication.
> I got myself a DVD recorder, because it is better than
> VHS, it is not going to save me any money, but the
> quality is better and the disks do not take so much room
> up.
And I bought a recorder with a hard disk drive for exactly the same
reasons.
> My telephone makes calls and receive calls, which is all
> people need from a telephone, I suppose that is one of
> the reasons I will not update my mobile phone. I can
> recieve calls and make calls and at the end of the day
> that is what a mobile phone is suppose to be for.
Me too. I have three nokia 6310i's as there hasn't been anything better
for my usage patterns and style.
> I too am interested in technology, but I will not buy
> something if it do not do a job better.
A reasonable point of view, but for myself I am genuinely interested in
*how* it works, not whether it is better or not, although it is certainly
as good for the most part. Yes there are problems now and then but that's
what developing new technology is all about.
>
> But is it going to work as it should if the router have
> not got QOS?
If the connection isn't hammered with heavy downloads all the time then it
should be ok for the most part.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <3metliF16i434U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> Well there we differ, I often do this, but I also buy things I am
> interested in. As well as telephone systems I am also interested in
> amateur radio, now I am never going to make money or save money with that,
> but it is an interesting mode of communication.
But that is a different thing, I was looking at Radio Ham once, but I
got so many things to do, i doubt I would get the time to use it. At 40
years of age, I think it is a bit late to think of radio Ham. I used the
CB for a few years, yes, I also used the illegal part, sideband, and AM.
but it all went to pot when it became legal.
>
> And I bought a recorder with a hard disk drive for exactly the same
> reasons.
Yep, this one have a hard disk, a pioneer, nice bit of kit. I also got a
Thomson DHd4000 Freeview PVR,
>
> Me too. I have three nokia 6310i's as there hasn't been anything better
> for my usage patterns and style.
I liked the 3310, it may have been a bit big in size, but it worked
well, it was simple to use and at least the screen was easy to see in
bright sunlight, which is more than I can say for most now.
I got a Sendo Fliphone, it is ok, but it will need replacing in the next
12 months, but trying to get a phone, without all the crap, like
Cameras, internet, polyphonic ringtones is getting difficult.
My parents have got the nokia now.
>
> A reasonable point of view, but for myself I am genuinely interested in
> *how* it works, not whether it is better or not, although it is certainly
> as good for the most part. Yes there are problems now and then but that's
> what developing new technology is all about.
I am interested in how it works, and I can get the idea most of the
time, by looking on the internet. Technology is ok, but I think
sometimes, we get to much into it and if it goes wrong, then we have
problems. Like today, I wanted to get some money out of the cash
machine, which is outside where I work. I went to put my card in and
there on the screen, was a windows desktop, with a command prompt box,
with Mcafee virus checker running.
I normally wait for a couple of years untill most of tebugs are sorted
out. I admit, I did not with the DVD recorder and I lost big time on my
first one.
>
>
> If the connection isn't hammered with heavy downloads all the time then it
> should be ok for the most part.
>
Fine if you only got one computer connected to the system, not sure what
it would be like if you got more than one, which is being used at the
same time.
| |
| Martin² 2005-08-16, 8:45 pm |
| The Zoom X5V VoIP modem / router isn't too expensive ~£90 (so long that you
don't need to add wifi).
I have no personal experience with it, but can vouch for Draytek Vigor
2600VG and Zyxel 2602HWL.
Regards,
Martin
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 13:24:32 +0100, "David W.E. Roberts"
<nospam@talk21.com> wrote:
>However I am likely to pay about £100 more for each router than for a
>non-VOIP router.
I don't know how you are arriving at the figure you are saying above
but you can get a Vonage/Linksys router for 29.99 from Staples which
allow you to have two phones and three computers connected if you are
willing to go with Vonage . If not then a PAP2 will cost over forty
pounds and I do not think it acts as a router and a Sipura around
80.00 depending on modal you choose .
A ADSL 4 port Edimax router/Modem which are good cost around 31.00
plus a decent ATA of some sort anything from 40 to 80 pounds .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:38:24 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>Yes there are problems now and then but that's
>what developing new technology is all about.
Only with ONE particular provider most VOIP providers have got passed
the beta stage and are now providing excellent service to all their
customers with ALL their services working has they should work
and do not expect their customers to attend collage and study the
German language .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 22:22:33 +0100, Ad C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>But that is a different thing, I was looking at Radio Ham once, but I
>got so many things to do, i doubt I would get the time to use it. At 40
>years of age, I think it is a bit late to think of radio Ham. I used the
>CB for a few years, yes, I also used the illegal part, sideband, and AM.
>but it all went to pot when it became legal.
Ham and CB radio's went out with the ark along with the large ariel's
stuck out on the garden or hanging from the chimney stack reaching for
the moon and all the users these days are old fuddyduddys.
I have a ICOM transmitter/receiver and a handheld that got put in the
cupboard about twenty years ago plus a CB radio .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0dp6g1tqku51mt07a99hjf92dccajv7am0@
4ax.com
[snip]
> services working has they should work
> and do not expect their customers to attend collage and
> study the German language .
I would respectfully suggest that you master the English language first
before you complain about others.
Ivor
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
|
"Ad C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6c6968b498a7f989839@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3metliF16i434U1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
>
> But that is a different thing, I was looking at Radio Ham
> once, but I got so many things to do, i doubt I would get
> the time to use it. At 40 years of age, I think it is a
> bit late to think of radio Ham. I used the CB for a few
> years, yes, I also used the illegal part, sideband, and
> AM. but it all went to pot when it became legal.
I was never really into CB. I did dabble, but found it too limiting, which
is why I went for the amateur licence. Regarding age, you're a
youngster..! My local club runs exam classes regularly, many people of all
ages pass, including pensioners. Give it a try, you may be pleasantly
surprised.
>
> Yep, this one have a hard disk, a pioneer, nice bit of
> kit. I also got a Thomson DHd4000 Freeview PVR,
Sony RDR-HX900 this end (160GB drive) plus an RDR-GX3 DVD-only machine.
>
> I liked the 3310, it may have been a bit big in size, but
> it worked well, it was simple to use and at least the
> screen was easy to see in bright sunlight, which is more
> than I can say for most now.
The 6310i is the best of the mono screen phones IMHO. I have a 7250i I got
as a free upgrade but I never use it. Once the backlight goes off you
can't see a thing.
> I normally wait for a couple of years untill most of
> tebugs are sorted out. I admit, I did not with the DVD
> recorder and I lost big time on my first one.
Same here, I had one of the early Philips machines, *big* mistake.
>
> Fine if you only got one computer connected to the
> system, not sure what it would be like if you got more
> than one, which is being used at the same time.
That's where QoS comes in.
Ivor
| |
|
|
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3mh893F16odarU1@individual.net...
>
>
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:0dp6g1tqku51mt07a99hjf92dccajv7am0@
4ax.com
>
> [snip]
>
>
> I would respectfully suggest that you master the English language first
> before you complain about others.
>
> Ivor
>
>
you see their yew gow ivur ,lording it up and telling peeple how you think
they shud akt, please tell us wat ur interezt in zipgayte is
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
| On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:01:14 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>I was never really into CB. I did dabble, but found it too limiting, which
>is why I went for the amateur licence. Regarding age, you're a
>youngster..! My local club runs exam classes regularly, many people of all
>ages pass, including pensioners. Give it a try, you may be pleasantly
>surprised.
