Slashdot Mirror


AOL Canada To Offer VoIP

Lev13than writes "The Globe and Mail reports that AOL Canada will today announce plans to launch a VoIP service, starting with Toronto and expanding to the rest of the country by the end of March. It will be the first AOL unit to sell VoIP anywhere in the world. "TotalTalk" will sell for $30 a month after a three-month discount, including unlimited local calling, 60 minutes of North American long distance, call display, call waiting, three-way calling and call forwarding. A premium service that includes 1,000 minutes a month of North American long-distance time will sell for $45 a month after a three-month rebate.
In comparison, Bell service in Toronto costs about $50/month for similar features and a few hours of Canada-only long distance. I wonder if this will be available over AOL Dial-up?"

130 comments

  1. In what currency, though? by kngthdn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Are those in American or Canadian dollars? 30CAD is only 24.39USD.

    $24USD sounds more in line with what US based VoIP companies like Lingo charge.

    1. Re:In what currency, though? by Arawak · · Score: 1

      Er... Canadian dollars, duh...

      Did you think that Canadian companies bill their customers in foreign currencies? Do you figure that Canadian newspapers quote US dollars in their Canadian stories?

      Arawak

    2. Re:In what currency, though? by Lev13than · · Score: 1

      Yes, it's CAD$, which is currently trading around $0.81-0.84 these days.

      Also, the official news release can be found here.

      --
      When you have nothing left to burn you must set yourself on fire
    3. Re:In what currency, though? by lashi · · Score: 1
      >Are those in American or Canadian dollars? 30CAD is only 24.39USD.

      For cost of living stuff, don't bother converting. That would give you a better idea of what the true cost is relative to salary.

      For example, DSL is $30 USD in US, $30 CND in Canada.

    4. Re:In what currency, though? by Servo · · Score: 1

      I pay US$25 a month from Vonage and get unlimited local and long distance for all of North America. Thats better than AOL Canada's offering.

      --
      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
  2. AOL Dial-up? by Fr05t · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not likely. One reason they probably picked Canada was because we have a pretty high % of homes with DSL/Cable. Sure it's no Korea, but I don't know too many people here that still use dialup.

    1. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Gopal.V · · Score: 1

      What you actually mean is that dialup penetration is very low.

      It's not like, everyone uses broadband because it's available everywhere.

    2. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      What you actually mean is that dialup penetration is very low.

      It's not like, everyone uses broadband because it's available everywhere.


      Broadband is available virtually everywhere in .ca. MTS, the major phone company in Manitoba, has DSL in something like 98% of it's coverage area. That includes place with only a few thousand people. They spent a small fortune running fiber across the province.

      Everyone I know, techie or not, that is on the net here is on DSL or cable. Both are offered in a "light" version for ~$25/month which gets you the benefits of basic broadband but not the highest speeds.

    3. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Quimo · · Score: 1

      Actually it pretty much is like the original poster said. With the low cost of High speed internet access in canada and the avalibility of it in most resonable sized markets already (with the goverment pushing programs to get communities of just about any size access.) Broadband penetration in Canada currently sits at about 67% (Nielsen/NetRatings) and considering that about 81%(Nielsen/NetRatings) of canadian homes have at least one computer that is one hell of a pile of people.

    4. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not really a matter of Canadian Broadband having a higher penetration (i.e. available in more areas), it's because the Canadian population is more urban-centered than America.

      Therefore if you hit the major urban centers (and their surrounding highly-populated suburbs), you're going to include a significantly higher percentage of the population in your broadband availability than you would if you just hit major urban centers in the US.

      "Rural" Canadians have no higher access to broadband than Rural Americans. It's just percentage wise, overall Canadians are higher.

      Even when you hit "Rural" populations, then tend to be more centralized (and therefore easier to hook up to things like DSL) than their American counterparts.

      In America, people boundary people. In Canada you get Oaises of population bounded by vast expanses of nothing.

      Try and explain to a Canadian how on the East Coast of the US your town borders on 6 other towns and they all have town halls and blah blah blah. They don't understand (and I'm referring to people that grew up in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver). They have the impression that you have your town, drive 50 miles, and you get the next town.

      You should see the neurons misfiring when I say, ok -- so if you say it's 50 miles to the next town and the area in between is "nothing", it's gotta belong to some jurisdiction. Is it part of one of hte towns? Just under Provincial? Just under Federal? Never got a good answer to that logic, lol.

    5. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Jardine · · Score: 1

      "Rural" Canadians have no higher access to broadband than Rural Americans. It's just percentage wise, overall Canadians are higher.

      Bullshit. I live in a village of less than 1000 people. Cable modems have been here for a few years and DSL is coming soon. Smaller places already have DSL because we already had access to cable modems. The only places that don't have high speed access are truly rural areas that are too far from the CO. That'll probably change once wireless starts to be rolled out.

      Try and explain to a Canadian how on the East Coast of the US your town borders on 6 other towns and they all have town halls and blah blah blah. They don't understand (and I'm referring to people that grew up in Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver). They have the impression that you have your town, drive 50 miles, and you get the next town.

      That's exactly how the Toronto area is setup. If you're not familiar with the area, you can be driving in Mississauga, look up and see a sign that says Brampton. There's no transition between the two. The same thing happens in Kitchener-Waterloo.

      You should see the neurons misfiring when I say, ok -- so if you say it's 50 miles to the next town and the area in between is "nothing", it's gotta belong to some jurisdiction. Is it part of one of hte towns? Just under Provincial? Just under Federal? Never got a good answer to that logic, lol.

      I'm not sure who you were talking to, but most of the "nothing" areas in provinces with people in them are part of a township or municipality. Sure if you go to the territories you'll find plenty of land that no one lives on but is probably technically owned by either a native tribe or the federal government.

