Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    235

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    Quote Originally Posted by Russell View Post
    What makes VOIPo so attractive is the low bottom line price. So as long as Tim doesn't lose sight of that (and it doesn't look like he is) and it's an option the rest of us should have no complaints :-).
    As a residential customer, going from $18 to $19.50 for CNAM assurance is nothing, nada, nill, as compared to what we are gouged from Ma Bell, and still way cheaper than Cable TV's digital phone service.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    513

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    Quote Originally Posted by stevech View Post
    As a residential customer, going from $18 to $19.50 for CNAM assurance is nothing, nada, nill, as compared to what we are gouged from Ma Bell, and still way cheaper than Cable TV's digital phone service.
    I'm happy it's nada to you. It may be not nada to all. One reason I'm here is the great price - I believe $8.25 a month (iirc) to me (not $1. Adding $1.50 to it is a significant percentage increase. Whereas, having it as an option doesn't affect those who don't care about it.

    Btw, I don't compare VOIPo costs to Ma Bell or Cable TV. I compare it to the other small VOIP providers. Just as if I buy a Chevy, I won't look at a Cadillac and tell myself how much I saved :-).
    Russell

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    ^ x2

    Ma Bell is extremely reliable and extremely expensive. Next is phone thru cable providers, very reliable and expensive. Then all the other VOIP carriers, reliable (mostly) and inexpensive. You gotta compare apples to apples.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    235

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    Agree- 5 nines POTS. But this thread isn't about reliability, but the lack of, or an option for, outgoing caller ID name (CNAM).

    Reliability has been great with VoIPo in 6 months (knock-wood). I hope they continue so - VoIPo is my third try at VoIP via cable modem. Other than this CNAM issue, it's been excellent.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    235

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    Quote Originally Posted by Russell View Post
    I'm happy it's nada to you. It may be not nada to all. One reason I'm here is the great price - I believe $8.25 a month (iirc) to me (not $1. Adding $1.50 to it is a significant percentage increase. Whereas, having it as an option doesn't affect those who don't care about it.

    Btw, I don't compare VOIPo costs to Ma Bell or Cable TV. I compare it to the other small VOIP providers. Just as if I buy a Chevy, I won't look at a Cadillac and tell myself how much I saved :-).
    I think that in the next 3 years the PUCs will drop the regulated POTS industry such that ye ole Class 5 switch will go away. And POTS too. And the copper wire infrastructure will deteriorate to a corroded, squirrel-eaten mess in short order. (U-Verse, beware). So VoIP/cellular we go.

    Lower price comes from 12 month pre-pay which I will do when the WAF for VoIP ("the toy phone" due to past transgressions of rotten QoS) threshold is passed, as I understand -to cut the cord with POTS which I really want to do. So I pay $15+3.

    I have to overcome the past horror stories in WAF due to ViaTalk (yeech) and one other. The CNAM is a must-have.

    As to the automobile analogy, yes, but I can opt for upgrades on cars too.
    Last edited by stevech; 12-23-2010 at 04:59 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1

    Default Re: VoIPo outgoing CNAM

    depending on which database the number your dialing into uses, this may help

    http://www.listyourself.net/

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •