|
Home > Archive > Voice Over IP in UK > January 2006 > Cheapest VOIP provide for an 'incoming' number?
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]
| Author |
Cheapest VOIP provide for an 'incoming' number?
|
|
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| What's the cheapest VOIP way to get an 'incoming' number? I.e. I want
people to be able to call, for example, 01473 123456 and I get the
call on my VOIP phone.
One of the cheapest ways would seem to be voip.co.uk where you get a
geographical number when you sign up and the only requirement is that
you purchase £10 calling credit which you don't actually have to
spend.
Even better, maybe, is sipgate.co.uk where you seem to get a
geographical number when you sign up and you don't have to spend
anything at all. Have I got this right, will I really get a free
incoming number with Sipgate?
--
Chris Green
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>Have I got this right, will I really get a free
>incoming number with Sipgate?
Yes, but if you want to make outgoing calls to POTS numbers, you will
have to pay call charges.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
|
<hairydog@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:t5k1t1luo91i284bmfhkdo3giokqsvnlja@
4ax.com
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC),
> usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> Yes, but if you want to make outgoing calls to POTS
> numbers, you will have to pay call charges.
Which are reasonable enough, considering there is no ongoing monthly
charge.
Ivor
| |
| Brian A 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>What's the cheapest VOIP way to get an 'incoming' number? I.e. I want
>people to be able to call, for example, 01473 123456 and I get the
>call on my VOIP phone.
>
>One of the cheapest ways would seem to be voip.co.uk where you get a
>geographical number when you sign up and the only requirement is that
>you purchase £10 calling credit which you don't actually have to
>spend.
>
>Even better, maybe, is sipgate.co.uk where you seem to get a
>geographical number when you sign up and you don't have to spend
>anything at all. Have I got this right, will I really get a free
>incoming number with Sipgate?
Yes is the short answer. However, would you have cheapness as your
main criteria if you were fitting some tyres to your car? Do I hear -
"Ah well they would have to be safe!"?
Why not search on google groups and see what people think of Sipgate
and not just take notice of replies to this posting.
Sipgate does have some advantages over other operators, but you would
be best to form your own opinion, on reliability, based on a google
groups search.
The voicemail on Sipgate is basic, as is the one on voip.co.uk. On
balance, I think that the Sipgate one is better because the one on
voip.co.uk deletes messages as soon as they have been heard - no good
if you want to note down a telephone number etc.
For a good voicemail go for voipfone.co.uk. They are quite reliable
too but do charge for a geographic number.
Summary (my opinion based on my personal experience):
1. voip.co.uk - Reliable. The best UK tariff. Currently only basic
voicemail. £2/month or £20/year. One off charge fof £2 for additional
numbers.
2. Sipgate - Not so reliable. Basic but adequate voicemail. Free
number.
3. voipfone.co.uk - Reliable. Monthly charges. Good, polished,
voicemail. Other good facilities available.
Personally I'd go for voip.co.uk and you'll get a good tariff thrown
in as well. Until they get round to improve on the voicemail, if
ever, you could use an answering machine.
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
| |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| hairydog@despammed.com wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> Yes, but if you want to make outgoing calls to POTS numbers, you will
> have to pay call charges.
That's generally true with all the VOIP providers isn't it? I know
there are some offering free calls of up to a minute but that's
hardly worth the hassle really.
--
Chris Green
| |
| David Floyd 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Brian A writes
>1. voip.co.uk - Reliable. The best UK tariff. Currently only basic
>voicemail. £2/month or £20/year. One off charge fof £2 for additional
>numbers.
For this additional number, is it on the same account/registration? And
if so how do you know which number has been called.
If not then I assume it is a separate registration, in which case an ATA
will be required than can deal with more than one registration for
incoming calls.
Anyone use this facility on voip.co.uk ?
David
| |
| David Floyd 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, writes
>hairydog@despammed.com wrote:
>
>That's generally true with all the VOIP providers isn't it?
SIPDiscount has unlimited free calls if you deposit 5Euro
| |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| Brian A <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
> Yes is the short answer. However, would you have cheapness as your
> main criteria if you were fitting some tyres to your car? Do I hear -
> "Ah well they would have to be safe!"?
But safety isn't a criteriON in this case, it's not dangerous for me
(or anyone else) if it doesn't work, it's just a (very) minor
inconvenience.
> Why not search on google groups and see what people think of Sipgate
> and not just take notice of replies to this posting.
> Sipgate does have some advantages over other operators, but you would
> be best to form your own opinion, on reliability, based on a google
> groups search.
