Vonage to Produce a WiFi Phone

GSM/GPRS by wdd1040 · 2005-01-04 07:09 · Score: 5, Insightful

Now, if it could seemlessly integrate with the GSM/GPRS setup already in place with most providers, I'd be all over it.

--
wdd

Re:GSM/GPRS by learn+fast · 2005-01-04 07:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

Especially since the coverage in my house is shitty. This way, cell providers don't need to worry about that, since people will be able to augment their own coverage in their own homes (they'll just have to worry about making ends meet...)
Re:GSM/GPRS by jpetts · 2005-01-04 07:41 · Score: 4, Informative

This is coming: I have already seen and tried out devices that have VoIP and GSM capability in the same unit. The acronym you need to watch out for is UMA - Unlicensed Mobile Access. Look here for basics.

--
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
Re:GSM/GPRS by Doc+Ruby · 2005-01-04 08:11 · Score: 1

Nice clue - thanks for the link :).

--
--
make install -not war
Re:GSM/GPRS by DanielJS · 2005-01-04 08:19 · Score: 0

Motorola has a phone that's VOip and GSM/GPRS.
Re:GSM/GPRS by Broiler · 2005-01-04 10:09 · Score: 1

This is already being done today. GSM/GPRS and CDMA phones are in development. The network operators want to off load their free nights and weekends. I have also seen a Bluetooth version. Gizmodo http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/motorola-cn620-sea mless-wifi-to-gsm-voice-calls-017270.php on the Motorola CN620. I guess that is what Moto means by seamless mobility.

--
My sigs offend the max # of people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, color, sex or creed. It's a gift.
Re:GSM/GPRS by smootherxp · 2005-01-04 19:11 · Score: 1

I am a Network Engineer in the NOC for ATT/Cingular. Anyone can say what he or she want about former ATT Wireless coverage, customer service, or lack of good phones. But they are leading the industry in future Technologies. They are promoting the UMA. Why? The plan: You take your cell phone with you while you are traveling using UMTS high frequency bandwidth (GPRS has limitations but will be around for many years still for backward compatibility) When you get home you switch to your local area network voip. Your Cell phone becomes your home phone. When you are at work your cell phone switches to your corporate network. Your cell phone becomes your work phone. Also via Bluetooth Your cell phone is your modem to your laptop / or even PC. This technology is not going to remove Cell phone service ... it will expand the use of your Cell phone. This is not something ATT and now Cingular is fighting it is something they are leading in the development of. GPRS/GPS (Now UMTS) Technology is the world open standard. Sprint and Verizon still use proprietary technology that will have a difficult time migrating to what is called 3G or 3rd Generation (or 4G) phones. This is the future with UMTS bandwidth already in 4 markets (Seattle is one of them) faster then DSL. I kept this as non-technical as possible (1st post)
Re:GSM/GPRS by xtal · 2005-01-05 18:37 · Score: 1

Can confirm this as well. Actually, I've seen prototypes from several years ago, but the mobile phone providers haven't exactly encouraged this along. Continued strong growth of wireless hotspots will make this inevitable though, and provide the catalyst for some real distruptive technologies.

--
..don't panic

Verizon.... by 10101001011 · 2005-01-04 07:10 · Score: 4, Funny

Can you hear me n.....

No carrier detected

Re:Verizon.... by cmburns69 · 2005-01-04 08:15 · Score: 1

What?

--
Online Starcraft RPG? At
Dietary fiber is like asynchronous IO-- Non-blocking!

Old News by jpetts · 2005-01-04 07:10 · Score: 4, Informative

This is not new

--
Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender

Re:Old News by Albanach · 2005-01-04 07:30 · Score: 1

I suspect they're actually going to sell a rebadged phone from Pulver Innovations (something lots of Vonage competitors already do).
Re:Old News by Nugget · 2005-01-04 08:19 · Score: 2, Informative

I would hope not, for their sake. That phone is a zyxel, not a pulver -- pulver is just another one of the rebadgers. It's also one of the shittiest pieces of equipment I've ever owned. I documented my experiences with it at http://slacker.com/~nugget/asterisk3.php
Re:Old News by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:37 · Score: 0

It's not the same as the pulver phone.

I have an open access point at my work by way2trivial · 2005-01-04 07:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

and at my home... both on consumer grade broadband connections..

widespread wifi voip will force me to close them. the bandwidth potential is to severe....

--
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random

Re:I have an open access point at my work by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:15 · Score: 0

You're being too paranoid. I imagine that anyone who would be abusing your bandwidth via VoIP wifi is already doing so with non-VoIP applications.

Also, the throughput required for VoIP is nominal compared to your average file sharing leecher.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by dresgarcia · 2005-01-04 07:18 · Score: 5, Insightful

When researching VOIP this weekend (I am thinking of nixing my home phone for a cell phone and a voip) I found that a call requires 90Kbps of bandwidth.

Isn't there a port or something you could block to disable VOIP services? I don't know a whole lot about it but I assume it must use a port that could be firewalled out.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:19 · Score: 0

Not that many leeches at, say, airports and *$. (They tend to have trouble affording a ticket on Greyhound Bus Lines... I know this from experience. ;-) Cell-phone use is a lot more common.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by LiquidCoooled · 2005-01-04 07:29 · Score: 2, Interesting

The art is to simply open the ports you want to allow access on :)

"Sure, you can surf the web from my connection, but your not going to send crap through it"

--
liqbase :: faster than paper
Re:I have an open access point at my work by dresgarcia · 2005-01-04 07:32 · Score: 1

Touche salesman. . .
Thats clearly what I meant, but I have no idea what ports it uses, so they could be open for another application. Anyone know what ports?
Re:I have an open access point at my work by garver · 2005-01-04 07:33 · Score: 1

You're kidding right? You're OK with "all you can eat" data transfers, but not OK with a steady 90 kbit/second?
Re:I have an open access point at my work by jascat · 2005-01-04 07:48 · Score: 1

It would be very easy to find out. Run a packet sniffer or watch what connections are going through your router. Most decent consumer routers will at least give you netstat. I'm sure a little googling would give you the answer.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by torqer · 2005-01-04 07:48 · Score: 1

What audio codec are you planning on using that requires 90kb/s of bandwidth. A digital phone line from your telco (ISDN) only uses 64k. There are many many VOIP codecs that use less than that... which is pretty much the point behind it. Random codec off the top of my head g.723. 6.4 kb/s
Re:I have an open access point at my work by user9918277462 · 2005-01-04 07:52 · Score: 4, Informative

SIP-based VOIP services like Vonage use UDP ports 5060, 5061 and the UDP range 10000-20000 (inclusive). TCP is not used.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by jonbrewer · 2005-01-04 07:58 · Score: 5, Informative

When researching VOIP this weekend (I am thinking of nixing my home phone for a cell phone and a voip) I found that a call requires 90Kbps of bandwidth.