I have and it was total bollocks that is why the radio's are in the
cupboard all that bullshit just to talk to someone maybe a few hundred
miles away much cheaper and easier these days to pick up the phone and
dial .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0ht6g1lt1kd1t7qvldr7tao90gump9umt9@
4ax.com
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:01:14 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I have and it was total bollocks that is why the radio's
> are in the cupboard all that bullshit just to talk to
> someone maybe a few hundred miles away much cheaper and
> easier these days to pick up the phone and dial .
As usual, you're totally missing the point. Amateur Radio is as much about
the means of communication as the communication itself. It is a
tremendously satisfying feeling to know you have communicated over a long
distance entirely by your own efforts and without the aid of any other
person or network.
Amateur Radio is also (apart from CB) the only method of communications
where you can call "blind" - i.e. put out a call and not know who (if
anyone) you're going to get. I've made many good friends that way, none of
whom behave as a lot of people do on here.
Ivor
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
| On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:48:59 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>As usual, you're totally missing the point. Amateur Radio is as much about
>the means of communication as the communication itself. It is a
>tremendously satisfying feeling to know you have communicated over a long
>distance entirely by your own efforts and without the aid of any other
>person or network.
Ivor if at the teaching sessions you spoke of taught how to use a
radio properly and not how to BUILD transceivers and erect Aerials
and know what length they should be and all that nonsense and then
test you on the knowledge gained there would be more sense in it .
I was in touch with quite a few radio hams a few years ago and most
agreed with me that all the engineering stuff should be removed from
the test papers completely but all the old fuddyduddys that comprise
the Amateur Radio society of Great Britain don't agree .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-17, 5:45 pm |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:reu6g11r2il6q8b46bbmuceibid4sv50ag@
4ax.com
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:48:59 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Ivor if at the teaching sessions you spoke of taught how
> to use a radio properly and not how to BUILD transceivers
> and erect Aerials and know what length they should be and
> all that nonsense and then test you on the knowledge
> gained there would be more sense in it .
> I was in touch with quite a few radio hams a few years
> ago and most agreed with me that all the engineering
> stuff should be removed from the test papers completely
> but all the old fuddyduddys that comprise the Amateur
> Radio society of Great Britain don't agree .
The course for the new Foundation licence does indeed teach procedures. As
for your other comments, the purpose of the technical requirements are to
ensure that you know precisely *how* radio works. This is for a very good
reason. The amateur licence grants a very exclusive privilege, that of
being *allowed* to build and use non-type-approved equipment. That carries
with it the responsibility not to cause interference with other services.
Hence the need to know how not to cause problems and how to solve them if
they do occur.
Anyone can be an equipment operator. Far fewer can be a true radio
amateur.
Ivor
| |
|
|
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3mhd4sF16nbknU1@individual.net...
>
>
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:reu6g11r2il6q8b46bbmuceibid4sv50ag@
4ax.com
>
>
> The course for the new Foundation licence does indeed teach procedures. As
> for your other comments, the purpose of the technical requirements are to
> ensure that you know precisely *how* radio works. This is for a very good
> reason. The amateur licence grants a very exclusive privilege, that of
> being *allowed* to build and use non-type-approved equipment. That carries
> with it the responsibility not to cause interference with other services.
> Hence the need to know how not to cause problems and how to solve them if
> they do occur.
>
> Anyone can be an equipment operator. Far fewer can be a true radio
> amateur.
>
> Ivor
>
>
you pull other people to bits about disussing other subjects apart from voip
on here yet you can get away with it, wheres the justice
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-08-18, 7:45 am |
| On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:48:59 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>Amateur Radio is also (apart from CB) the only method of communications
>where you can call "blind" - i.e. put out a call and not know who (if
>anyone) you're going to get. I've made many good friends that way, none of
>whom behave as a lot of people do on here.
Another way would be to dial numbers at random on a telephone. ;-)
Chris
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 7:45 am |
|
"Chris Blunt" <chris_blunt@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:qfj8g11qj5hdcdo53c2hm1jp46jugitbhd@
4ax.com
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 18:48:59 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Another way would be to dial numbers at random on a
> telephone. ;-)
>
> Chris
Then they call the police though :-(
<g>
Ivor
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 7:45 am |
|
<abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk> wrote in message
news:430470be$0$25903$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk
> Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
>
> To daringly drag this back on topic, I gather that Skype
> encourages randomly calling strangers for a chat. It's an
> opt-in thing though.
Yes, Skype Me, I've seen it. I still prefer radio though :-)
Ivor
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-18, 7:45 am |
| On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:12:16 +0800, Chris Blunt
<chris_blunt@despammed.com> wrote:
>Another way would be to dial numbers at random on a telephone. ;-)
Had loads of fun dialing 0800 and 08000 numbers a few years ago
I once hit a 08000 number situated in the states somewhere which gave
you the oppertunaty to press a number on the keypad which gave you an
outside line and then you could call anywhere in the world for free.
It lasted over a year before finally being blocked.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-18, 7:45 am |
| On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:05 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>Then they call the police though :-(
Give over Ivor anyone can dial a wrong number ! .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 5:45 pm |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7d09g1l8i3sadh1hafdb523m9bttqjedmn@
4ax.com
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:47:05 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Give over Ivor anyone can dial a wrong number ! .
Yes but when you try and chat up the girl that answered ;-))
I'll stick to radio, thanks..!
Ivor
| |
|
| Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
[...]
> Yes, Skype Me, I've seen it. I still prefer radio though :-)
An interesting idea, but I find that neither John Humphrys nor Sarah
Montague reply when I speak to the radio. Are they just rude, or is my
radio faulty?
--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger abuse@mooli.org.uk for full key
/:.*posting.google.com.*/HX-Trace:+j
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 5:45 pm |
|
"Peter" <abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk> wrote in message
news:4304e004$0$306$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk
> Ivor Jones <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> [...]
>
> An interesting idea, but I find that neither John
> Humphrys nor Sarah Montague reply when I speak to the
> radio. Are they just rude, or is my radio faulty?
You don't have a licence to transmit on Band II, that's why..!
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <lrp6g1pvd2ok8dqcl3vm0jkomafub6306j@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
> Ham and CB radio's went out with the ark along with the large ariel's
> stuck out on the garden or hanging from the chimney stack reaching for
> the moon and all the users these days are old fuddyduddys.
> I have a ICOM transmitter/receiver and a handheld that got put in the
> cupboard about twenty years ago plus a CB radio .
>
CB radio is still going, it is not so busy on itnow, I still got my
aerial stuck on ths die of the shed and I may connect it up again, to
see who is still around. CB radio is a cheap way to talk to people, ok
so it is not private, you can also meet people on there. I got a few
friends off the CB, that I still see now.
Ham radio is another thing, it is a very interesting hobby, you can talk
to people all other the world, I know you can do that by using MSN,
paltalk and other software of that type, but it is not the same.
It may be old to you, but there are still millions of people around the
world still using Ham radio.
| |
|
| In article <3mh8qsF16ho1qU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid=20
says...