Yes, I have been pottering around the newsgroups and looking on
Google, the question here was just another string to my bow.
> The voicemail on Sipgate is basic, as is the one on voip.co.uk. On
> balance, I think that the Sipgate one is better because the one on
> voip.co.uk deletes messages as soon as they have been heard - no good
> if you want to note down a telephone number etc.
> For a good voicemail go for voipfone.co.uk. They are quite reliable
> too but do charge for a geographic number.
>
Voicemail really isn't an issue for our use of this number.
> Summary (my opinion based on my personal experience):
> 1. voip.co.uk - Reliable. The best UK tariff. Currently only basic
> voicemail. £2/month or £20/year. One off charge fof £2 for additional
> numbers.
> 2. Sipgate - Not so reliable. Basic but adequate voicemail. Free
> number.
> 3. voipfone.co.uk - Reliable. Monthly charges. Good, polished,
> voicemail. Other good facilities available.
>
> Personally I'd go for voip.co.uk and you'll get a good tariff thrown
> in as well. Until they get round to improve on the voicemail, if
> ever, you could use an answering machine.
>
Thanks for the information/opinions.
--
Chris Green
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 11:14:58 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
> Have I got this right, will I really get a free
>incoming number with Sipgate?
Until such time has the service goes down or they buzz off for a
holiday and leave the service to look after itself for long weekends
which used to happen quite often at one time .
| |
| Bill Taylor 2006-01-20, 7:45 am |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:57:13 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
wrote:
>In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Brian A writes
>
>For this additional number, is it on the same account/registration? And
>if so how do you know which number has been called.
>
>If not then I assume it is a separate registration, in which case an ATA
>will be required than can deal with more than one registration for
>incoming calls.
>
>Anyone use this facility on voip.co.uk ?
>
You can have more than one number per account.
I have the 2 port ATA, and the user account page shows both ports of
the ATA. You can assign a number to each port separately, presumably
you could use more than one ATA and assign the numbers in a similar
way.
If ny account would accept incoming calls I would try it, but there
doesn't seem much point at the moment.
Bill
| |
| Tim Bray 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
> But safety isn't a criteriON in this case, it's not dangerous for me
> (or anyone else) if it doesn't work, it's just a (very) minor
> inconvenience.
Safety might be a consideration. For example, if your partner broke
down and needed to get in touch with you, but your voip provider was
down ....
Or, if you publish your number on your business cards and you don't
receive business calls because the provider is down.
Tim
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:05:10 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>But safety isn't a criteriON in this case, it's not dangerous for me
>(or anyone else) if it doesn't work, it's just a (very) minor
>inconvenience.
But would you consider it a VERY minor inconvenience if you wanted to
get in touch with a family member to tell them another member of your
family was in hospital dying or had died . A phone service needs to be
100% reliable and Sipgate is nowhere near this figure more like 10%.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:55:50 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>That's generally true with all the VOIP providers isn't it? I know
>there are some offering free calls of up to a minute but that's
>hardly worth the hassle really.
Voipcheap charge nothing for calls to many countries and up to now I
have found them to be very reliable .
| |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| Tim Bray <nutnews@kooky.org> wrote:
> usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
> Safety might be a consideration. For example, if your partner broke
> down and needed to get in touch with you, but your voip provider was
> down ....
>
We have two POTS phone lines, both have normal phones on them. If
they're not working then it's unlikely that the VOIP is going to work.
> Or, if you publish your number on your business cards and you don't
> receive business calls because the provider is down.
>
Hardly a *safety* issue! :-) .... and our business number is one of
the two POTS numbers.
--
Chris Green
| |
| David Floyd 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Bill Taylor writes
>On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:57:13 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
>wrote:
>
>You can have more than one number per account.
>
>I have the 2 port ATA, and the user account page shows both ports of
>the ATA. You can assign a number to each port separately, presumably
>you could use more than one ATA and assign the numbers in a similar
>way.
>
Do I gather from this then that each number has a separate SIP
registration? If so it wont work for me on a SPA3000.
David
| |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:05:10 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> But would you consider it a VERY minor inconvenience if you wanted to
> get in touch with a family member to tell them another member of your
> family was in hospital dying or had died . A phone service needs to be
> 100% reliable and Sipgate is nowhere near this figure more like 10%.
As I said elsewhere we have two POTS lines which the VOIP lines are
carried on (not surprisingly), there are phones on the POTS lines.
--
Chris Green
| |
| usenet@isbd.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 13:05:10 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>
>
> But would you consider it a VERY minor inconvenience if you wanted to
> get in touch with a family member to tell them another member of your
> family was in hospital dying or had died . A phone service needs to be
> 100% reliable and Sipgate is nowhere near this figure more like 10%.