This depends entirely upon the codec used. 90kbps (full-duplex) would be G.711, while G.729 uses about a third of this:

http://www.terracall.com/FAQs_white_1.aspx

I haven't figured out why so many people use G.711 - voice doesn't need this much bandwidth, and we all know this from years of working with mp3.

Isn't there a port or something you could block to disable VOIP services? I don't know a whole lot about it but I assume it must use a port that could be firewalled out.

This can be very tricky. SIP uses UDP 5060 to negotiate calls, then picks variable high ports (~16000 I think) but can be run pretty much anywhere.

I have been playing with a WiFi VoIP phone from ZyXel at home for the last few weeks & the performance has been adequate. It really depends heavily on the quality of your Internet connection. Unless you have consistent ping times of 50ms and close to zero jitter to your call termination point, you won't enjoy the experience.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by badmammajamma · 2005-01-04 08:15 · Score: 1

If the 90kbs bandwidth is a concern for you, they do offer other codecs. The lowest one uses 30kbs. The middle one is 50kbs. I use the 90k one, so I don't know how much of a difference the lower ones make on sounds quality. The 90kbs codec sounds just like a regular phone.

--
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
Re:I have an open access point at my work by DanielJS · 2005-01-04 08:24 · Score: 0

A digital phone line (ISDN) does not have the IP overhead.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by ZakMcCracken · 2005-01-04 08:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

I haven't figured out why so many people use G.711 - voice doesn't need this much bandwidth, and we all know this from years of working with mp3.

Simple-- there is just so much overhead that dividing your codec bandwidth does not increase the capacity much.

In fact, if you check out this good technical presentation by Spectralink, slide 13, you will see for example that a G.711 call (64 kbps both ways, i.e. at most 128 kbps) actually utilizes 4.5% of the bandwidth in "11 Mbps" mode (i.e. in the best radio conditions). That represents 500 kbps of nominal bandwidth, to carry a 128 kbps signal.

What happens when you use the G.729 (GSM) codec at 8 kbps instead, is that the quality goes down for for sure, but the capacity does not increase that much: one call utilizes 3.5% of the bandwidth in "11 Mbps" mode, which still represents 400 kbps of nominal bandwidth.

So while you divided your codec rate by 8, sacrificing quality, the capacity has only been increased by 30%, not by 700% as one would expect in a perfectly designed system.

Why bother with lousy codecs when the underlying layer adds so much overhead in any case?
Re:I have an open access point at my work by dj245 · 2005-01-04 09:02 · Score: 1

Yes, there are certain ports for voip that make them impossible to use. I had Vonage until the Campus blocked some port or another to combat a worm or something. Like they say, it seemed to be a good idea at the time. This makes Vonage pretty undesireably because the ports it uses are very widely exploited by worms and such. I think 51-53 are critical, there are others that improve service. Its been a while so I might be completely wrong.

--
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by zm · 2005-01-04 09:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

TCP is not used.

Actually, that is not correct. See rfc3261.
All SIP elements MUST implement UDP and TCP. SIP elements MAY implement other protocols. Making TCP mandatory for the UA is a substantial change from RFC 2543. It has arisen out of the need to handle larger messages, which MUST use TCP, as discussed below. Thus, even if an element never sends large messages, it may receive one and needs to be able to handle them.

--
Sig ?
Re:I have an open access point at my work by user9918277462 · 2005-01-04 09:13 · Score: 4, Informative

Regardless of the RFC, I can verify that Vonage at least does not use TCP currently in its hardware applications.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by matth · 2005-01-04 09:27 · Score: 1

Vonage does not use ports 51-53.. and 53 is DNS.. no way your campus would block that.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by Lumpy · 2005-01-04 09:29 · Score: 1

yes you can at least non crap level firewall/routers can.

my FVS318 from netgear can block specific ports from all IP's a range of ip's and/or from timeframes.

it's very simple. we have one here on the open accesspoint that blocks everything outgoing but port 80 outgoing, and even blocks that during closed hours.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by standbypowerguy · 2005-01-04 10:11 · Score: 0

VOIP requires ~4kbps per conversation. Wifi has a practical range of ~30m indoors, perhaps 100m outdoors. Unless your access points are in an overcrowded area full of chatty people, all with VOIP, I doubt you'll notice the bandwidth hit. I could do more damage wardriving with bit torrent...

--
This isn't the sig you're looking for... Move along.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 11:00 · Score: 0

widespread wifi voip will force me to close them. the bandwidth potential is to severe....

Give me a break. The introduction of VoIP cell phones is going to flood your connection into the dark ages? Well, I guess your 'public access points' will simply have to go away. Now, roll over and take it- you're obviously too feeble minded to come up with a better solution.

Normally, I would give you the benefit of the doubt, being a /. community member, but in this case, your lazyness just blows me away.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by wolrahnaes · 2005-01-04 11:03 · Score: 1

An ISDN line also doesn't use compression. It does run at a low sampling rate, but it is not compressed. This means that with lossy compression, you can get far smaller transfer rates. Look at CD vs. MP3. Nearly the same quality at a fraction of the size.

Do the same with IP telephony, and that 64Kbit/sec ISDN stream becomes 14kbit/sec or less, with no perceptible loss in quality.

--
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by way2trivial · 2005-01-04 11:08 · Score: 1

I had vonage. it brought my home cable modem to it's knees.. it uses far more than 4kbps

--
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Re:I have an open access point at my work by tylernt · 2005-01-04 13:50 · Score: 1

"no way your campus would block that."

Not really. They might block port 53 connections to hosts other than their official DNS server -- to discourage rogue servers for example. Same goes for other ports; they might allow port 80 connections, but only to their web servers (thus forcing you to use their http proxy to get out onto the WWW).

If I were the netadmin of a college, yeah, I certainly might block common ports such as DNS from going outside my subnet -- as long as I provided a server on the inside that was accessible.

--
DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
Re:I have an open access point at my work by shumacher · 2005-01-04 14:27 · Score: 1

I'm already okay. I allow outbound access to POP3, http, https, and IMAP for everyone, and I put my own machines into a second group on my router and grant that group full outbound access. You should be able to do something similar on most reasonable residential routers.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by DanielJS · 2005-01-04 16:25 · Score: 0

Yes, but IP overhead is almost 75%... IP protocol is the most inefficient protocol for voice communications.
Re:I have an open access point at my work by God!+Awful+2 · 2005-01-04 18:00 · Score: 1

Isn't there a port or something you could block to disable VOIP services? I don't know a whole lot about it but I assume it must use a port that could be firewalled out.

This can be very tricky. SIP uses UDP 5060 to negotiate calls, then picks variable high ports (~16000 I think) but can be run pretty much anywhere.

Ummm... easy. Block 5060 at the firewall level. No control channel => no data channel. Now I suppose someone could get devious and negotiate the control channel from one AP and then roam to a different AP, but how likely is that? (And it assumes that SIP actually supports this case - I have no idea.)

-a

--
/. users can't
Re:I have an open access point at my work by swillden · 2005-01-05 05:49 · Score: 1

Unless you have consistent ping times of 50ms and close to zero jitter to your call termination point, you won't enjoy the experience.
This is not my experience at all. My ping times are typically around 95ms (Comcast cable), and while my jitter is fairly low (+- 10ms), it's certainly not zero. However, my VOIP calls are very good. I had some trouble with other traffic on my cable modem connection causing VOIP packets to get dropped, which caused problems, but installing some traffic shaping on my router fixed it completely. For people who can't do that, you can get the same effect by connecting your Internet connection directly to your VOIP box and then connecting that to your switch.
I've also used my VOIP connection via various other Internet connections, including hot spots in airports and wired and wireless connectivity in hotels and friends' and relatives' homes. Good call quality is dependent on having a good Internet connection, but I've found very few that aren't perfectly adequate.
Also, I've found that VOIP connections are louder and clearer than typical phone conversations, and that the latency really isn't noticeable. In fact, by calling a regular land line from both my cell phone and my VOIP phone, I've discovered that cell phones have *much* higher latency than VOIP, so if latency on your cell phone doesn't bother you, a VOIP phone won't either.
On the downside, even on a good connection like I have at home, I find that there are occasional "glitches" when a pile of packets get lost. They rarely interfere with communication, but I rarely get through an hour-long phone call without at least one artifact. They're much more than offset, IMO, by the high quality of the non-glitched audio. Using kphone on my laptop with a decent headset I get far and away the best, clearest phone connections I've ever had with any technology. It feels like CD-quality audio on a telephone call. People on the other end also report that I sound very clear.

--
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.

Still lame... by WIAKywbfatw · 2005-01-04 07:11 · Score: 3, Funny

OK, wireless but still less space than a Nomad. I guess that still makes it lame in some people's eyes...

--

"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg

Good by doombob · 2005-01-04 07:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

This will be a wonderful alternative for many people. Right now, the company I work for is setting up various hotspots on the selling point that you could bring in Vonage, and this will be one more great selling point. It's amazing how many people despise phone companies.

Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:13 · Score: 0

It's amazing how many people despise phone companies

No it isn't.
Re:Good by bradkittenbrink · 2005-01-04 07:21 · Score: 1

is too!!
Re:Good by synergy3000 · 2005-01-04 08:25 · Score: 1

I wonder what hotels with free wifi will do, considering how much they charge for calls through their phones.
Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:34 · Score: 0

Just a hunch...
Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:43 · Score: 0

I wonder what hotels with free wifi will do, considering how much they charge for calls through their phones.

Actually, most large chains have dramatically dropped the price of calls. Most are now free unless you leave a line open for more than 60 minutes.
Re:Good by Moofie · 2005-01-04 10:11 · Score: 1

Block the ports?

--
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Re:Good by cyberwiz01 · 2005-01-04 12:47 · Score: 1

The building where I work has absolutely horrible cell reception, but we have pretty decent wireless coverage throughout. I am always missing calls when I am at work, sometimes important ones. This looks like a promising solution to lame cell coverage.

XTEN + Ipaq + Asterisk by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:12 · Score: 2, Informative

I have had this setup working for some time now. Works perfectly!

Been using Vonage by kvsnut · 2005-01-04 07:12 · Score: 4, Informative

I've been using Vonage and I dig it so far - altough I'm hoping the international rates come down further.

I have Verizon for land line and they charge 2.57 per minute to france. I'm not signed up for an international plan but I do have a $60 per month plan. They are shooting themselves in the foot by charging so much for basic line, vmail and international.

This idea is cool but I don't think it would be an immediate threat to the wireless carriers.

Re:Been using Vonage by steeleweed · 2005-01-04 07:52 · Score: 4, Insightful

Ever consider Skype? PC-PC free internationally, PC to phone also available: PC in US to phone in France would be 0.017 Euro/minute...
Re:Been using Vonage by NardofDoom · 2005-01-04 08:08 · Score: 1

I was going to sign up for Vonage, but the ~$50 set up fee is making me wait until I have some of my holiday bills paid off.
But I am looking forward to having it.

--
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
Re:Been using Vonage by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 15:59 · Score: 0

Maybe you should check out Broadvoice. Broadvoice's World Unlimited plan covers the US and 21 countries in the flat rate. Which is $5/mo less than Vonage, btw. Oh, and they already have a wifi phone available, though at a higher price.
Re:Been using Vonage by Spoing · 2005-01-04 16:11 · Score: 1

$2.57 to France? BAH! Try $0.30 or less. $0.18-0.14 is competitive according to a friend with family in France (he's in the US; Maryland).

--
A firewall can not protect you from yourself. Turn off what you do not need. Do not use the firewall to do your work.

More detail, please. by Moby+Cock · 2005-01-04 07:13 · Score: 4, Interesting

Can the phones be used to receive incoming calls? If so, how does Vonage "know" where to address the messages to? Is there a persistent forward channel giving Vonage the phone's location?