In article <3mh8qsF16ho1qU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid=20
says...
> I was never really into CB. I did dabble, but found it too limiting, whic=
h=20
You are right, it is limited, but then it was only made for local=20
communication. I did chat to some people abroad when the old skip was=20
right, but most of the time it was only about 30 miles away. I only had=20
a small aerial as my pareants would not allow me to put an illegal one=20
up :-(. Now it is legal to use sigmas and things like that.
> is why I went for the amateur licence. Regarding age, you're a=20
My nephew went for it, passed the exam and never bothered after,
> youngster..! My local club runs exam classes regularly, many people of al=
l=20
> ages pass, including pensioners. Give it a try, you may be pleasantly=20
> surprised.
It is just finding the time that is the problem.
>=20
> Sony RDR-HX900 this end (160GB drive) plus an RDR-GX3 DVD-only machine.
I was looking at a sony or a Pansonic, but I am not fond of Sony=20
products.
> The 6310i is the best of the mono screen phones IMHO. I have a 7250i I go=
t=20
> as a free upgrade but I never use it. Once the backlight goes off you=20
> can't see a thing.
That is not good, I will keep the Sendo for a couple more years I think,=20
I can not understand why people change the things so much. I could not=20
be bothered.
=20
> Same here, I had one of the early Philips machines, *big* mistake.
Goodmans, =A3250 and it was a load of rubbish, it is up here now, and is=20
used as a DVd player only.
>=20
> That's where QoS comes in.
>=20
But then we are back to the problem that most routers do not have QOS. I=20
have looked on the support site for my router which is a Safecom and=20
there is something about QOS may be added to the next firmware upgrade.=20
This router cost me =A370 last year, so I am not ready to buy another one=
=20
for a couple more years. It is a good router and I got a small printer=20
on it downstairs, which is useful if I want to print off something ,=20
downstairs, before I go out. It is down there wating for me.
| |
|
| In article <0ht6g1lt1kd1t7qvldr7tao90gump9umt9@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
> I have and it was total bollocks that is why the radio's are in the
> cupboard all that bullshit just to talk to someone maybe a few hundred
> miles away much cheaper and easier these days to pick up the phone and
> dial .
>
>
I think you are total bollocks.
Normally you phone people you know, A CB is not about that, A CB is a
way for people to meet, make new friend and house bond people can also
make new friends. Trying doing that with your VOIP.
Oh BTY, your so call VOIP provider, should sort out their custamer
service. a mate of mine sent an email a week ago to them, asking about
some information, since he runs a business and VOIP may be the way to
go. He have heard nothing apart from a Automated email.
At least Slipgate did reply.
| |
|
| In article <reu6g11r2il6q8b46bbmuceibid4sv50ag@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
..
> Ivor if at the teaching sessions you spoke of taught how to use a
> radio properly and not how to BUILD transceivers and erect Aerials
> and know what length they should be and all that nonsense and then
> test you on the knowledge gained there would be more sense in it .
> I was in touch with quite a few radio hams a few years ago and most
> agreed with me that all the engineering stuff should be removed from
> the test papers completely but all the old fuddyduddys that comprise
> the Amateur Radio society of Great Britain don't agree .
>
>
It is nice to learn, I do know a little bit about it, as I have read
books and also being on the Cd I have made my own aerials now and again,
so I know about the different wave lengths. There is now an easier test,
but you are limited to the frequencies you use.
| |
|
| In article <qfj8g11qj5hdcdo53c2hm1jp46jugitbhd@4ax.com>,
chris_blunt@despammed.com says...
>
> Another way would be to dial numbers at random on a telephone. ;-)
>
Anyone did that to me and I would tell them where to go, since I am ex-
directory.
Talking of which, is there such a thing as ex-directory with VOIP, do
the numbers get published in the nommal telephone directory or are the
numbers easy to get?
I know with mobile phones, there is some sort of listing, but my phone
is not registered anyway, so my number can not really be listed.
Kind of got back on topic.
| |
|
| In article <430470be$0$25903$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
>
> To daringly drag this back on topic, I gather that Skype encourages
> randomly calling strangers for a chat. It's an opt-in thing though.
>
>
That is a different thing, that is like MSN messenger and all the other
messenging software. I know SKYP is VOIP, but it is not the same as
VOnage or Sligate.
| |
|
| In article <0dp6g1tqku51mt07a99hjf92dccajv7am0@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 20:38:24 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> Only with ONE particular provider most VOIP providers have got passed
> the beta stage and are now providing excellent service to all their
> customers with ALL their services working has they should work
> and do not expect their customers to attend collage and study the
> German language .
>
It is a pity thye customer service is not better, typical Amercans, I
suppose.
| |
|
| In article <1jo6g1pv776a4hnlkqd5r0tnj4adhl07p8@4ax.com>,=20
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 13:24:32 +0100, "David W.E. Roberts"
> <nospam@talk21.com> wrote:
>=20
>=20
> I don't know how you are arriving at the figure you are saying above
> but you can get a Vonage/Linksys router for 29.99 from Staples which
> allow you to have two phones and three computers connected if you are
> willing to go with Vonage . If not then a PAP2 will cost over forty
What happens if y9ou decide say in 12 months time, you decide that=20
Vonage is not for you, is it not possible to change the settings of the=20
Linsys router, so you can use another provider, or is that why it is so=20
cheap?=20
Not a good idea, ISPs are giving away modems and some even cheap=20
routers, but they are not locking them, apart from Wannabees.
It is like the mobile phone compnaies, locking the phones.
> pounds and I do not think it acts as a router and a Sipura around
> 80.00 depending on modal you choose .
> A ADSL 4 port Edimax router/Modem which are good cost around 31.00
> plus a decent ATA of some sort anything from 40 to 80 pounds .=20
>=20
It will take some getting your money back then.
=20
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-18, 8:45 pm |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:03:31 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Normally you phone people you know, A CB is not about that, A CB is a
>way for people to meet, make new friend and house bond people can also
>make new friends. Trying doing that with your VOIP.
I have no wish to make new friends I have enough friends has it is
that I met face to face years ago, face to face is the way to make
friends not over a radio or in a chat room or whatever.
>Oh BTY, your so call VOIP provider, should sort out their custamer
>service. a mate of mine sent an email a week ago to them, asking about
>some information, since he runs a business and VOIP may be the way to
>go. He have heard nothing apart from a Automated email.
Now just why would anyone want to contact vonage by email when they
provide a 0800 number for people to contact them on ???? this was one
on my main grumbles with Sipgate " no personal voice contact". I do
not like spending hours typing out emails sooner pick up the phone no
matter what the cost .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-18, 8:45 pm |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:10:26 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Anyone did that to me and I would tell them where to go, since I am ex-
>directory.
Being ex directory doesn't prevent anyone from dialing your number by
mistake now does it or any auto dialer for that matter, when we first
got a TW phone it started ringing once every 20 minutes and on
answering there was a foreign voice on the other end jabbering away.
TW changed the number and said it was a auto dialer somewhere in the
world dialing random UK numbers .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-18, 8:45 pm |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:13:38 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>In article <0dp6g1tqku51mt07a99hjf92dccajv7am0@4ax.com>,
>Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
>It is a pity thye customer service is not better, typical Amercans, I
>suppose.