    6. Re:AOL Dial-up? by Quimo · · Score: 1

      >It's not really a matter of Canadian Broadband
      >having a higher penetration (i.e. available in
      >more areas), it's because the Canadian
      >population is more urban-centered than America.

      Actually there is almost no difference between the two countrys regarding urban VS rural. The only recent statistic I could find pegs the US at 75% and Canada at 77%. Not a huge difference in that regard.

      >"Rural" Canadians have no higher access to
      >broadband than Rural Americans. It's just
      >percentage wise, overall Canadians are higher.

      Actually there are numerous projects ongoing that are connecting rural communities with high speed internet access. Both goverment programs an private are bringing up the percentages. The number is only something like 20% currently but it is growing. The US however is hovering arount 10% and isnt seeing much growth. I know some of that is just the sheer number of people but still.

      >In America, people boundary people. In Canada
      >you get Oaises of population bounded by vast
      >expanses of nothing.
      >Try and explain to a Canadian how on the East
      >Coast of the US your town borders on 6 other
      >towns and they all have town halls and blah blah
      >blah. They don't understand (and I'm referring
      >to people that grew up in Montreal, Toronto, and
      >Vancouver). They have the impression that you
      >have your town, drive 50 miles, and you get the
      >next town.

      Sorry to say that your impressions of Canadians are about 50 years out of date. In the urban areas of canada it is possible now to drive for hundreds of kilometers and never leave "the city." Hell on the drive to my cottage its nearly an hour before I get to anything that looks remotly rural and I pass through at least 5 towns and thats at highway speeds. Its becoming a huge deal now dealing with urban sprawl in canada.

  3. How usefull by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Wow a phone line in a phone line. How usefull?

  4. Re:Costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    you can't claim that the difference between 500 and 700 minutes costs them (and hence, me) another 40$ a month.

    If I make a phone call from my VoIP phone to a regular land-line phone, then at some point my provider has to dial a real number on their end and connect me. The more I talk, the more I'm using one of their modems, or PBX cards, or whatever (I'm not an expert), which means they have to have more equipment to service my needs. Multiply this by thousands of users and it does cost them more.

    Charging me based on usage is reasonable.

  5. is that cost for by coolcold · · Score: 0

    calling from voip to regular phones or just other voip?

    if its voip to regular land lines, fair enough. If it's voip to voip, what's the point of paying them when we can get them free like skype?

    --
    I am harvesting funny/good quotes. Please help by putting them in your sigs :)
  6. On dialup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if this will be available over AOL Dial-up?

    Yes, but only if you talk very s..l..o..w..l..y..

    1. Re:On dialup? by rob_squared · · Score: 1

      Voip is only at 8kbps, that's manageable on a 56k, as long as you're doing absolutely nothing else.

      --
      I don't get it.
    2. Re:On dialup? by flumps · · Score: 1

      ... and with grammar and syntax previously defined by the AOL EULA of course... ;)

      --
      "So there he is, risen from the dead. Like that fella, E. T." - Father Ted Crilly
    3. Re:On dialup? by outz · · Score: 0

      Voip is only at 8kbps, that's manageable on a 56k, as long as you're doing absolutely nothing else.

      Also assuming you have 0 line interference between you and the co... which is very unlikely.

      --
      What was your username again? -BOFH
    4. Re:On dialup? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VoIP is 8kbps from a codec perspective (presumably G.729) Once you add in all the applicable overhead, it's closer to 16 kbps per call. Still quite viable over a dial-up line, if QoS is properly configured.

  7. How about inf minutes for $0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess some people might get excited about this because they want this service for their regular phones, but I prefer to use Skype or SIP clients on my PC with a headset.

    I'm also considering buying an IP phone. Both options have a $0 monthly subscription cost and $0 for infinity minutes if I make calls to other IP phones or PC clients (as is the case for most of my overseas relatives).

    The tech "savvier" will always beat the curve.

    1. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by NardofDoom · · Score: 1

      That's great and all, but what if you don't know anyone with Skype or an IP phone? You'll still need to interface with POTS to order a pizza and call your parents (assuming you don't live in their basement). That's worth $20/month to me.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    2. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by Spoing · · Score: 1
      Skype charges about $0.02/USD per minute long distance to north america and much of Europe. You pre-pay 10 or 25/EUR for the time and it expires in 6 months. I've used it to cut my cell phone costs and drop my land line entirely.

      True, when it doesn't work it doesn't work at all, though I've only had 1 call in my first week of usage that was not usable...about the same as my cell phone.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    3. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps because some people like to *receive* calls as well as make them. I browsed Skype's site and they don't seem to provide you with a POTS phone number.

    4. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by pathos49 · · Score: 1

      cool, you keep your computer on 24/7 so that you can make and recieve phone calls. Wonder what the cost of electricity is?

    5. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I leave my computer on 24/7 regardless.

    6. Re:How about inf minutes for $0? by wwaaves · · Score: 1

      I'm only paying 16 a month for VOIP and I can call everyone including the chinese delivery boy. IP phones are so 20th century...

  8. Cheaper from Comwave by djwerder · · Score: 3, Informative

    Using a link from http://www.redflagdeals.com/deals/main.php/ongoing /, you can get a Comwave VoIP package for $9.95 Canadian with a Long distance package for $2.95 Canadian. Those prices seem a little more reasonable than the AOL package.

    1. Re:Cheaper from Comwave by jsprigg · · Score: 1

      Another alternative:

      http://broadband.spectravoice.com/index.php

      $21.99 CA$
      - Unlimited local calling
      - 500 Minutes North American Long Distance
      - All features included (Voice Mail, Voice Email, Call Display... etc)

      - Jeff

      --
      --- Nothing better than a healthy helping of fresh pancreas. ---
  9. Re:Costs by zakezuke · · Score: 1

    They take something good (VOIP), cross it with AOL users, and add completely arbitrary pricing

    What is funny is the fact that a local call is pretty much arbitrary. You could be in Vancouver or Tokyo, order the service and say you are local to anywhere you damn well please.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  10. AOL Canada? by suso · · Score: 2

    Sorry to pick nits, but shouldn't it be COL?

    1. Re:AOL Canada? by VanillaCoke420 · · Score: 1

      I suppose so, but then AOL should be UOL.

    2. Re:AOL Canada? by draos · · Score: 1

      The A stands for America...as in North America...its the name of a continent not a country. If the article refered to AOL France I would understand your position...That would have to be EOL -- not to be confused with ELO, the band.

    3. Re:AOL Canada? by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      You do realise that AOL does have operations in Europe, right? There's an AOL UK, for starters. Just because the company's name refers to its home country/continent, that doesn't stop it from using the same name elsewhere.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    4. Re:AOL Canada? by draos · · Score: 1

      Yup-- they oughta go by EOL...

    5. Re:AOL Canada? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 3, Funny

      But then the poor people in Spain would be SOL...

      Chris Mattern

    6. Re:AOL Canada? by marq00z · · Score: 1

      There's already a company called Europe Online, so this won't be possible.

    7. Re:AOL Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, there's no reason why AOL has to stand for America On-Line outside of America.

      The Deutsche Paket Dienst (DPD; translates as 'German Parcel Service') has decided that, in the UK, its acronym stands for Direct Parcel Distribution.

    8. Re:AOL Canada? by ttys00 · · Score: 1

      In Australia, it is called AOL, not 'Australia Online' or 'AOL Australia' (at least in the advertising I've seen).

      No one uses it though.

    9. Re:AOL Canada? by Wordsmith · · Score: 0

      My kingdom for a mod point ...

    10. Re:AOL Canada? by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      So you expect American Airlines to do the same? Change its name for its European operations?

      Company names are brand identities that can't be shifted as easily as the winds: there's a reason why 20th Century Fox isn't now 21st Century Fox, the BBC's overseas operations are still branded BBC, etc, etc.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    11. Re:AOL Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't it called 30th century fox on Futurama?

    12. Re:AOL Canada? by CPrimerPlus · · Score: 1

      even though america is the name of the continent ppl still use it to mean mostly americans, and i'm sure AOL meant the same. so yeah if they want to come over here - fine! buy change your name. otherwise i'm sticking with skype!!!! lol

    13. Re:AOL Canada? by rtaylor · · Score: 1

      Naw.. They meant America as in North / South / Central America.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    14. Re:AOL Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's cause you americans claimed the whole continent......

      manifest destiny

    15. Re:AOL Canada? by seanvaandering · · Score: 1

      Sorry to pick nits, but shouldn't it be COL?

      Contrary to popular belief, not all Canadians use AOL.

    16. Re:AOL Canada? by Kwil · · Score: 1

      LOL! Now available in Luxembourg.

      --

      That Jesus Christ guy is getting some terrible lag... it took him 3 days to respawn! -NJ CoolBreeze

    17. Re:AOL Canada? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Spain" is "Espania" in Spanish.
      Espania would be "EOL", which, is probably worse.

  11. Aol and adds by ZiakII · · Score: 0

    Is it me or did anyone notice that AOL is just like a virus you have something good the next thing you know AOL has it as well, and if your a customer all your getting is a broken product, I can just see it now when you sign the contract what they don't yell you that there gonna sell your phone number to companies for advertising, and signing the contract makes everything legal.

  12. VoIP over dialup?? by Gothmolly · · Score: 1, Funny

    Um, they have that, it's called a phone. Seriously, on a 33.6Kbps link, what kind of quality are you going to get? Speak not to me of codecs - you're too close to the bone bandwidth-wise. Latency and low bandwidth would kill it. VoIP on broadband, like I have here, however, works gre...BUFFERING...

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by NeedleSurfer · · Score: 1

      That's the other problem with this service, most cable companies in Canada limit the upload speed of their client, I have a 4.5Mbps download bandwith and a 384Kbps upload bandwith, which is wrong. You'd expect I play nice games on the web but the upload is what makes it crappy, in fact for all two-way communication I might as well consider my total bandwith to be 384Kbps, I need more or less double that for uncompressed mono audio at 16bits/44.1KHz. Compression is inevitable plus there is the problem of latency...

      let's say I won't jump on the bandwagon, I'll wait to see if people fall of it first, and then there is the ridiculous pricing...

    2. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by NeuralAbyss · · Score: 1

      Audio transmitted over the PSTN is usually digitised to a 8KHz ulaw (64kbps) stream. Nowhere near this 16bps/44.1KHz you speak of.

    3. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with previous reply to this post. I have Vonage Canada VoIP, it uses at most 90kbps for high quality voice. My DSL line (magma/primus) is a 3Mbps down and 800kbps up, so there is no concern about using VoIP.

    4. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by RoundTop-VJAS · · Score: 1

      hey moron, ever thought that the reason upload is capped like that is due to the fact that it taxes the system a hell of a lot more than download?

      ALL carriers have a lower upload than DL (by a long shot) except if you are running a T1 or OC. that is the reason of fibre, full bandwidth both ways.

      --
      RoundTop

    5. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by anagama · · Score: 1

      I just got vonage at my kiln/studio. Note that this is a dirt floor barn-like place in the countryside. My kiln-neighbor somehow got a DSL connection (I can't get one and I live in town - go figure) and he said I could tap in. So with a wireless bridge (stock antenna even) spanning the 300ft to his place and a vonage box, I finally have a telephone out there. His caps are smaller than yours (I think they are 1.5/256). Phone is perfect.