Re:More detail, please. by Vellmont · 2005-01-04 07:25 · Score: 1

The phone (or telephone adaptor as the case may be) registers with Vonage when it's turned on. Vonage then knows the IP address the phone is located at. There's even ways of working through a NAT, though obviously an outgoing firewall would be a problem.

--
AccountKiller
Re:More detail, please. by Moby+Cock · 2005-01-04 07:28 · Score: 1

Is it dynamic? As the phone trasists from one hot spot to the next will Vonage be notified? Basically are there mobile assisted hand-offs like cell phones?
Re:More detail, please. by Zeebs · 2005-01-04 07:28 · Score: 1

I'd imagine it worked something like when the phone enters a hotspot it connects to vonage's service so vonage has the address to reach it at. I could also be wrong.

--

Happy Noodle Boy says "F###ing doughnut! Mock me? You fried cyclops!!"
Re:More detail, please. by grasshoppa · 2005-01-04 07:34 · Score: 1

Actually, with protocols like SIP, as long as the server isn't firewalled, you should be in good shape.

So if this phone is sitting behind a firewall, it won't matter, because vonage's servers aren't.

--
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Re:More detail, please. by Vellmont · 2005-01-04 07:35 · Score: 1

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that isn't supported under SIP (which is what I believe Vonage uses for its VoIP protocol). Even if it was there wouldn't be many fully covered areas with WiFi (or at least areas where you're allowed free usage).

--
AccountKiller
Re:More detail, please. by Sialagogue · 2005-01-04 07:36 · Score: 5, Informative

Incoming calls would be no problem, just as they aren't with their modems or softphone. The phone is basically a shrunken VoIP modem with a mic and a wireless card, so I'd assume that the phone declares its IP address to Vonage Central once it logs on to the local network. Vonage then maps your local number to that IP and your on your way.
Their modems and softphone work the same way. Once they navigate the firewall they log into the Vonage servers and your number is mapped. We use both all the time internationally - we've sent modems to our European offices which has made them accessable with a local New York call, and we use the softphone on business trips to Hong Kong, which has turned a multi-hundred dollar phone bill per trip into nearly zero.
If you're involved in international business, VoIP is the biggest cost-saving measure since e-mail.

--
The only acceptable defense of scientific results is to say that they were the product of the Scientific Method.
Re:More detail, please. by Vellmont · 2005-01-04 07:38 · Score: 1

I was referring to outgoing firewalls, like I said in my post. If you're only allowed access to port 80 and 443, Vonage isn't going to work. Also if the firewall only allows HTTP requests out, it obviously wouldn't work.

--
AccountKiller
Re:More detail, please. by cavemanf16 · 2005-01-04 07:39 · Score: 4, Informative

Vonage's current units work by having a unique identifier that they send back to Vonage to identify which "number" the call is coming from or going to. In other words, if I take my Vonage unit with me on the road and have a hotel with broadband available in the room, all I have to do is plug the unit in and I could make calls from it back to my area code as a "local" call. I could also receive calls in my hotel room from people trying to reach me at my "home" phone number. I assume their WiFi phone would work the exact same way.

I know some /.'ers may poo-poo this idea, but I think it's got some real sticking power. The whole "college kids making free calls" thing mentioned in the article is just one use of many. In the approx. 1yr that we've had Vonage at my home, neither my wife or I have been displeased with the service. Yes, my wife gets displeased when I'm trying to d/l all three Mandrake 10.1 ISO's and she's trying to talk to her mother because I'm swamping the cable connection with my d/l's, but I simply delay the downloads... no big deal.

I'd also like to mention the sheer joy you will receive when telling your local and long distance telemark-a-droids that there is no way they can beat the price you're currently getting for phone service. When you tell them: "I'm getting every single service you offer PLUS long distance PLUS Canada calls PLUS $0.05-$0.15/min. for International calls for $29.99", you can hear their jaw hit the desk as they say: "Oh. Have a nice day." True, we're not factoring in the price of broadband to that dollar amount, but hell, I'd have broadband whether or not I needed phone service anyways so that doesn't matter.
Re:More detail, please. by Lord+Kano · 2005-01-04 07:49 · Score: 1

How does Yahoo, or MSN, or ICQ or whomever know where to send your IMs?

The device would sign in whenever it's within range of a wifi hotspot.

LK

--
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Re:More detail, please. by Sialagogue · 2005-01-04 07:50 · Score: 1

I'm not a VoIP specialist here, but you wouldn't need super-clean hand-off as in a cellular network, would you? Since they don't have to route the calls to a specific tower as in cellular, just to an IP address which looks the same no matter what wifi network it's on, they appear to have fewer technical challenges.
Technically the POTS calls only take place between the Vonage call center and whoever is on the POTS network. Vonage then routes them onto the Internet to point to the IP address of the hardware associates with the user. If the phone moves out of the WiFi network and contact is lost on the IP side, Vonage could easily still hold the POTS line open and then decide how to handle it with the POTS user. They could, for example, have a recorded message saying "connectivity with the Vonage caller has been temporarily lost, press 1 to wait for them to reconnect, press 2 to leave a message, press 3 to have an automatic call-back when they have re-connected."
Then, when the phone re-establishes with the same or a different wi-fi network, or the same or different IP address, then they simply link that IP stream back to that POTS connection.
As I say, I'm not a VoIP expert, but it seems to make sense, yes?

--
The only acceptable defense of scientific results is to say that they were the product of the Scientific Method.
Re:More detail, please. by Moby+Cock · 2005-01-04 07:53 · Score: 1

Those are not mobile. A cell phone conducts dynamic mobile assisted handoffs as it transits from cell to cell. Is this going to be possible with a Vonage phone as it transits from hot spot to hot spot? If so, what protocol supports this? Is it a truly mobile phone or a portable fixed phone?
Re:More detail, please. by ehiris · 2005-01-04 08:05 · Score: 1

I'm not sure how Vonage will work but you can use Skype on your PocketPC if you have WiFi and at a processor running at minimum 400 Mhz.
Re:More detail, please. by PureCreditor · 2005-01-04 08:12 · Score: 1

that's based on the VERY vague and unrealistic assumption that hotspots are so close to each other you can "hand-off" a call currently in place. unless the city is 100% wired for WiFi, you rarely need to think about handing-off anything on 2.4GHz.

then we have to account for the cost of the WiFi connection itself. at the current prices of WiFi hotspots plus vonage/skype rates, you only save if you're making multi-hour calls to Canada to make any sense. Cell phones plus international phone cards are so cheap these days that the savings from VoIP doesn't show until after so-much usage
Re:More detail, please. by caudron · 2005-01-04 08:31 · Score: 1

how does Vonage "know" where to address the messages to?