Eh I though Sipgate was a German firm !!! .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 8:45 pm |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6f33c6709c3aa5989685@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <qfj8g11qj5hdcdo53c2hm1jp46jugitbhd@4ax.com>,
> chris_blunt@despammed.com says...
> Anyone did that to me and I would tell them where to go,
> since I am ex- directory.
Me too..!
> Talking of which, is there such a thing as ex-directory
> with VOIP, do the numbers get published in the nommal
> telephone directory or are the numbers easy to get?
AFAIK all VoIP numbers are "ex-directory". Certainly Sipgate don't publish
their numbers, it's mentioned on their site, something to do with
"regulatory reasons" but I know no more than what it says there. I can't
speak for any other provider.
> I know with mobile phones, there is some sort of listing,
> but my phone is not registered anyway, so my number can
> not really be listed.
Actually I am not aware of any public listing of mobile numbers, but I
could be wrong. I have never seen one listed in the BT phone book.
> Kind of got back on topic.
Much needed ;-)
Ivor
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-18, 8:45 pm |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pd9ag1luuniqji7vni17r4cn72lleonn3d@
4ax.com
[snip]
> Now just why would anyone want to contact vonage by email
> when they provide a 0800 number for people to contact
> them on ???? this was one on my main grumbles with
> Sipgate " no personal voice contact". I do not like
> spending hours typing out emails sooner pick up the phone
> no matter what the cost .
A phone call is ephemeral. Once you put the phone down there is no record
of it. Ok so it might be listed on a website or on a bill that you called
such and such a number, but it doesn't record what was said.
There are many occasions when a written record is desirable. A dispute,
for example. "Oh you phoned us complaining about X, did you..?" "Yes, what
are you going to do about refunding my money..?" "Nothing, goodbye"
Click..
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <pd9ag1luuniqji7vni17r4cn72lleonn3d@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> I have no wish to make new friends I have enough friends has it is
> that I met face to face years ago, face to face is the way to make
> friends not over a radio or in a chat room or whatever.
That depends on a few things, some people are shy, some are house bound.
I talked to one person most days who was house bound and I started to go
and see them every week to see if I could help in anyway. It made her
happy, because she was meeting people. Her health got worse and she
died, which is sad, but I am glad I made a difference in her life.
> Now just why would anyone want to contact vonage by email when they
> provide a 0800 number for people to contact them on ???? this was one
> on my main grumbles with Sipgate " no personal voice contact". I do
> not like spending hours typing out emails sooner pick up the phone no
> matter what the cost .
Does it matter how he contacts them? at the end of the day they have got
an email address, on which they can be contacted, so on which they
should reply. I prefer emails, if I can do things over theinternet or
via email I will. I hate phoning.
| |
|
| In article <3mkoreF1756g0U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
>
> There are many occasions when a written record is desirable. A dispute,
> for example. "Oh you phoned us complaining about X, did you..?" "Yes, what
> are you going to do about refunding my money..?" "Nothing, goodbye"
> Click..
>
That is true, mind you all of my phone calls are recorded.
| |
|
| In article <lq9ag1dmml1akgrrophq997rkc4g35tbo3@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
> Being ex directory doesn't prevent anyone from dialing your number by
> mistake now does it or any auto dialer for that matter, when we first
You don't say? I never knew that.
> got a TW phone it started ringing once every 20 minutes and on
> answering there was a foreign voice on the other end jabbering away.
> TW changed the number and said it was a auto dialer somewhere in the
> world dialing random UK numbers .
>
I do nto get them very often, I do come home from work and find some
Amercan voice on the answering machine saying that I have won something
and to press 9, which I would never do anyway. I am on the telephone
preferences service or what ever it is called. Being Ex-directory do
help a lot, also my phone do not send out the number, so any one with
caller I.D will not know what my number is.
| |
|
| In article <3mkoh9F16c3scU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
>
> Me too..!
In fact I do tell them where to go, but if I am in a really evil mood, I
play with them. A few months back, I almost had a firm that redo the
guttering and facia boards, to pop down and have a look, it was only
when I told them, they would have to speak to the housing association
about the quote, that they put the phone down. I was on the phone for
about 15 minutes. Well they waste my time, I will waste theirs.
>
> AFAIK all VoIP numbers are "ex-directory". Certainly Sipgate don't publish
> their numbers, it's mentioned on their site, something to do with
> "regulatory reasons" but I know no more than what it says there. I can't
> speak for any other provider.
This is something that all VOIP provider will have to sort out. Maybe
offcom will sort it out. I presume VOIP providers still fall under the
Offcom banner.
> Actually I am not aware of any public listing of mobile numbers, but I
> could be wrong. I have never seen one listed in the BT phone book.
When I had my first mobile phone, and registered it, Vodafone asked me
if I wanted it listed. Maybe it is the telephone directory services that
lists it then.
| |
|
| In article <04aag1li0lpjheqle150m69mvsa6m17fmu@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> Eh I though Sipgate was a German firm !!! .
>
Sorry, I meant vonage, sipgate do reply. Vonage have lost a customer.
Mind you I was chatting to my mate this monring and he is thinking that
maybe VOIP is not for him. He needs something he can rely on and being a
fair distance from the exchange, he is a bit worried about if his ADSL
would be able to cope. He do have problems now and again.
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-08-19, 7:46 am |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:31:15 +0100, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:10:26 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>
>Being ex directory doesn't prevent anyone from dialing your number by
>mistake now does it or any auto dialer for that matter, when we first
>got a TW phone it started ringing once every 20 minutes and on
>answering there was a foreign voice on the other end jabbering away.
>TW changed the number and said it was a auto dialer somewhere in the
>world dialing random UK numbers .
Their explanation doesn't sound quite right. If it was really dialling
random telephone numbers you would expect to get as many calls on the
new number as you did on the old one.
Chris
| |
| Phil Thompson 2005-08-19, 7:46 am |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:47:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
<ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>I have never seen one listed in the BT phone book.
found a couple of mobile number in ours, and quite a few 0845 and 0870
"non geographical" numbers which seems a contradiction.
Orange Directory on 118 000 will give out "listed" Orange mobile
numbers.
Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
| |
|
| AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> Talking of which, is there such a thing as ex-directory with VOIP,
> do the numbers get published in the nommal telephone directory or
> are the numbers easy to get?
I would expect them to be NQR ("No Quoted Record") rather than XD,
unless you arrange otherwise with BT. XD is in the directory (but
marked XD) whereas NQR is not.
The main difference is when you're trying to get the number out of
118xxx. When you do a search for an XD number, they can say "sorry,
that number is ex-directory" whereas a search for a NQR number will
draw a blank. The latter annoys the operator (although maybe no longer
at 50p/min!) because the caller may ask to search again with a
different variant of name and/or address.
--
PGP key ID E85DC776 - finger abuse@mooli.org.uk for full key
/:.*posting.google.com.*/HX-Trace:+j
| |
| Chris Blunt 2005-08-19, 7:46 am |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 09:19:37 +0100, Phil Thompson
<phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:47:33 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
>found a couple of mobile number in ours, and quite a few 0845 and 0870
>"non geographical" numbers which seems a contradiction.