      BTW, my cell phone won't work out there unless pointed in a particular direction on overcast days in the mornings or evenings. Even then, the connection is lousy.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    6. Re:VoIP over dialup?? by PhotoJim · · Score: 1

      Get a cablemodem... I have 6 meg down, 1 meg up. More than livable. Same price as DSL, more or less.

  13. VoIP over dialup... umm, NO!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Lets see, I'm going to make a phone call by dialing my ISP over PSTN and then "tunnel" VoIP on top of that? So what the hell is the point of VoIP then!? I might as well get dial-up over my high-speed internet connection. The point of VoIP is to get rid of PSTN, not layer on top of it. If you want to make phone calls over the internet, you can use a 1995 application called Internet Telephone. You obviously don't know what VoIP is or what it's about.

    1. Re:VoIP over dialup... umm, NO!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to not get the joke! You must be the life of parties...

    2. Re:VoIP over dialup... umm, NO!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Geeezz... did someone stepped on your balls or something ? The guy's doing a JOKE!

  14. local calling? by shimbee · · Score: 1

    I thought the point of VoIP was to eliminate the "local" nature of the calls, since they're not routed through as many traditional public exchanges.

    Maybe they just have better deals with the Toronto telcos.

    1. Re:local calling? by Neter · · Score: 1

      The 'telco' that is carrying the VoIP traffic is a national carrier. It is Allstream - Canada's 3rd largest telco, owned by MTS

      The traffic will be carried over their national fibre network - has nothing to do with a 'local' telco...

  15. Not the best price by denjin · · Score: 1

    Even if you convert to US$, it is a bit high. Not as bad as Comcast is planning to charge for their VOIP, though.

    For example, I use Lingo (http://www.lingo.com) and pay $20 for unlimited calls inside the US and to a few places in Western Europe. Mainly I just call the U.K., and had 6200 minutes logged there last month. And the company that owns lingo (Primus) isn't too tiny either...not that I'm saying AOL is.

  16. Crossing AOL, Canada, and voice communications? by evilmeow · · Score: 1

    Golly gee, I can see that already.

    *ring ring*

    (luser A picks up)

    • A: "Hi"
    • B: "Re"
    • A: "What?"
    • B: "H R u?"
    • A: "Please speak clearly"
    • B: "lol"
    • A: "Can I help you with something?"
    • B: "asl"
    • A: "Eh?"
    1. Re:Crossing AOL, Canada, and voice communications? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VOIP, Eh?

  17. Rip Off, total by NeedleSurfer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Voice over IP should cost LESS not a bit less, it's not like they have to built a network or something, they get some servers gear configure it the way they want and the trick is done. 30$ a month is what I pay here in Quebec and I consider it expensive. VOIP for 30$ a month, it should cost that a year with NO long distance fee AT ALL, since no, absolutely no extra charge is placed upon the company when you make a long distance, you don't use more of their network you just connect an IP to another IP, you do not use the phone system of another country, you do not have to pay them to communicate on their land, that's the internet, it's would be like my ISP charging me more to connect to a japanese website!

    This is timeless though, a technology is proposed, supposedly it will revolutionize the field for which it has been concieve because it is so unexpensive, so cheap. A company launch the service with the new technology and instead of the consummer paying less it's the company that makes more profit, VOIP, banking machines...

    capitalism really sucks

    1. Re:Rip Off, total by Christoff+Ka+Sin+Chu · · Score: 1

      Add VoIP to the list of AOL-ruined enterprises: Netscape ICQ Winamp

      --
      CKSCIII
    2. Re:Rip Off, total by Spoing · · Score: 1
      While I agree with you on the price @ $30/month, the termination fees for calling a real phone do cost money. It's a monopoly in most cases, true, and it's silly as the wires involved can be the same, though they have charged for 100+ years. Expecting them to charge nothing all the sudden isn't reasonable.

      If you want to 'call' someone using the Internet only, use one of the free programs out there or Skype and just call them.

      --
      A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.
    3. Re:Rip Off, total by russianspy · · Score: 1

      Actually there are charges for crossing different network boundaries. Believe it or not, all of the world's internet is not provided for free.

      All the major providers measure bandwidth in and out of their networks, the differences are settled something like once a month.

  18. ummm... no. by koi88 · · Score: 1


    Sorry to pick nits, but shouldn't it be COL?

    Ummm... no. You know, America is the name of a continent.
    I give you a few examples for countries on this continent: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, the USA (United States of America).

    --

    I don't need a signature.
    1. Re:ummm... no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, Brazil is part of South America. South and North America are different continents.

    2. Re:ummm... no. by dzarn · · Score: 1

      I give you a few examples for countries on this continent: Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, the USA (United States of America).

      So we merged with South America?

    3. Re:ummm... no. by koi88 · · Score: 1


      Actually, Brazil is part of South America. South and North America are different continents.

      I think the classification of continents is kind of arbitrary. E.g., America gets only one ring in the olympic flag.
      Geographically, there are good reasons that they're actually two continents.
      But then, there are not so many reasons that Europe should be considered a continent...

      --

      I don't need a signature.
  19. packet 8 by f()bz · · Score: 2, Informative

    just a thought: packet 8 already offers a much cheaper solution for canadians (and americans). unlimited calls to canada and the us for 19.95 USD a month. includes caller id, 3 way calling, etc. cheaper and probably better solution than A-Oh-hell....

    1. Re:packet 8 by flithm · · Score: 1
      No they don't! Did you even bother to check before spouting off?

      They don't offer local termination in Canada. Sure I could get an american phone number and call people in Canada, but what good is that?

      So far right now the Canadian competition is:

      Primus TalkBroadband (19.95 for free local calls and 300 minutes to Can and US, 911 available everywhere).

      Yak Communications (1000 mins to can, us, china, hong kong, free local calls, for 19.95 USD + 31 set up fee + 1 year contract! BOOOO!)