No phone service is 100% reliable.
--
Chris Green
| |
| David Floyd 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
|
>Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>
Just like Dexter's comments then.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
|
"David Floyd" <david@floyd.org.uk> wrote in message
news:ICCDLONR8R0DFwHH@127.0.0.1
>
> Just like Dexter's comments then.
It's my NY resolution not to reply to him.
Ivor
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:31:13 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
>No phone service is 100% reliable.
Agreed that is why I have three voip lines from three different
providers none of which have been any problem so far I got rid of my
voipfone account because it went down three times in close succession.
But I have never known a service go down at 6pm on a Friday night and
not come live again until the following Monday morning and then go
down again for a day and half the following weekend has Sipgate did.
Sipgate will never be forgiven by me for that little episode
especially has it turned out they had all gone off on a boozing
weekend under the pretext of attending some convention or other .
| |
| Bill Taylor 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:17:47 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
wrote:
>In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Bill Taylor writes
>
>Do I gather from this then that each number has a separate SIP
>registration? If so it wont work for me on a SPA3000.
>
Sorry, I'm no expert on SIP, but I can tell you what is visible in the
control panel.
In the VOIP.co.uk account management page both ports are shown when
the ATA is on line. Each port has a different address, like
sip:xxxxxx@84.92.40.235:5060.
For each port you can change the CLID shown when a call is made.
Another section of the management page is called incoming targets, and
it looks as if you should be able to set the destination for incoming
calls for each number. Can't try it as I only have one ATM.
Bill
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:05:00 GMT, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>A phone service needs to be
>100% reliable and Sipgate is nowhere near this figure more like 10%.
I use Sipgate. I have only used it for a few months, but to date is
has not failed once (excepting when I'd something wrong at this end).
It may well be that it is not 100% reliable. It is very clearly far
better than 95% reliable, if not a few orders of magnitude better than
that.
To describe Sipgate as 10% reliable exposes you for the utter lying
idiot that you so clearly are.
If I were anything to do with Sipgate, I would commence legal action
against you for that statement. I hope they are nasty enough to do so.
In the meantime, why not piss off back under your stone?
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 19:04:25 GMT, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>Agreed that is why I have three voip lines from three different
>providers
Running on three different internet connections? Over diverse paths?
Of course not. You are neither rich and clever enough to do it nor
important enough for it to matter.
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:57:13 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
wrote:
>For this additional number, is it on the same account/registration? And
>if so how do you know which number has been called.
Same account, different phone number.
You can point that number at whichever sip registration you want to,
so you could have two ATAs connected with a phone number each, or two
phone numbers going to the same ATA or two ATAs getting calls on one
number.
Outgoing calls can use the CLI of any of your voip.co.uk numbers (or
subject to a verification fee, any other number you legitimately
'own')
>If not then I assume it is a separate registration, in which case an ATA
>will be required than can deal with more than one registration for
>incoming calls.
It's an option.
>Anyone use this facility on voip.co.uk ?
Yes, we have three numbers, curently running into two ATA
registrations. The third ATA is on sipgate.
| |
|
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
|| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 15:31:13 +0000 (UTC), usenet@isbd.co.uk wrote:
||
||| No phone service is 100% reliable.
|| Agreed that is why I have three voip lines from three different
|| providers none of which have been any problem so far I got rid of my
|| voipfone account because it went down three times in close
|| succession. But I have never known a service go down at 6pm on a
|| Friday night and not come live again until the following Monday
|| morning and then go down again for a day and half the following
|| weekend has Sipgate did. Sipgate will never be forgiven by me for
|| that little episode especially has it turned out they had all gone
|| off on a boozing weekend under the pretext of attending some
|| convention or other .
I have resisted the urge for long enough.............
AS not HAS
Besides that, the OP asked who the cheapest provider for incoming numbers
was. That /is/ Sipgate.
Their service has been great. I feel quite guilty about the quantity of free
numbers I have.
Stop harpin' on.
Thanks.
| |
| Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 22:30:20 GMT, "Jono" <none@none.za.uk> wrote:
>Their service has been great. I feel quite guilty about the quantity of free
>numbers I have.
Then you shouldn't have got them I do not feel the least bit guilty
about my three numbers I PAID for each one, I am no cheapskate
unlike a few people here .
| |
| Ivor Jones 2006-01-20, 5:45 pm |
| <hairydog@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:jnk2t1t67a3o9n0et7f8rt08qcjd9bnr5v@
4ax.com
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 14:05:00 GMT, Dexter@blueyonder.co.uk
> wrote:
>
>
> I use Sipgate. I have only used it for a few months, but
> to date is has not failed once (excepting when I'd
> something wrong at this end).