I used to have my 07010 FlexTel personal number listed in the BT
directory. What a mistake that was.
Chris
| |
|
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:pd9ag1luuniqji7vni17r4cn72lleonn3d@
4ax.com...
> On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 01:03:31 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> I have no wish to make new friends I have enough friends has it is
> that I met face to face years ago, face to face is the way to make
> friends not over a radio or in a chat room or whatever.
> Now just why would anyone want to contact vonage by email when they
> provide a 0800 number for people to contact them on ???? this was one
> on my main grumbles with Sipgate " no personal voice contact". I do
> not like spending hours typing out emails sooner pick up the phone no
> matter what the cost .
>
excatly i suspect most people in here such as ivors cronies make friends on
the net and via cb radio , how sad, get out into teh real world and make
real friends
| |
|
|
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3mkoreF1756g0U1@individual.net...
>
>
> <Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:pd9ag1luuniqji7vni17r4cn72lleonn3d@
4ax.com
>
> [snip]
>
>
> A phone call is ephemeral. Once you put the phone down there is no record
> of it. Ok so it might be listed on a website or on a bill that you called
> such and such a number, but it doesn't record what was said.
>
> There are many occasions when a written record is desirable. A dispute,
> for example. "Oh you phoned us complaining about X, did you..?" "Yes, what
> are you going to do about refunding my money..?" "Nothing, goodbye"
> Click..
>
> Ivor
>
>
have you never heard of recording teh call ivor, of course telling them at
the start you are actually recording it.
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6f9e89d5d5025698968a@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <3mkoreF1756g0U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
> says...
> That is true, mind you all of my phone calls are recorded.
well i hope you are informing the parties who you are recording becuase it
is against the law if you arent pal
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6f348d60d4a61a989687@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <0dp6g1tqku51mt07a99hjf92dccajv7am0@4ax.com>,
> Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
>
> It is a pity thye customer service is not better, typical Amercans, I
> suppose.
>
he is talking about sipgate thicko not vonage like you seem to be implying
with your comments about americans
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6fa32ef07b98d398968d@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <04aag1li0lpjheqle150m69mvsa6m17fmu@4ax.com>,
> Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> Sorry, I meant vonage, sipgate do reply. Vonage have lost a customer.
> Mind you I was chatting to my mate this monring and he is thinking that
> maybe VOIP is not for him. He needs something he can rely on and being a
> fair distance from the exchange, he is a bit worried about if his ADSL
> would be able to cope. He do have problems now and again.
would you have been chatting to him on your cb bwaaaahhhhhhhhhhh
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6f364877261133989688@news.metronet.co.uk...
In article <1jo6g1pv776a4hnlkqd5r0tnj4adhl07p8@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 13:24:32 +0100, "David W.E. Roberts"
> <nospam@talk21.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't know how you are arriving at the figure you are saying above
> but you can get a Vonage/Linksys router for 29.99 from Staples which
> allow you to have two phones and three computers connected if you are
> willing to go with Vonage . If not then a PAP2 will cost over forty
What happens if y9ou decide say in 12 months time, you decide that
Vonage is not for you, is it not possible to change the settings of the
Linsys router, so you can use another provider, or is that why it is so
cheap?
Not a good idea, ISPs are giving away modems and some even cheap
routers, but they are not locking them, apart from Wannabees.
It is like the mobile phone compnaies, locking the phones.
> pounds and I do not think it acts as a router and a Sipura around
> 80.00 depending on modal you choose .
> A ADSL 4 port Edimax router/Modem which are good cost around 31.00
> plus a decent ATA of some sort anything from 40 to 80 pounds .
>
wannabees
who are they ??????????
| |
|
| In article <dpjNe.11838$wh6.7586@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
dollars@pounds.uk says...
>
> well i hope you are informing the parties who you are recording becuase it
> is against the law if you arent pal
>
>
Do I care? nope, I do not give a monkeys, pal
For your information there is a beep I think it is every 12 seconds,
which is the only thing |I need to warn people they are being recorded.
| |
|
| In article <isjNe.11841$wh6.8974@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
dollars@pounds.uk says...
> would you have been chatting to him on your cb bwaaaahhhhhhhhhhh
>
That would be a bit difficult, since he have never used a CB,
You are a right prat.
| |
|
| In article <4njNe.11836$wh6.8286@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
dollars@pounds.uk says...
> excatly i suspect most people in here such as ivors cronies make friends on
> the net and via cb radio , how sad, get out into teh real world and make
> real friends
>
>
I got a lot of friends, I have met in different ways, but not every one
likes going to the pub, I see no sense in spending lots of money , just
to piss it up against the wall. so not all of my friends I have met on
CB or the net, in fact very few of them really.
Most people I talk to over the Internet do not even live in this
country, I am not going to fly to America, Japan, china, Italy, Spain or
Australia just to meet people. It is nice to talk to people from around
the world.
I think you are the sad one, because you do not open your eyes. The
Internet is not just about email and looking at porn sites, which some
of you think it is.
BTW, I do not regard myself as anyone's crony.
At the end of the day, I have got nothing to prove, I do not use VOIP,
like Sipgate or Vonage, so I can not say anything against or for them,
apart from the fact that vonage do not know what customer service is.
| |
|
| In article <MsjNe.11842$wh6.10976@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
dollars@pounds.uk says...
>
>
>
> wannabees
>
> who are they ??????????
>
>
Think aboout it.
It is my name for an ISP, who want to be an ISP, but are not very good
at doing it.
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d701e1dca041783989691@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <MsjNe.11842$wh6.10976@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
> dollars@pounds.uk says...
> Think aboout it.
>
>
> It is my name for an ISP, who want to be an ISP, but are not very good
> at doing it.
>
thick c*** i know perfectly well who it is, i was making a point, and why
not travel to see your friends all over the world, so far this year i have
been to bubai twice, atlanta 3 times, spain inparticular marbella more than
10 times so i dont particulary have a problem flying around the world, oh
and its always club class , you wouldnt belive how many points i have
accumulated on ba worldpoints :-)
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-19, 5:45 pm |
|
"Peter" <abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk> wrote in message
news:4305b268$0$930$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk
> AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
>
> I would expect them to be NQR ("No Quoted Record") rather
> than XD, unless you arrange otherwise with BT. XD is in
> the directory (but marked XD) whereas NQR is not.
>
> The main difference is when you're trying to get the
> number out of 118xxx. When you do a search for an XD
> number, they can say "sorry, that number is ex-directory"
> whereas a search for a NQR number will draw a blank. The
> latter annoys the operator (although maybe no longer at
> 50p/min!) because the caller may ask to search again with
> a different variant of name and/or address.
Out of interest, how would you ask DQ for a VoIP number..? The user could
be anywhere and doesn't have to live at the address the account was set up
from.
Ivor
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-19, 5:45 pm |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d6f9e89d5d5025698968a@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3mkoreF1756g0U1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
> That is true, mind you all of my phone calls are recorded.
And AFAIK a recording isn't admissible as evidence in court. Certainly it
never used to be, maybe that has changed.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <MrjNe.11840$wh6.1516@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>,
dollars@pounds.uk says...
>
> he is talking about sipgate thicko not vonage like you seem to be implying
> with your comments about americans
>
>
He also said the others provide excellent service, hinting at the one he
is also praising, which seems to have a crap customer service.