      Vonage Communications (500 mins to Can and US, every calling feature they have, but no 911 yet)

      There are also offerings from other companies that don't cover all of Canada yet such as:

      BabyTel

      Sprint Canada

      BabyTel is cheap, Sprint is 19.95 like the rest. Currently I am with Primus because they have both the best price and 911 service, no contract, and you don't have to buy some stupid piece of hardware.

      I look forward to switching to Vonage as soon as they get 911, as their price is better, and all the reviews indicate that their quality of service is top notch.

    2. Re:packet 8 by f()bz · · Score: 1

      yes you're right i didn't do my homework. please negate my first statement if you want a canadian area code. i just called packet 8 and a customer service agent said "we will probably *never* offer canadian area codes". bleh. i've spoken to friends who have vonage on the other end of my non-voip POTS and the audio quality imho is not that lovely. maybe give it a try with people that use it? also re: 911 service. 911 vonage service to the states comes with many clauses. Vonage notes at the end of the lengthy section on 911 calls: "You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Vonage and its third party provider from any claim or action arising out of misroutes of 911 calls". That said, most cellphones in the US allow you to dial 911 even if there is no longer a phone service provider associated with that particular cell phone. is that rule of thumb applicable in canada? maybe one could just keep a well-labeled non-paying cellphone in the house for emergencies instead of relying on a voip provider to patch one through to the local 911 dispatch.

    3. Re:packet 8 by Nos. · · Score: 1
      Also not covering all of Canada is:
      WebCall
      A little more expensive than most, and very limited area for local numbers (Alberta and BC) though you can sign up from anywhere.

      Disclaimer: I do work for SaskTel which owns Navigata (who provides WebCall). I've done some work on the service. One thing I like about the webcall setup is the fact that you plug a regular phone into it. Not sure how many other VoIP providers do this - I'm sure some do

    4. Re:packet 8 by flithm · · Score: 1

      What good would a VoIP service be if you couldn't use a regular phone?

      Every single one of the providers listed in the parents post allow this.

      I was going to ask you about some information regarding webcall, ie how does their service compare to that of others, but apparently you've no experience in this area.

      Also, this webcall service sucks really huge. 29.95 for 400 minutes with no 911, and no phone number porting! Not only is that MORE EXPENSIVE than a regular POTS line with a winback pricing plan here in Alberta, but even if it was cheaper it would still suck!

      Sadly I've just lost all respect for SaskTel, who used to be a pioneer and innovator in communications technology world wide. What are they thinking?

    5. Re:packet 8 by Nos. · · Score: 1

      No, I don't have a lot of experience with other providers, but I'll try and give you some information. One of the main reason's its tough to do 911 on VoIP is that there is a requirement (or one might be coming down, I'm not sure) that forces the 911 operators to be able to locate the physical source of the call... not easy to do when all you have is an IP.
      Yes, it is expensive. Webcall wasn't launched to be a major competitor in the market. It was launched to get SaskTel IN the market. There's a lot of work being continually done on the service. There's a lot of new features/benefits in the pipe, but some internal politics have slowed the next phase of the product. The only reason I have it (in Regina) is so I can do testing on some of the things I'm working.
      Yes, SaskTel has been one of the biggest pioneers and innovators, and there not quite there any more, but there are some of us who are trying :)

  20. Couldn't resist... by di0s · · Score: 0

    You've got mail, ay?

    1. Re:Couldn't resist... by pigscanfly.ca · · Score: 1, Informative

      Its eh not ay!
      Crazy americans.....

  21. Dial-up voip=dumb by rob_squared · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't voip be kind of pointless over dail up? I mean think about it, you're calling a phone number to get internet, to then call another number. voip at home makes the most sense with cable and no traditional home phone line, even voip with dsl is weird. If you're already paying for telephone service, why pay again?

    --
    I don't get it.
    1. re: Dial-up voip=dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have adsl from a telco (because it's cheaper than the cheapest cable provider in my area).

      Even when I pay the telco charges AND charges for a VOIP to PSTN call from a provider such as Skype I end up paying far less than when I use the telco to call direct.

  22. AOL Germany by Lieutenant_Dan · · Score: 1

    AOL also exists in Germany. Heck, they even have a stadium of one the bigger soccer teams named after them.

    --
    Wearing pants should always be optional.
  23. Vonage in Canada by rkischuk · · Score: 2, Informative

    Also, for comparison, Vonage Canada is offering 500 minutes to North America for $19.99 and $34.99 unlimited in-province plus 500 long distance minutes. For $5 more, I think a lot of people will be claiming the extra 440 minutes of long distance. Oh, and at $45, Vonage CA is FULL unlimited, not capped at 100 minutes long distance.

    --
    Seen any BadMarketing lately?
    1. Re:Vonage in Canada by pigscanfly.ca · · Score: 1

      Another popular provider on the market is primus. There local package is 19.95/month , (15.95/month if you have the hardware) going up to 45.95/month (or 41.95/month if you have the hardware) for there unlimited package , with many stops in between .

    2. Re:Vonage in Canada by jsprigg · · Score: 1

      Ah wait...

      Local minutes aren't free. 500 minutes means 500 minutes.

      Check out:
      http://broadband.spectravoice.com/index.php

      $21.99 - Unlimited Local, 911 service, Voice Mail, Voice Email, etc... etc... etc...

      -Jeff

      --
      --- Nothing better than a healthy helping of fresh pancreas. ---
    3. Re:Vonage in Canada by kryptik_79 · · Score: 1

      "Local minutes aren't free. 500 minutes means 500 minutes."
      That's their very base plan ($19.95). They also offer free in province and 500 min. north america for $34.99. - 500 minutes means 500 minutes!

    4. Re:Vonage in Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this for an Idea, buy US VOIP have it shipped to a friend in the states then have your friend ship it to you, Most US VOIP providers don't charge anything more for calls to Canada, seems like the cheapest route.