Same way as at home. The phone connects to Vonage and with a simple "I'm at x.x.x.x" handshake. Then whenever a call comes in, Vonage pushes the call to that IP. If the phone is no longer at that location (easy enough to determine) then the call goes to voicemail or to the forwarding number (vonage let's to establish a failsafe forwarding number for cases where the vonage PBX isn't on the network currently.

In really lame psuedo-code:

When the phone enters a WiFi spot
Phone connects to Vonage and sends latest IP

When incoming call is recieved
if phone is at $LatestIPAddressGiven (check by MAC address)
forward call to phone's IP
else
forward call to voice mail
end if

Surprisingly simply and effective service, really.

--
-Tom
Re:More detail, please. by lovswr · 2005-01-04 08:42 · Score: 1

You mentioned that large downloads can cause the VoIP to be less than stellar. What about the other way around? I have DSL for one reason only. Loweset latency that I can afford. Does the VoIP kill your latency? For me, anything that makes me have greater than (say 70ms) to my favorite Q3 servers is a no go. That's why I kill peer to peer (& anything else that's going on) on my home network while I'm gaming.
Re:More detail, please. by CharlieHedlin · 2005-01-04 09:00 · Score: 1

I can't say for sure, but I was a network engineer at one of the largest hot spot networks, and I do a lot of work with SIP.

If you traversed from multiple access points within the same 802.11 network it would be fine, but if you have to get a new IP address, your call is over.
Re:More detail, please. by Hulfs · 2005-01-04 09:01 · Score: 1

Does the VoIP kill your latency? For me, anything that makes me have greater than (say 70ms) to my favorite Q3 servers is a no go.

I've had Vonage (w/ Comcast cable as ISP) for about 3 months now and you will usually notice pretty sharp ping dropoffs to game servers during phone calls but whilst the phone is on the hook I haven't noticed any delays whatsoever. Another must is to get some sort of traffic shaping going on at your gateway. The Linksys router that Vonage gives you prioritizes VoIP over everything else so this will work if you've got that router as your gateway, but if you've got a Linux box or another router/NAT box as your gateway you'll want to figure out some other way to prioritize your IP traffic to favor phone calls (unless you don't mind hearing the wife or parents complain that the phone is cutting out because you're in the middle of a large download).
Re:More detail, please. by homer_ca · 2005-01-04 09:04 · Score: 1

The big problem with leaving it on to receive calls is battery life. An idle WiFi link uses almost as much power as an active link. It just takes a lot of power to maintain an 11Mb/s link to a relatively low powered base station. Compare this to cellphones that can last for hours of talktime and days in standby.
Re:More detail, please. by Moby+Cock · 2005-01-04 09:11 · Score: 1

That is as I suspected. Thanks, dude.
Re:More detail, please. by cavemanf16 · 2005-01-04 09:18 · Score: 2, Informative

You mentioned that large downloads can cause the VoIP to be less than stellar. What about the other way around? I have DSL for one reason only. Loweset latency that I can afford. Does the VoIP kill your latency? For me, anything that makes me have greater than (say 70ms) to my favorite Q3 servers is a no go. That's why I kill peer to peer (& anything else that's going on) on my home network while I'm gaming.

I haven't noticed that it does. I regularly get under 70ms pings to CounterStrike:Source servers in the midwest. (I live in Columbus, OH) Of course, I use a router which provides connections to the VoIP box and other computers in the house, so without a router in front of the VoIP box it might. I could probably get even fancier if my router was a linux box with QoS packet scheduling enabled, but I'm not all that into administering a fancy-schmancy network in my home. (This is on a 3Mbit down/356?Mbit up cable modem through Insight RoadRunner) I can consistently max out a really large download from high bandwidth servers at 300kB/s, so YMMV on DSL or a slower cable connection.

The VoIP box pings the central server A LOT, but it hasn't impacted my online gaming as far as I can tell.
Re:More detail, please. by Moofie · 2005-01-04 10:15 · Score: 1

Your apparent IP address will change as you move from network to network. How will the routers predict where you're going to be when you need this particular packet?

--
Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
Re:More detail, please. by rworne · 2005-01-04 10:32 · Score: 1

I also went through some growing pains with Vonage. The bandwidth/quality problems can be solved with QoS, such as obtaining a Linksys WRT54G router and flashing it with Sveasoft custom firmware. This is a very cheap and effective solution.

I can now run multiple torrents and hold a conversation with no breakups.

Downtime only hit us three times in the last year. One was Vonage, and it lasted a couple of hours. The second was a firmware update on the Linksys preventing the box from contacting Vonage (fixed with a phone call). The third was when our DSL went out for a weekend.

Our phone bill dropping from $80/mo to $25-28/mo was really nice too, since we dropped our landline. Yes, we still have the DSL.

--
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Re:More detail, please. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 10:47 · Score: 0

does 802.11 even do seamless hand-offs within a large mesh network ?
Re:More detail, please. by tylernt · 2005-01-04 14:00 · Score: 1

http://www.it.kth.se/~vatn/research/handover-perf. pdf

--
DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
Re:More detail, please. by Dekortage · 2005-01-04 22:30 · Score: 1

Yeah, but can't WiFi throttle down to 1 or 2Mb/s? Normally that is just for extended range, but why not temporarily drop the bandwidth and power just to a level low enough to maintain the link, then boost it when a call comes in?

Admittedly, I'm not a WiFi expert... just wondering about this.

--
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts

Idea by spac3manspiff · 2005-01-04 07:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

Would it be possible to get the same functionality from a PDA with wifi and a mic?

Re:Idea by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:38 · Score: 0

Get Skype for PocketPC!

http://www.skype.com/products/skype/pocketpc/
Re:Idea by Lord+Kano · 2005-01-04 07:52 · Score: 1

Sort of, a PDA wouldn't have a special purpose DSPs designed for VOIP applications.

You could do it in software, but not as efficiently as if the work was done in hardware.