Maybe it is you who is the thicko, thicko.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-19, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:46:23 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>He also said the others provide excellent service, hinting at the one he
>is also praising, which seems to have a crap customer service.
The thicko is the person who would sooner spend time typing emails
than pick up a phone and dial an 0800 number, good job he or she does
not use Pipex for internet connection or they would have to wait at
least a week for a reply to an email from pipex or 18866 for that
matter .
| |
|
| In article <feoNe.10464$CM.9749@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>, dollars@pounds.uk
says...
> thick c*** i know perfectly well who it is, i was making a point, and why
On about yourself again?
> not travel to see your friends all over the world, so far this year i have
> been to bubai twice, atlanta 3 times, spain inparticular marbella more than
> 10 times so i dont particulary have a problem flying around the world, oh
> and its always club class , you wouldnt belive how many points i have
> accumulated on ba worldpoints :-)
>
>
That is up to you, myself I prefer to keep my feet on the ground. I am
going to Italy next year, but it will be on a ferry. The other problem
is money, it costs money to go to these places and also time.
What the hell is world points anyway? another loyalty card thing, to con
you into giving compnies your information, so they can give that
information to other companies?
| |
|
| In article <3mn0c5F17sj42U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid > >
>
>
> And AFAIK a recording isn't admissible as evidence in court. Certainly it
> never used to be, maybe that has changed.
>
I think it is as long as you got the beep, because it is difficult to
edit if you got the beep, mind you these days it is easy enough to put
the beep in your self. I do not record them for court use anyway. I got
a refund from a company, because I could prove that they said I would
get one, when they sold me the product if I was not happy with it.
TBH, I do not record all my calls, but if I phone companies, I normally
put the recorder on. I got an old answering machine, that uses full size
cassettes, that is what I use to record. It works better as an ansering
machine than some of the digital crap that is around.
My Dect phone may be a great phone, but the ansering machine on it is a
load of trash. The longest message is 3 mins and it only have the memory
for 15 mins of messages and if I decide to put my own outgoing message
that takes up some space as well. Then their is this quality problem. My
old Pansonic tape based answering machine is much better.
Talking of which, Would a VOIP system activate an answering machine?
| |
| Mark Ingle 2005-08-19, 8:45 pm |
| Martin" <never@give.one> wrote:
> The Zoom X5V VoIP modem / router isn't too expensive ~£90 (so long that you
> don't need to add wifi).
The 90 pounds is for two units; as the cost is 45 pounds + shipping from
ebuyer, but yes it doesn't have WiFi unless you connect a wifi access
point.
http://www.ebuyer.com/customer/prod...4078465&action=
c2hvd19wcm9kdWN0X292ZXJ2aWV3&product_uid=62676
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-19, 8:45 pm |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7072d6c23524e5989694@news.metronet.co.uk
[snip]
> Talking of which, Would a VOIP system activate an
> answering machine?
An analogue port from an ATA behaves in exactly the same way as a physical
landline. Put an answering machine on it and it will work fine. That's
what I did before Sipgate's voicemail system started.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <puncg1diklhihvsrbstjrthrd9gjpjm2cu@4ax.com>,
Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> The thicko is the person who would sooner spend time typing emails
> than pick up a phone and dial an 0800 number, good job he or she does
> not use Pipex for internet connection or they would have to wait at
> least a week for a reply to an email from pipex or 18866 for that
> matter .
>
>
Using the phone is not always the best idea, most componies these days
use Indian call centers, tying to understand some of them is almost
impossible. Also you got to plough though loads of menu options, which
are time wasting and achieve nothing. It was a lort better in the days,
when you just phoned and talked to a British person straight away.
so sending an email is a lot better, unless you want the answer right
away.
| |
|
| In article <3mn88nF17datjU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> An analogue port from an ATA behaves in exactly the same way as a physical
> landline. Put an answering machine on it and it will work fine. That's
> what I did before Sipgate's voicemail system started.
>
Some people will prefer to use their own answering machine than rely on
another system. I use 1570, well my phone supplier equivalent of it, but
only for when I am on the phone talking to someone, so they can leave a
message instead of getting a engaged tone.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-20, 2:45 am |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d70e1b656a7e2fb989696@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3mn88nF17datjU1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
>
> Some people will prefer to use their own answering
> machine than rely on another system. I use 1570, well my
> phone supplier equivalent of it, but only for when I am
> on the phone talking to someone, so they can leave a
> message instead of getting a engaged tone.
I assume you mean 1571. That's something I hate, it means I pay instead of
getting an engaged tone when someone is on the phone. I'd rather hear the
engaged tone (without paying..!)and try again later. If I get the 1571
system I don't call that person again.
Ivor
| |
|
| In article <3mo466F17ns3bU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> I assume you mean 1571. That's something I hate, it means I pay instead of
> getting an engaged tone when someone is on the phone. I'd rather hear the
> engaged tone (without paying..!)and try again later. If I get the 1571
> system I don't call that person again.
>
yep 1571, sorry, that is what I meant. If someone phones me, and leave a
message on 1571, then I can ring them back, after I finished talking to
the last person. A mate of mine says the same thing about answering
machines, that they cost him money. But as I said to him, if he left a
message, I would phone him back, when I got in.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-20, 7:45 am |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d71050ebd5189c3989697@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3mo466F17ns3bU1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
> yep 1571, sorry, that is what I meant. If someone phones
> me, and leave a message on 1571, then I can ring them
> back, after I finished talking to the last person. A mate
> of mine says the same thing about answering machines,
> that they cost him money. But as I said to him, if he
> left a message, I would phone him back, when I got in.
But a lot of people don't, and I end up spending money to leave messages.
I'd rather try again later. I know of people that don't check their
messages for days, and with 1571 you can't tell there's a message waiting
until you pick up the phone and get the stuttered dial tone. At least with
most answering machines you get a flashing light or something and it
*doesn't* cut in if the line is busy.
Personal opinion of course, but I don't ring a number with 1571 on it
twice.
Ivor
| |
|
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7072f35f591638989693@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <feoNe.10464$CM.9749@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>, dollars@pounds.uk
> says...
>
> On about yourself again?
>
>
> That is up to you, myself I prefer to keep my feet on the ground. I am
> going to Italy next year, but it will be on a ferry. The other problem
> is money, it costs money to go to these places and also time.
> What the hell is world points anyway? another loyalty card thing, to con
> you into giving compnies your information, so they can give that
> information to other companies?
>
i havent got a problem with ba or any other frequent flyer programmes i use
having information about me or flights, in fact i was recenly offered a free
upgrade becuase of teh amount of travelling i do on ba, as for money well i
earn it, some months can be thousands others just a few hundred but all my
hartd work enables me to enjoy myself very well.
| |
|
| In article <3mog9dF180i79U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid=20
says...
>=20
> But a lot of people don't, and I end up spending money to leave messages.=
=20
I thought your calls was free on VOIP, as long as you pay almost =A310 a=20
month, or is that just Vonage?
> I'd rather try again later. I know of people that don't check their=20
> messages for days, and with 1571 you can't tell there's a message waiting=
=20
> until you pick up the phone and get the stuttered dial tone. At least wit=
h=20
I always check mine, after I finished a conversation. A few phones and=20
it is only a few, will flash a light if there is a message waiting, I do=20
not know how it knows.