  24. Re:Costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Charging me based on usage is reasonable."

    Actually it is a cash grab plain and simple. To deny this is to deny the fundamentals of capitalism. The additional costs are marginal at best and a cost of doing business.

    Other companies do it cheaper and unlimited to boot.

  25. Rogers has the best deal, if you're their customer by CokoBWare · · Score: 2, Informative

    Rogers has a "Better Bundle Deal" that gives you 15% off all their services if you have two or more services with them. If you are a "Better Bundle Deal" subscriber, then you qualify to get 1000 anytime minutes in North America per month for $0.05/minute up to a maximum of $5/month. The first 100 minutes are billed at the $0.05 rate, and the next 900 are free. After the 1000 minutes are used up, you get a rate of $0.05/minute. Probably the best deal I found so far. It lowered my Bell bill by $70/month!

  26. Not the first AOL unit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Actually, AOL has been offerring VOIP through its Time Warner division for a while now. Read this press release, dated January of this year:

    http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,208 12 ,670217,00.html

    They've been running commercials for it in Houston for months.

  27. Re:Rogers has the best deal, if you're their custo by CokoBWare · · Score: 1

    Oh it's not branded as VoIP, but I bet the LD that is done through this service is conducted through VoIP. I originally thought VoIP would be competetive, but actually it seems as if everyone's jumping on the VoIP bandwagon.

  28. CDs everywhere again by slapout · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can see it now: Hundreds of CDs floating around offering "1,000 Minutes of Long Distance Free!"

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  29. Capitalism is fine. You suck. by MoralHazard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I swear, the people on Slashdot who attack market systems are almost as bad as the people who defend them! Let's cover some basic ground, shall we?

    1) Voice over IP should cost LESS not a bit less, it's not like they have to built a network or something

    How much do you know about running a VOIP business? Have you been running models that demonstrate the enormous cost difference? I bet if you did, you'd notice that ISP-level providers generally pay backbone carriers on a flat-rate PLUS a per-byte basis, not the simple flat rates like home users pay to ISPs. So if AOL customers are sending shitloads of packetized voice (potentially a LOT more bytes than they send now), AOL will have to charge accordingly to pay for it. Not to mention the fact that AOL will definitely have to purchase tons of new capacity from carriers, which increases the flat-rate portion of their costs.

    2) ...it should cost that a year with NO long distance fee AT ALL, since no, absolutely no extra charge is placed upon the company when you make a long distance, you don't use more of their network you just connect an IP to another IP.

    I'm sorry. You obviously misunderstand VOIP technology something awful. If a VOIP customer wants to talk to another VOIP customer, you are mostly correct about how you don't have to go through any phone systems or toll points. But if a VOIP customer wants to chat with a non-VOIP customer, how the FUCK is that call supposed to get into the POTS system without talking to the regular local phone company in the called area? So a VOIP provider has to maintain a VOIP gateway and a bank of outgoing phone lines in EVERY SINGLE local calling area so that its customers can reach those areaa without incurring phone toll charges once the calls leave the Internet. Now wouldn't that be kind of expensive? Especially when AOL has 30 million customers, a lot of whom probably might want to call any given area code at one time? I pity the fool ISP that gives too many busy signals to its customers.

    Oh, and don't forget that VOIP gateways have to function the other way, too. How does a non-VOIP person call you, the VOIP customer? Well, your VOIP provider maintains a phone line connected to a VOIP gateway in the area code that you selected when you signed up with them, so that calls from the POTS system will be routed to that area code, and then into the VOIP gateway. Guess what? Phone lines cost money.

    3) A company launch the service with the new technology and instead of the consummer paying less it's the company that makes more profit, VOIP, banking machines...

    First of all, VOIP does promise to reduce the costs of consumer telephone service, but it takes time for the market to adjust to new products like this. Once VOIP gets generally accepted as a drop-in substitute for residential POTS service, the available ISPs will grow in number and customer base, and VOIP service will become just another commodity. VOIP providers will start competing with each other, and you'll see prices dropping down to the efficiency point (the price at which the business is just barely making enough profit to keep it in that market).

    And for the record, banking machines HAVE reduced consumer banking costs, but in a way that you have to actually THINK about to notice. See, since consumer use of ATMs has made it possible for banks to serve a lot more customers with a lot less employees, banks have been able to either reduce costs by controlling staff (firing, or just hiring freezes) or add more paying customers to their clientele without having to pay more staff to service them. Either way, the banks have lowered their costs.

    Joe Consumer sees a reduced cost, also: the banks see opportunities to undercut each others' prices (lowering or eliminating banking fees, offering higher interest rates) and gain market share, which they do. In the process, the price to the consumer drops toward the efficiency point.

    It is a HELPFUL t

  30. aol.CA by hey · · Score: 1

    Who outside the US would use a service with such a USA-centric name? I mean AOL Canada, AOL Europe, etc. I would think the name alone would turn off most non-Americans. Not because of anti-Bush or anything just because it *sounds* like you'll get tech support 9-5 EST, in English only, etc.

    1. Re:aol.CA by vidarh · · Score: 1
      How often these days do you hear AOL referred to as America OnLine?

      They've consciously stuck to AOL in most contexts for a long time, and in the UK at least that is what most users recognise them as. I don't think many users in Europe at least think of AOL as any more USA centric than other US owned services sold here.

    2. Re:aol.CA by slapout · · Score: 1

      Funny thing is they'll probably outsource the tech to support India.

      --
      Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  31. Skype ROCKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No thanks AOL. I'll keep using Skype http://www.skype.com/ as I can already do VOIP to landlines for about 2 cents a minute to almost anywhere in the world.