LK

--
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Re:Idea by koko775 · 2005-01-04 12:46 · Score: 1

That's exactly what I do with my PocketPC (yeah, yeah, it's Microsoft), and the main killer I'd say is the interface -- you have to turn on the wireless (or wait for it to connect, at least), open Skype, log on, and then click on the user or number to call. Where this wi-fi phone will hopefully really shine should be in its interface, as it will be less usable and less useful than its alternatives otherwise.

Hurdles by Bronz · 2005-01-04 07:15 · Score: 2, Insightful

Forgive my ignorance of the product, but won't it need to continually poll a server to find out if it has an incoming call due to firewalls? Also, does it expect to be able to seamlessly jump wifi networks -- transparent to the user anyway?

I see the use of using it in a Starbucks, or whatever, but it would hardly make a practical mobile phone. And I doubt people would bother carrying two phones around.

Re:Hurdles by Vellmont · 2005-01-04 07:30 · Score: 1

I see the use of using it in a Starbucks, or whatever, but it would hardly make a practical mobile phone. And I doubt people would bother carrying two phones around.

Oh I don't think it's intended to be for anyone that already has a cell phone. More likely it's for anyone travelling that doesn't have a cell phone (or travelling where they don't have service, like say Europe).

--
AccountKiller
Re:Hurdles by drinkypoo · 2005-01-04 07:51 · Score: 1

It's not really a mobile phone, it's a cordless phone that works through wifi hotspots. It's useful if you are the type who doesn't want a mobile - if you did, you probably wouldn't have vonage as well unless you lived in one of the few places where you can get broadband but can't get cellular coverage. I imagine that it would be quite useful if you were one of those people who sits at starbucks all day. Incidentally, since you can make a healthy living selling stuff on fleabay you could just get an account at one of those mailbox places and live that way quite successfully :)

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Hurdles by Algan · 2005-01-04 08:07 · Score: 1

won't it need to continually poll a server to find out if it has an incoming call due to firewalls?

No, what it does is it sends a registration message to the central server every minute or so. This has a double purpose: it lets the server know where to find the device and it pokes a hole through most NAT firewalls. When a call comes in, the firewall is already opened on that particular port and the NAT association is created.

does it expect to be able to seamlessly jump wifi networks?

Nope, not when you're in a call. When you're idle you can do it, however, I'm not sure if the particular piece of hardware Vonage uses has the capability.

--
If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
Re:Hurdles by scottme · 2005-01-04 08:09 · Score: 1

I think you will find that pretty much all of Europe has cellphone service these days :-)

Actually, I imagine that what you're trying to get across is that since a couple of the dominant US-based service providers use CDMA based technology, which has no concept of roaming service, you are locked in to that network and only that network. In which case you might want to look at choosing one of the carriers who operate GSM networks instead (AT&T/Cingular or T-Mobile).

A better alternative for when you're in Europe (or most of the rest of the world for that mattter) would be to buy a cheap GSM handset and a pre-pay SIM. I suspect that would be more likely to work in more places than a WiFi handset. In Europe WiFi hotspots are still quite scarce outside of major population centres and costly in them.
Re:Hurdles by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:24 · Score: 0

"And I doubt people would bother carrying two phones around."

Right, and between a $15/month phone and a $50/month phone, which one will you drop first?
Re:Hurdles by rainman_bc · 2005-01-04 09:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

But IIRC that Philly was makeing the city one huge wifi hotspot.

Wouldn't that cripple the cellular market in philly?

--
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Re:Hurdles by Vellmont · 2005-01-04 13:51 · Score: 1

Actually I have T-mobile here, but I don't have a tri-band phone. If I were going to Europe I'd probbably buy one (or make T-mobile upgrade me) and then do the SIM switch. I'm also not certain all SIMs are compatible with all GSM phones. I tried putting a housemate from Italy's SIM in my phone and it said the SIM wasn't recognized.

--
AccountKiller
Re:Hurdles by scottme · 2005-01-04 20:24 · Score: 1

Probably means your phone is SIM-locked - this is a tactic used by many operators to attempt to recoup the subsidized cost of the handset. It will only recognize your operator's SIM until you get it unlocked or purchase your own, unsubsidized "SIM-free" handset.

Net2Phone Has Had This For A While Now ... by charyou-tree · 2005-01-04 07:16 · Score: 3, Informative

First used their XJ100 on their VoiceLine service a few months ago. Worked great. Battery life was pretty good too - a couple hours of talking before it had to be recharged.

Only disadvantage ... 802.11b only. No WPA.

Hotspots? Not really..... by djrogers · 2005-01-04 07:16 · Score: 5, Insightful

Granted there are many open hotspots out there, but the easiest to find and most predicatable for the road warrior are all pay-for-play (iPass, tmobile, wayport etc). Given that there's no standard for authenticating to these networks, this kind of thing won't be useable there. Now for home/office use, it looks great!

--
Think outside the... Hey, where'd the friggin' box go?

Re:Verizon.... (as in a previous /.er comment) by dacaldar · 2005-01-04 07:17 · Score: 1

Funny you should mention Verizon.

This story adds even more "insightful" mod points to a recent post I read: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=134809&cid=112 51440

Meh by SilentChris · 2005-01-04 07:17 · Score: 2, Interesting

I have a similar setup at home:, much cheaper Linksys router with Vonage hooked up to 1 piece of a 2 piece portable phone. The phones are regular models (900 mhz Vtech's I believe). The piece connected to the router goes on the floor, and the other piece is easily accesssible (so I can keep 1 phone or the other charged at all times). The entire setup cost $20 and I can add more phones later if I feel like it.

Re:Meh by hey · 2005-01-04 07:32 · Score: 1

Your setup only works around your house.
How about from any hotspot in the world?
Re:Meh by drinkypoo · 2005-01-04 07:46 · Score: 1

Your setup involves four pieces of hardware counting the phone and base separately, three connections to power (router, cable modem or dsl modem or whatever, and phone) and a wired network connection. This is contained in a mobile phone. The two are ever so slightly different, but thank you for playing.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Meh by SilentChris · 2005-01-04 08:12 · Score: 1

"The two are ever so slightly different, but thank you for playing."