=20
> most answering machines you get a flashing light or something and it=20
I got three answering machines here, the one I am using, will flash a=20
light and flash up how many messages is on the tape. The one built into=20
the Dect phone will just flash a light on the base, which is silly since=20
the base could be anywhere. I also got a single micro cassette one,=20
which will bleep until you check the message.
> *doesn't* cut in if the line is busy.
At least I do not miss a call, even when I am talking on the phone,=20
unless the person do not leave a message. But I can also understand what=20
you mean as well.
=20
> Personal opinion of course, but I don't ring a number with 1571 on it=20
> twice.
>=20
Then there must be a lot of people you do not call, I hope you are not=20
in business and have to call clients. I know very few people who do not=20
have 1571 on their phone.
My parents have got it because it is a cheap and easy way to get=20
messages. It is easy to use and they do not have to bother with=20
answering machines. It is one of the better things BT have done and with=20
the free one it is even better.
| |
|
| In article <lbENe.12141$wh6.8483@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>, pc999@copspam.uk
says...
>
> i havent got a problem with ba or any other frequent flyer programmes i use
> having information about me or flights, in fact i was recenly offered a free
Good for you.
> upgrade becuase of teh amount of travelling i do on ba, as for money well i
As I said, I prefer to keep my feet where belong, on the ground.
> earn it, some months can be thousands others just a few hundred but all my
> hartd work enables me to enjoy myself very well.
>
Good for you, I also work hard and also enjoy myself, but I do not have
to fly to do that.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2005-08-20, 5:45 pm |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d71a6f8daf3a029989699@news.metronet.co.uk
> In article <3mog9dF180i79U1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
>
> I thought your calls was free on VOIP, as long as you pay
> almost £10 a month, or is that just Vonage?
£10 a month isn't free, is it..?! No that's just Vonage, I believe. On the
normal Sipgate system you pay per call, but there's no monthly fee.
>
> I always check mine, after I finished a conversation. A
> few phones and it is only a few, will flash a light if
> there is a message waiting, I do not know how it knows.
Hmm, not seen any of those, but you're the exception that proves the
rule..! Most people I know who use 1571 have never returned my calls when
I've left a message on it, which is why I now detest the system.
>
> I got three answering machines here, the one I am using,
> will flash a light and flash up how many messages is on
> the tape. The one built into the Dect phone will just
> flash a light on the base, which is silly since the base
> could be anywhere. I also got a single micro cassette
> one, which will bleep until you check the message.
So why use 1571..?
>
> At least I do not miss a call, even when I am talking on
> the phone, unless the person do not leave a message. But
> I can also understand what you mean as well.
You wouldn't miss a call from me, I'd call again later.
> Then there must be a lot of people you do not call, I
> hope you are not in business and have to call clients. I
> know very few people who do not have 1571 on their phone.
I honestly don't know many people who use it. Those I do don't get called
twice, as I said, and I make sure to tell them when I do speak to them of
my reasons for not calling them. Actually most people I call regularly I
either call on their mobile or on Sipgate so 1571 doesn't apply.
> My parents have got it because it is a cheap and easy way
> to get messages. It is easy to use and they do not have
> to bother with answering machines. It is one of the
> better things BT have done and with the free one it is
> even better.
As long as you check for messages *regularly* then it's fine. If you
don't, as those I've been unlucky enough to encounter, then it's a damned
nuisance. I also really hate the thing cutting in when a line is engaged.
It may be convenient for the 1571 user, but it's annoying and expensive
for the caller. It's similar to those systems that answer a call and then
say press 1 for this, press 2 for that etc., charging you while it's doing
it. If I call someone and they're on the phone, I prefer to hear an
engaged tone so I can try again later. I don't see why I should pay not to
talk to the person I'm calling..! Ok so you are considerate and regularly
check for messages and always call back the person immediately. Most
people are not so thoughtful.
All the best,
Ivor
| |
| Pc8765 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
|
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d71a78913a12f7e98969a@news.metronet.co.uk...
> In article <lbENe.12141$wh6.8483@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>, pc999@copspam.uk
> says...
>
> Good for you.
>
>
>
> As I said, I prefer to keep my feet where belong, on the ground.
>
>
> Good for you, I also work hard and also enjoy myself, but I do not have
> to fly to do that.
no adc youre missing the point,i enjoy myself on land far too much as well,
i just happen to fly a lot, you wouldnt belive how attentive the staff are
in some of the executive lounge, not to mention cute lol
| |
| Pc8765 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
|
"Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:3mpko1F17c0cbU1@individual.net...
>
>
> "AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d71a6f8daf3a029989699@news.metronet.co.uk
>
> £10 a month isn't free, is it..?! No that's just Vonage, I believe. On the
> normal Sipgate system you pay per call, but there's no monthly fee.
>
>
> Hmm, not seen any of those, but you're the exception that proves the
> rule..! Most people I know who use 1571 have never returned my calls when
> I've left a message on it, which is why I now detest the system.
>
>
> So why use 1571..?
>
>
> You wouldn't miss a call from me, I'd call again later.
>
>
> I honestly don't know many people who use it. Those I do don't get called
> twice, as I said, and I make sure to tell them when I do speak to them of
> my reasons for not calling them. Actually most people I call regularly I
> either call on their mobile or on Sipgate so 1571 doesn't apply.
>
>
> As long as you check for messages *regularly* then it's fine. If you
> don't, as those I've been unlucky enough to encounter, then it's a damned
> nuisance. I also really hate the thing cutting in when a line is engaged.
> It may be convenient for the 1571 user, but it's annoying and expensive
> for the caller. It's similar to those systems that answer a call and then
> say press 1 for this, press 2 for that etc., charging you while it's doing
> it. If I call someone and they're on the phone, I prefer to hear an
> engaged tone so I can try again later. I don't see why I should pay not to
> talk to the person I'm calling..! Ok so you are considerate and regularly
> check for messages and always call back the person immediately. Most
> people are not so thoughtful.
>
> All the best,
>
> Ivor
>
>
ivor with vongae you pay 9.99 per month for a flawless and reliable service,
also as im on the business package at 18.99 and none of my vonage bills have
ever been over this amount whereas previosuly the largest monthly bill
received for business related calls was 699.87 dont you think their is
some savings to be made with vonage lovey.
| |
|
| In article <3mpko1F17c0cbU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid=20
says...
>=20
> =A310 a month isn't free, is it..?! No that's just Vonage, I believe. On =
the=20
> normal Sipgate system you pay per call, but there's no monthly fee.
No it is not free, but what I meant was that you are not wasting money,=20
since it is unlimited calls. Sipgate is the better way to go then, if=20
you do not want a monthly fee, as long as you are not going to spend=20
more than =A310 a month on calls.
I am lucky if I spend more than =A35 a month on calls, the rest of my bill=
=20
is line rental. It is about time the line rental was dropped or=20
incorporated into call charges. Most gas and electric suppliers do not=20
have a standing charge, they just put a little bit extra on each unit=20
you use.
>=20
> Hmm, not seen any of those, but you're the exception that proves the=20
I only seen two phones with them on and they was in a news paper advert=20
or something like that.