  32. Primus Canada VOIP by drtns · · Score: 1

    Primus VOIP can be a much better deal, depends if you care about features... if you load your phone up with every bell and whistle under the sun they it'll be around the same price but with a much better LD plan, but for basic VOIP plus a reasonable LD plan it'll cost about $26 a month AFTER TAX. Primus VOIP also lets you tack on 2 extra numbers to your line from ANY area code they service, and will roll over to an "alternative number" I.E. your cell phone if cable or DSL goes out in your area. http://www.primus.ca

  33. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by vidarh · · Score: 1
    You over-simplify the way VOIP-POTS gateways work quite a bit. It's not like you'd set up gateways in every local calling area. You'd likely just set up gateways in really high traffic areas, or covering big regions and negotiate interchange agreements with the local carriers. Now, while that reduce the hardware costs, it's still expensive since you'll be paying part of your per minute charges to the carriers you pass traffic on to.

    Most companies offering cheap long distance to consumers - whether via VOIP or access numbers - just make their money routing calls to carriers based on who's offering the lowest prices at the moment anyway. Few of them have much in the way of infrastructure, though some will build out as and when they get sufficient volume in certain areas.

  34. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Joe Consumer sees a reduced cost, also: the banks see opportunities to undercut each others' prices (lowering or eliminating banking fees, offering higher interest rates) and gain market share, which they do. In the process, the price to the consumer drops toward the efficiency point.

    You do not understand how banks operate in Canada. For quite a while, many of the banks were (1) cutting service (decreasing service hours, closing branches, etc.), (2) increasing fees overall, and (3) making more money.

    Customers were paying increasing fees for decreasing service.

    The customer got shafted until CIBC and President's Choice did the PC Financial thing. Now a number of banks have added flat-rate unlimited plans.

  35. That's not cheap! What about babyTEL? by Geoff+NoNick · · Score: 1
    BabyTEL has a plan that lets you make unlimited calls to any city in Canada (just about) for $25 per month. And that's in Canadian dollars.

    Strange that they're not mentioned in the article - they're the third-largest provider in Canada, after Vonage and Primus. I use them myself and can't get enough of them, after some nasty experiences with Vonage.

    1. Re:That's not cheap! What about babyTEL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks to me like the $25 plan is for unlimited calls to selected Canadian cities only. Whoopee. That might work for some, but the rest of us need to make calls to small towns and USA.

      Actually, they do have a pretty good plan: $17 for 500 minutes within North America. I'm currently signed-up for an outbound-only plan with 400 minutes/month and I never exceed that. I'd sign up for this if they weren't charging $20 for their softphone (basically a setup fee).

    2. Re:That's not cheap! What about babyTEL? by Geoff+NoNick · · Score: 1

      For me, BabyTel is all about the features - I think they're still the only guys doing voicemail-to-email in Canada, and they don't charge a small fortune for such luxuries as caller ID and call waiting and voicemail. It's all included in the base price. I can deal with a one-time chrage of $20 for that.

    3. Re:That's not cheap! What about babyTEL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For me, it sounds like you're a shill for BabyTel.

  36. Doesn't sound too good to me. by re-Verse · · Score: 1

    I already get my VOIP from Primus in Toronto. I pay $40 a month for unlimited north american calling and ridiculously low overseas prices. With the regular phone companies charging over 50 dollars now for really simple service, this is a godsent.

  37. NAOL by koi88 · · Score: 1


    So we merged with South America?

    Ah, I didn't know it's actually North Ameriacan Online (NAOL).

    --

    I don't need a signature.
  38. Re:Costs by f()bz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the local call with voip is not that arbitrary. in clauses for both vonage and packet 8 they note that if they deem you are using your voip from a non-US or canada IP addy they can and will switch you to a more costly plan than the unlimited plan. i have been the victim of this because i live half and half in nyc and paris. my use of non-US based IPs for calls was against their policy, but you must know that they CHANGED their policy to include the non-US IP clause after i already had service with them for five months.

    therefore, local to anywhere does not apply if you are outside the US or canada.

  39. Why the diff between local and LD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The part I don't get is why these companies make a difference between local and long-distance calls. It's all going through the internet so what difference does it make if you're calling someone next door or across the continent? I mean, you don't pay extra for surfing websites that are in a different city...

    I can understand somewhat charging more for calls in other continents, maybe? But a VoIP call in North America should cost pretty much the same no matter where. I think these companies are taking advantage of the old system's rate structure to make their services look cheaper than they really are.

  40. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by Canuck_TV · · Score: 1

    And for the record, banking machines HAVE reduced consumer banking costs, but in a way that you have to actually THINK about to notice.

    You know, I was with you right up to that point. Anyone, and I mean _ANYONE_ who defends the actions of a bank in the 21st century, needs to have their head examined.

    Instead of paying a Zillion (tm) dollars a year in staffing wickets, the computer automated 90% of customer interaction. What did the banks do with the newfound savings? Well, they pocketed it of course. And then they had the sheer fscking arrogance of charging me a fee to access my own money. Like the oil industry, its a monopoly, and us north americans just look the other way and pay. what would happen if we ALL told the banks they could take their ATM fees and shove it, and collectively decided to go back to using tellers? Sure, the lineups would go on forever, but wouldn't the bank be legally obligated to serve its customers in whatever manner they chose?

    People need to stop listening to those such as yourself that say "No, seriously, this looks like a steaming pile of feces, but really, its a rose!" Instead, like the way the g33ks have previously here on /., we need to band together and raise our middle finger in pride, and call BS.

  41. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So a VOIP provider has to maintain a VOIP gateway and a bank of outgoing phone lines in EVERY SINGLE local calling area so that its customers can reach those areaa without incurring phone toll charges once the calls leave the Internet. Now wouldn't that be kind of expensive?

    In any given area, they must setup a bank of phone lines anyway, to support incoming calls for the local customers. The only reason LD calls might cost them more is if they have no customers in a given area and they have to setup phone lines just to support calls to that area. But that should only happen if their service is unpopular.