Yes, except mine costs $20 for the entire setup while this would cost upwards of $300 ($120 for each phone, and a wireless router). Thanks for playing.
Re:Meh by drinkypoo · 2005-01-04 08:22 · Score: 1

Actually, at that price, it would cost $300 even. However, your setup did not cost only $20, except maybe at your cost - compare full price to full price for a more fair comparison and then ask your self what people are willing to pay for portability and not having to set stuff up.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

resolving DHCP..... please wait by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:19 · Score: 0

sweet i get to wait 30 seconds to grab dhcp everytime i move 200 feet assuming there actually is another AP in range

Not time yet by drivinghighway61 · 2005-01-04 07:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

This is a nifty gadget, but it really isn't functional. VoIP is fine for home use, but at this point there's no reason to choose a portable VoIP phone over a cell phone. There simply isn't a large enough network of WiFi connections yet, not to mention the fact that many of them are personal networks. I'm sure the owners of said networks do not want random passersby using up their bandwidth. If anyone wants one of these toys, fine, but I'm sticking with my cell phone. I can actually make calls without reliance on an internet connection with it.

Re:Not time yet by dresgarcia · 2005-01-04 07:29 · Score: 1

At this time I don't think you would use it in place of a cell phone. I am considering getting VOIP service and could see myself using this phone, my cell phone has a lot of problems getting access in some areas, including where some of my friends live in bumblefuck and in my own house. But they (almost) all have wireless connections. If I do get voip this gadget could be used in my own home (where I plan on replacing standard phoen service with voip), or I can take it with me when I go and use it there. . . if I want.

Overall its not the most practical gadget ever, but if these dropped a bit in price I would hop right on even at its current state. For $100 Im not about to pounce since I am a poor-ass young guy.
Re:Not time yet by CKW · 2005-01-04 07:51 · Score: 2, Insightful

> I'm sure the owners of said networks do not want
> random passersby using up their bandwidth.

Not true *at all*. I and friends run WiFi connections explicitly so people can do stuff like this. Laptops on the park bench below me, disabled guy down the hall barely making ends meet gets to use an old/donated system, friends/strangers walking or driving by who pull out their high-end PDA to refer to something online, WiFi p2p/sharing networks, etc etc.

What's the old saying? Information wants to be free?

New saying - Bandwidth wants to be free!

Seriously, the above two sayings are closely related. The effective "cost" of many types of information is near zero due to the ability to replicated it among 6 billion people for near zero cost. And that's because bandwidth is so cheap. Bandwidth *and* information want to be free!
Re:Not time yet by badmammajamma · 2005-01-04 08:26 · Score: 1

I wouldn't say that it "isn't functional."
It is nichey. Here's the three things that it's useful for: 1) some areas have poor cell phone reception, 2) international calls are far more expensive on a cell phone, 3) you can act like you're home even if you aren't :)

--
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
Re:Not time yet by abrinton · 2005-01-04 08:40 · Score: 1

No reason... except that its so cheap. When WiFi and VoIP drive cell phone carriers to offer international at $.02 a minute I'll call all day on my cell phone. Same when they drop that $1 per minute international roaming charge... until then, if I can get that price from a VoIP phone I'm all over it.
Re:Not time yet by MarkGriz · 2005-01-04 08:52 · Score: 2, Insightful

What's the old saying? Information wants to be free?

New saying - Bandwidth wants to be free!

Newest saying - WiFi phonecalls want to be free.

...which of course they will be once someone captures enough WiFi packets to crack the encyption and clone their own phone to someone elses Vonage account.

--
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
Re:Not time yet by Plugh · 2005-01-04 11:44 · Score: 1

There simply isn't a large enough network of WiFi connections yet
What about WiMax?
Seriously... suppose it's 18-24 months from now, and many large metropolitan areas have WiMax coverage. Then a VoIP handset like this one, but using WiMax instead of WiFi, would be a shoo-in cell-phone-killer-app. Or am I missing something?
I've been a Vonage user for about a year now. What the hell, I already had broadband, and the flat $25/month for their "Premium Unlimited" is a lot cheaper than I was paying before. Plus, now I have what they call a "virtual number" in my parents' area code, so they can call me and it's a free local call for them, even though they're back in Wisconsin and I'm in California. Cool!

--
Part of the Second American Revolution!
Re:Not time yet by Plugh · 2005-01-04 12:01 · Score: 1

Newest saying - WiFi phonecalls want to be free. ...which of course they will be once someone captures enough WiFi packets to crack the encyption and clone their own phone to someone elses Vonage account.
Dude, have you actually checked the price list? It's just not worth the trouble!!!
Calls within the US and Canada are unmetered. I call my parents back in Wisconsin and just don't bother hanging up, leave the line open for a few days, it costs ZERO EXTRA. So what, you hijack my account? Have a ball! See if I care!
Now, I have some friends in Australia. I call them all the time. The biggest impediment is the time zone difference, not the cost -- calls to frickin' Australia are $0.04/minute! It's literally cheaper, per-minute, to make a VoIP call to the opposite end of planet Earth than to get a seat at the local movie theater.
Sure, someone could jack my account to call a cellphone in Afghanistan at $1.25/min, but that's the kind of length you'd have to go to....

--
Part of the Second American Revolution!
Re:Not time yet by waynelorentz · 2005-01-04 14:36 · Score: 1

Seriously... suppose it's 18-24 months from now, and many large metropolitan areas have WiMax coverage.

Seriously... suppose you actually want to use a product today, or in the next couple of weeks instead of waiting for something that might or might not happen and work well two years from now.

That's like not buying a cell phone now because two years from now they should be really really cool. That doesn't help when you want to make a call today.

--
World's tallest building rises in the desert

This helps me decide which company to choose by Morris+Thorpe · 2005-01-04 07:20 · Score: 1

Vonage hopes the Wi-Fi phone will attract new customers. "It's a great differentiator," Briere says.

He's right about that. I'm signing up today. It's not the Wi-Fi phone that did it for me but it sure is a nice thing to have.
The video phone is also something I'd like to try.

I like to back innovating companies like Vonage.

Re:This helps me decide which company to choose by BlowChunx · 2005-01-04 09:03 · Score: 1

I'd like to 'back' innovative companies like Vonage, but it appears that they are privately held...anyone got a ticker symbol or stock recommendations?

<all this taken with a grain of salt>

WiFi VoIP phones unimpressive by Greg@RageNet · 2005-01-04 07:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

I hope the vonage effort finally brings a good voip/wifi phone to the market. I have a WiSIP and so far it's been unimpressive. Flakey, difficult to configure and use, and underpowered (audio quality degrades sharply when using 128bit WEP). Lots of room in this market to make a better product!