I was one of their first customers in the UK, somewhere around 12-18
months ago. I had terrible problems getting sorted when I first started,
the assistance of their technical support staff was invaluable, certainly
above and beyond the call of duty.
> It may well be that it is not 100% reliable. It is very
> clearly far better than 95% reliable, if not a few orders
> of magnitude better than that.
Since I've been with them there have been maybe three or four *major*
outages, at least two of which were directly attributable to outside
problems over which they had no control.
If I have any issues with them at all, it is the poor quality of the
voicemail files. This is being addressed I believe, but in the meantime
the system *does* work.
> To describe Sipgate as 10% reliable exposes you for the
> utter lying idiot that you so clearly are.
>
> If I were anything to do with Sipgate, I would commence
> legal action against you for that statement. I hope they
> are nasty enough to do so.
It's not worth the effort.
> In the meantime, why not piss off back under your stone?
Unfortunately, troll baiting is a pastime that has rarely borne fruit.
It's fun though, sometimes ;-)
Ivor
| |
| David Floyd 2006-01-20, 8:45 pm |
| In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, writes
>On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 12:57:13 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
>wrote:
>
>
>Same account, different phone number.
>
>You can point that number at whichever sip registration you want to,
>so you could have two ATAs connected with a phone number each, or two
>phone numbers going to the same ATA or two ATAs getting calls on one
>number.
>
>Outgoing calls can use the CLI of any of your voip.co.uk numbers (or
>subject to a verification fee, any other number you legitimately
>'own')
>
>
>It's an option.
>
>
>Yes, we have three numbers, curently running into two ATA
>registrations. The third ATA is on sipgate.
>
Thank you for that explanation, that explains all that I needed to know.
David
| |
| Brian A 2006-01-21, 7:45 am |
| On Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:53:35 +0000, David Floyd <david@floyd.org.uk>
wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
>In message of Fri, 20 Jan 2006, writes
I have an SPA-3000. I would like to have another number on voip.co.uk
but for it to be answered on the same handset as my current number.
I assume, from what you have said that this is possible ??
However, I would like the voicemail to go to separate destinations -
is that possible too?
voip.co.uk have provided these facilities and want to sell their
numbers but have not given any explanation, on their site, on how it
all works - How silly!
Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
| |
| Stephen Peterson 2006-01-21, 7:45 am |
| "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
news:43d8q0F1n20rcU1@individual.net...
>
> If I have any issues with them at all, it is the poor quality of the
> voicemail files. This is being addressed I believe, but in the meantime
> the system *does* work.
>
That's odd. I always have been very impressed by the quality of the mp3
files you get from Sipgate voicemail. Maybe it's a problem with your
account? The one niggle I have with their voicemail is that you cannot
upload an mp3 file as your outgoing message.
Stephen
| |
| hairydog@despammed.com 2006-01-22, 5:45 pm |
| On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 12:23:53 GMT, Brian A
<no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote:
>I have an SPA-3000. I would like to have another number on voip.co.uk
>but for it to be answered on the same handset as my current number.
>I assume, from what you have said that this is possible ??
Yes. Just get a second number from voip.co.uk (£2) and then point it
at your existing "target"
> However, I would like the voicemail to go to separate destinations -
>is that possible too?
I'm baffled by voip.co.uk voicemail. I wish I could help you with it.
Or even help me with it, but I can't.
>voip.co.uk have provided these facilities and want to sell their
>numbers but have not given any explanation, on their site, on how it
>all works - How silly!
They seem to have concentrated on getting a service up and running at
a good price. I think it's a pity they've not managed to provide
decent documentation yet.
In my view good documentation and help are very important and would
make it a far better proposition for the average member of the public.
But then again I would say that: my company specialises in
documentation.
| |
| Ivor Jones 2006-01-22, 5:45 pm |
|
"Stephen Peterson" <nospam@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in
message news:dqtcpa$76j$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk
> "Ivor Jones" <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote in message
> news:43d8q0F1n20rcU1@individual.net...
>
> That's odd. I always have been very impressed by the
> quality of the mp3 files you get from Sipgate voicemail.
> Maybe it's a problem with your account? The one niggle I
> have with their voicemail is that you cannot upload an
> mp3 file as your outgoing message.
The audio levels vary on different files, it's tolerable but does need
fixing. It's a minor issue though. At least it no longer lapses into
German ;-)
Ivor
|
|
|
|
|