Printable View
Why are these linksys router ata's justified again?
We were Broadvoice customers for five years and they could remotely administrate our Sipura3000, re-credential the device from afar, and all while it was kept unlocked for user-tweaking.
I have had my set up massaged by support, router reset up, remote sessions, etc. why does VOIPo require so much intervention?
And not on one acct... three, in fact.
this is a strange business model, anyone?
Locking an ATA like VOIPo, Vonage, Packet8, ... is SOP for a large customer base. The provisioning is usually done via TFTP (Port 69). By using locked phone credentials, it keeps abuse down. The BYOD credentials on VOIPo do not allow international calling and are limited in the number of instances that can be used.
If the system was wide open, there would be more need of monitoring potential fraud. It would let users mess-up settings that likely 80% would not really understand anyway.
VOIPo has great features, great pricing, and great support. If that is not what a particular user needs, then there are companies like Future-Nine, Voip.ms, and other companies that allow full BYOD. They also charge by-the-minute and their users must be of the 20% that are VoIP savvy.
I say vote with your wallet. Plenty of marketplace for what VOIPo offers right now.
At least that is how I view things. The features are geeky enough for me, yet the fully managed ATA has a sense of comfort. I have never needed special requirements and have ran it on two different ISPs. Its simply been plug&play.
I'd like to clarify,
we have NO need for user-controlled (unlocked) devices.
I only added mention of that to show the extreme opposite experience we had with our voip service with the other provider.
The question remains, what the heck is the benefit of a router/ata instead of an (even locked) ata standalone device?
Again, especially, since the time (money) is required for tech support to do sessions to fool with ports, network topography, and STILL cannot remotely reload firmware or user settings without taking over via VNC.
ALSO...
There have been a number of instances where numbers I dial result in a fast busy.
When I've had the time to do "live chats", the incredibly responsive VOIPo staff has been kind to "re-route" calls.
HOWEVER, I NEVER had this issue with needing "operator assistance" when using Broadvoice (OR my cell or landlines.)
Why is intervention needed (repeatedly) ?
This can't be cost effective. It ISN'T time effective.
Thanks in advance for your explanation(s).
I don't have an answer for your question, but I can commiserate with you... I'm currently going through the same issues. They seem to come in waves; looking back through my tickets, I had this "calls not completing- fast busy" issue back around Christmastime, then all was well for about 3 months, until this past week, when it started up again. My best guess is that VOIPo does some carrier switching from time to time, and issues arise, and are fixed one by one via our tickets and re-routing. MY question is, why mess with something that was working fine? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big VOIPo fan, but, as others have mentioned, the wife gets very frustrated when a call cannot be completed. She's OK with the occasional redial, but when it's impossible to reach a certain number, I start hearing the "dumb VOIPo" comments...Quote:
Originally Posted by fergessen
Yes, I have to take that from my wife too. I too am a big fan of VOIPo and their features, but the periodic series of "glitches" is irritating - the most recent being that my wife tried calling home and got the number was disconnected or no longer in service. As I mentioned in the other thread (http://forums.voipo.com/showthread.php?t=2273), she then conference called me in so I could hear it too. We don't use our phone that much (typically no one is at home during the day - except this week when a child was out of school) which really makes me wonder how often these glitches occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brody
I had the "number not in service" issue twice with Vonage.