> rule..! Most people I know who use 1571 have never returned my calls when=
=20
> I've left a message on it, which is why I now detest the system.
I always return calls, It is a polite thing to do.
>=20
> So why use 1571..?
Because the answering machines do not work, if I am on the phone. I do=20
not very often get calls, when I am on the phone but it do happen.
Voice mail on VOIP, do that take messages if your phone is engaged?
>=20
> You wouldn't miss a call from me, I'd call again later.
But some people may not phone up later.
I must admit, if I had to pay for the messaging service, then I would=20
not bother with it now. When I had a lodger I paid for 1571, because she=20
found it easier than bothering with an answering machine and since at=20
that time, we was on dial up internet, it was an easy way for people to=20
leave messages and save them phoning the mobile.
> I honestly don't know many people who use it. Those I do don't get called=
=20
> twice, as I said, and I make sure to tell them when I do speak to them of=
=20
> my reasons for not calling them. Actually most people I call regularly I=
=20
> either call on their mobile or on Sipgate so 1571 doesn't apply.
People are not going to get rid of it, because you will not call them,=20
they would just say please yourself. I hate calling people who got call=20
waiting, but I know two people who uses it, I do not stop calling them.
> As long as you check for messages *regularly* then it's fine. If you=20
> don't, as those I've been unlucky enough to encounter, then it's a damned=
=20
> nuisance. I also really hate the thing cutting in when a line is engaged.=
=20
> It may be convenient for the 1571 user, but it's annoying and expensive=
=20
> for the caller. It's similar to those systems that answer a call and then=
=20
It depends how many people you call. I have not noticed my bill go up=20
much if at all, because of them.=20
> say press 1 for this, press 2 for that etc., charging you while it's doin=
g=20
I hate them.
> it. If I call someone and they're on the phone, I prefer to hear an=20
> engaged tone so I can try again later. I don't see why I should pay not t=
o=20
> talk to the person I'm calling..! Ok so you are considerate and regularly=
=20
It is called life and it will get worse as technology take over.
> check for messages and always call back the person immediately. Most=20
> people are not so thoughtful.
>=20
When I come home, I always check as well, just in case the answering=20
machine was resetting itself when a call came in. It sometimes happens,=20
that I get two calls one after the other, before the machine have sorted=20
itself out. with twin tapes, it is faster than the one with a single=20
tape.
Another thing I want to ask, if I had a VOIP phone, would the dial tone=20
and also the incoming ringtone be the same as ours or will it change?
Vonage being American, I would not be surprised if they just had a=20
single ring, and Sipgate being German, it uses what ever Germany uses.
| |
|
| In article <a%XNe.11868$Ht5.11581@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, pc999
@copspam.uk says...
> ivor with vongae you pay 9.99 per month for a flawless and reliable service,
> also as im on the business package at 18.99 and none of my vonage bills have
> ever been over this amount whereas previosuly the largest monthly bill
> received for business related calls was 699.87 dont you think their is
> some savings to be made with vonage lovey.
>
>
Nothing is flawless.
| |
|
| In article <kZXNe.11857$Ht5.9491@newsfe1-win.ntli.net>, pc999@copspam.uk
says...
>
> no adc youre missing the point,i enjoy myself on land far too much as well,
> i just happen to fly a lot, you wouldnt belive how attentive the staff are
> in some of the executive lounge, not to mention cute lol
>
>
Good for you, I hope you are happy.
II still prefer to keep my feet on the ground. If we was meant to fly,
we would have wings.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
| On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:59:32 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Nothing is flawless.
Really you haven't tried Vonage have you so how can you make comments
about something you don't have any experience of ,when I find a flaw
in the Vonage service I will let you know in the meantime keep your
gob shut about subjects you know bugger all about . Get your wallet
out spend a little money and get yourself a decent telephone service
provider ,people who make comments about something they know bugger
all about make me bloody sick .
| |
| Pc8765 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
|
<Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:kpngg15mc1jhd1t76ej06oiurl11190gn1@
4ax.com...
> On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:59:32 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
> Really you haven't tried Vonage have you so how can you make comments
> about something you don't have any experience of ,when I find a flaw
> in the Vonage service I will let you know in the meantime keep your
> gob shut about subjects you know bugger all about . Get your wallet
> out spend a little money and get yourself a decent telephone service
> provider ,people who make comments about something they know bugger
> all about make me bloody sick .
ditto until one tries the service they can NOT pass comment, still if the do
gooding ,liberal, freeloaders like ivor and his gang of cronies wnat to use
a "FREE" and i say free in the most liberal sesne of the word and put up
with an appauling service, no connection and 100% crap cs well let
them,pissgate have a long way to go before /if they ever each vonages
stable/superior and reliable service.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
| On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 11:58:11 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>It depends how many people you call. I have not noticed my bill go up
>much if at all, because of them.
You like helping BT with their crafty way of increasing revenue do you
tell you what when I get the BT 1571 picking up a call I have made the
phone goes down and I never ring that number again.
When I make a call I either want to here the engaged tone or the
persons voice on the other end that I want to speak to not robbing
BT's computers .Besides which when I make a call I withhold my number
so anyone dialing 1571 or 1471 will gain nothing .
>It is called life and it will get worse as technology take over.
It will if people like you keep agreeing to use these money making
services in any case with Vonage there is no need for a service like
1571. I have my first line transferred to my second line if it is not
answered after 30 seconds and if that line is not answered it
transfers to my mobile which is switched on and in my pocket so where
I go so I can be reached from noon until 3 am any day of the week.
>Another thing I want to ask, if I had a VOIP phone, would the dial tone
>and also the incoming ringtone be the same as ours or will it change?
I have a selection of ring tones on my Diverse X10 including the usual
UK tone .
>Vonage being American, I would not be surprised if they just had a
>single ring, and Sipgate being German, it uses what ever Germany uses.
Don't be bloody stupid it is the phone or ATA not the phone company
that dictates what you here ,are you trying to wind us all up or what
with your stupid questions and remarks .
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2005-08-21, 7:45 am |
| Newsgroups: uk.telecom.voip
X-Trace: news.freedom2surf.net 1124627105 16896 195.137.72.12 (21 Aug 2005 12:25:05 GMT)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@freedom2surf.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:25:05 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
X-No-Archive: yes
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com uk.telecom.voip:4784
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 12:00:53 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
wrote:
>Good for you, I hope you are happy.
>II still prefer to keep my feet on the ground. If we was meant to fly,
>we would have wings.
Good job we all don't or didn't think like you or we would have
members of the SS parading up and down our streets now !!!!!!!!!!!.
| |
| Paul Cupis 2005-08-21, 5:45 pm |
| AD C wrote:
> I am lucky if I spend more than £5 a month on calls, the rest of my bill
> is line rental. It is about time the line rental was dropped or
> incorporated into call charges. Most gas and electric suppliers do not
> have a standing charge, they just put a little bit extra on each unit
> you use.
Yeah, right. BT should provide a national infrastructure for telephony
and more, including connectivity to every household (or thereabouts) and
maintain the entire network FOC so that people can make calls using
other operators and not pay BT a penny for the above.
Certainly - shortly after they leave the private sector and become a
charity o | | |