  42. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1
    "And then they had the sheer fscking arrogance of charging me a fee to access my own money."

    Well, don't you give them your money to manage it in first place? You still can store it in your mattress and it won't cost you a penny to access it.

    I'd rather than say you are yourself arrogant telling them they should not charge you for the service they provide. Perhaps you were never confronted to the situation to need to access your money while being 1000 miles away of your mattress.

    And I don't see how they should be legally obligated to serve you at counter tellers without charging you for it? And expect the bill to be much higher than the ATM fees. Or maybe, they will simply choose to not let you open an account.

    --
    Achille Talon
    Hop!
  43. Comparison of VOIP providers? by dabraun · · Score: 1

    Has anyone seen any good reviews comparing the current crop of VOIP providers? I recently set up a Vonage VOIP line and so far I am not particularly happy with the quality:

    - Background noise that starts before you even dial (coming from the linksys VOIP router I guess)
    - Significantly more lag than a normal phone line - perhaps 500ms vs. 100ms or less for a normal phone line
    - One person talking often cuts out the other person talking - I want to say that it is sort of 'single duplex' but there are definitely times when you can both hear eachother so it's not clear to me.

    1. Re:Comparison of VOIP providers? by Geoff+NoNick · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that was my experience with Vonage too - and the tech support isn't anything to write home about. I use BabyTel now and they look to be the cheapest around. All their packages have all the features and the sound quality is just like a regular landline. Not that cell-phone quality noise you get with Vonage.

  44. Those Canadians amaze me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Despite the fact that they don't have computers, they're still going to have VoIP? I'm impressed!

    "if you dont like it why dont you move to canada where they dont have computers and its dark for 9 months and they hate technologies" http://geraldholmes.freeyellow.com/MSadvocacy.html

  45. Dial-up by kryptik_79 · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this will be available over AOL Dial-up?

    I hope that was a joke!

  46. Bell Canada rolling out VOIP soon instead of POTS by Deimios · · Score: 1

    I was speaking with a friend of mine who works for Bell...Apparently they are currently working on a project called "Project Galileo." They plan to replace all analog POTS lines with VOIP boxes connected to VDSL modems hard wired to your NID on the side of your house over the course of the next few years. The idea is that provisioning a line would be very easy...no work needs to be done in the central office, just activating your account in their system, and adding an additional line would be just as easy.

  47. The Bells Strike Back by upsidedown_duck · · Score: 1


    What's to prevent the traditional phone companies from rolling out their own VoIP services? They have all they infrastructure for regular phones and DSL, so why not? They could see whether VoIP start-ups are successful, and roll back the curtain on a whole new secretly-installed VoIP infrastructure.

    --
    -- "Makes Little Debbie look like a pile of puke!" - Moe Szyslak
  48. The Problem is... by Run4yourlives · · Score: 1

    ..that you'll still need to pay for your phone line from Bell, Telus etc to recieve your DSL connection.

    So, unless you have a cable modem, this isn't even a viable option.

    What we need up here are worthy competitors in the DSL market.

  49. I'm beta testing this for the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although nobody will ever see this thread, I thought I would throw in that I have been testing this for a US based service they plan to roll out sometime next year. It has some advantages, but to get it you must already be an aol customer (at this point). It is still glitchy as hell when you try and call cellphones. I have certain friends who I just can't call! Other than that it works alright.

    The service uses a box made by motorola, and AOL is using level3 to route the calls. It is only available for highspeed customers, but it doesn't work for customers with AOL branded broadband services (how ironic). If you dare put the aol software on your computer, it has an advanced caller ID that will come on screen whenever a call is received. It also keeps a log of calls made and received so you can call people you know back by clicking a button and picking up your phone. If the price in the US is good enough I may keep it. During the beta period the Canadian and US long Distance is included - don't know if it will be upon final release though.

  50. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by novakreo · · Score: 1

    Well, don't you give them your money to manage it in first place? You still can store it in your mattress and it won't cost you a penny to access it.

    I know that here in Australia at least, if you have a real job (not some shady cash-in-hand arrangement), or even if you're on welfare payments, you need a bank account for the money to be paid into, otherwise you don't get the money.
    --
    O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!
  51. Re:Capitalism is fine. You suck. by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

    They don't have to purchase incoming and outgoing lines in equal amounts. If they have no customers in a given area, they just need to buy outgoing services. If they have tons of customers in a given area that only ever seem to call long-distance, they could well buy more incoming than outgoing capacity.

    See, when you're negotiating bulk traffic like this, you buy based on capacity and availability, not on a per-line basis like a consumer would. You can get asymmetric service.

  52. Available Over Dialup?? by Lord+Flipper · · Score: 1

    What about bandwidth? VoIP starts at around 30kB for a modestly decent signal. 50kB for solid, better than any phone, 90kB you're talking mid-nineties motorola single-cel along the ocean (no interference from the mainland, low mid-tones, breathy audio)... Dialup? Never.

    What did you say, it sounded like crackle, burp, hiss? Oh, my email client was polling the mail server, oops. That's exactly what happens with a dsl connection and VoIP set to 30kB. At 90kB on a twice-as-fat pipe, it's stunning, not a landline on Earth can touch it. Been on them for years now, never going back to copper.

    And even 24 bucks and change for a very limited N.American service blows. Vonage is $29 with unlimited 50-state/all of Canada coverage, factor in 2 cents a minute to most western european countries, and this is just another stupid move on the part of AOL. They're probably looking at the 'stupid' market, oh, I mean newbies, and they'll employ the same over-billing that Sprint wrote into their code, AND the same impossible-to-cancel that AOL already 'owns'.

    People that give those aol assholes money, deserve everything that happens from then on.