-- Greg

--
Slashdot, would a spell-checker for posting be too much to ask? It's not rocket science!

Re:WiFi VoIP phones unimpressive by Nugget · 2005-01-04 08:22 · Score: 1

My own experiences with the WiSIP match yours. It's a terrible bit of firmware in an underpowered phone. I recently saw this phone which might be a better option, but I haven't picked one up yet.

not really competitive ... yet. by mixup · 2005-01-04 07:22 · Score: 1

With its very limited coverage areas this isn't going to be able to take on the cellular market anytime soon. But you can be fairly confident that WiFi saturation will continue at its current rapid pace (based on laptop and handheld demand)and eventually these WiFi phones will give cellular a run for their money.

I see camera phones that send your club-kid photos right to your moblog ... oh wait, we have that already. But with WiFi, it will be at a MUCH cheaper cost!

YES!!! One for me, please! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:26 · Score: 0

I've had the chance to see another brand of WiFi phone in action recently and it is probably the coolest thing I've seen in a long time. I need to get one of these ASAP. Does anyone know when do they start to take orders?

Deja Vu by Hognoxious · 2005-01-04 07:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

will allow Vonage subscribers to make VoIP calls from any WiFi hotspot.

Deja Vu, but for once, not about the article. Wasn't there an outfit called "Rabbit" when mobile phones were kind of taking off (late 80s) in the UK? IIRC you had to stand within 20 yards of some antenna contraption to use them. It was a dismal failure, possibly due to the fact that the only places that had the antennas seemed to be railway stations - right next to a bank of payphones. If this phone doesn't (as TFA suggests) do normal GSM too, then it'll go the same way.

As to making a voice over wifi call at home, I suppose it means I don't have to swith the pooter on (yeah, like it's ever off).

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:Deja Vu by ad0gg · 2005-01-04 07:35 · Score: 1

At my old office we had 20,000 square feet of office space. We had the whole building covered with WIFI, it would have been nice to a carry a wifi enabled office phone that intergrated with our pbx. Would have been nice to go down to the server room and still have people call up my extension to contact me. I know there are wireless systems out there for PBXs but most require a FCC permit or at least the nortel ones did. And they are pretty damn pricey.

--
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
Re:Deja Vu by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:42 · Score: 0

However wi-fi is probably a lot more widespread than those antenna especially with all those open access points. What would be interesting is for there to be APs which specifically allow unlimited VoIP access but can have other access disabled (with of course bandwidth limitation as well). If you can have a message show up on the phone when using such an AP (with say the AP owners name if it's a company, etc.) then that would give companies an incentive to set these up (cheap advertisements) instead of traditional closed AP points.

Personally, I wouldn't mind having one at college if they ever get the darn wi-fi network up and running in more places. Well if it's cheap enough for the service.

Actually, if they can convince colleges to set up unrestricted access for this service (normally it costs $10/month per device/ip for me) then that might be a real selling point (regular cell phone coverage here is crappy).

Potentially bad news for hotspots by HotNeedleOfInquiry · 2005-01-04 07:32 · Score: 1, Troll

Yet again, the internet bandwidth gets sucked away by something it was not orginally designed for. Instead of supporting 10-20 laptops checking email and news, we'll have 2-3 phones sucking up all the bandwidth while the yuppies and teens chat.

I don't like it. I don't want to hear more cell phone chatter in my coffeeshop hotspot.

--
"Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...

Re:Potentially bad news for hotspots by wfberg · 2005-01-04 07:52 · Score: 1

Yet again, the internet bandwidth gets sucked away by something it was not orginally designed for. Instead of supporting 10-20 laptops checking email and news, we'll have 2-3 phones sucking up all the bandwidth while the yuppies and teens chat.

E-mail?? News?? I hope you mean usenet newsgroups in the sci.* hierarchy with "news"! The internet is for serious research only..

--
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
Re:Potentially bad news for hotspots by hswerdfe · 2005-01-04 07:59 · Score: 1

because the internet was designed for

hotmail, slashdot, and google news....
what ever the internet was designed for data exchange and military use. your laptop checking email is just as much a coruption of its origional intent as a cell phone.

--
--meh--
Re:Potentially bad news for hotspots by Martin65 · 2005-01-04 08:06 · Score: 1

The bandwidth requirements for VoIP aren't that bad, it is typical 5-50Kbps per call. You could have 5 people talking on these phones and still not use up the bandwidth of someone downloading the latest 2.5MB WMV file from their friends in an email.
Re:Potentially bad news for hotspots by Politburo · 2005-01-04 08:21 · Score: 1

I don't like it. I don't want to hear more cell phone chatter in my coffeeshop hotspot.

Then tell the managers that you will no longer frequent their establishment due to the problem. People aren't psychic.

Yet again, the internet bandwidth gets sucked away by something it was not orginally designed for

Yet again, electricity gets sucked away by something it was not originally designed for. I demand electricity be used only for light bulbs! Right...
Re:Potentially bad news for hotspots by chris234 · 2005-01-04 08:22 · Score: 1

The internet was designed to move packets from A to B.

The phone in question apparently by General_Corto · 2005-01-04 07:33 · Score: 3, Informative

So, based on the articles, Vonage will be selling this handset (PDF of details available from page).

Batt life by mushupork · 2005-01-04 07:33 · Score: 1

That's okay...the battery life on my Motorola MD 451's is crap anyhow (using Vonage w/ multihandset 2.4 GHz setup.) I had a Panasonic 900MHz brick before; the charge lasted for days.

--
Currently bidding on sig

I used to be interested.. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:34 · Score: 0

..in this, but my current phone plan at home includes unlimited long distance. This would probably be more interesting if I made more international phone calls, but I don't.

softpackets by Doc+Ruby · 2005-01-04 07:34 · Score: 1

I just want a SIP softphone to run on my WiFi Treo. Then I can connect to my regular Vonage softphone account. The next step is for Vonage to factor out the special "softphone account", and let me connect from any SIP device (softphone/Treo/PC, ethernet Telephone Adapter/router, etc) for my $25:mo, and they'll take over the world from the circuit telcos.

--

--
make install -not war

Re:softpackets by valmont · 2005-01-04 09:12 · Score: 1

earthlink gives you a pure SIP address and handles gatewaying when needed. So you can send and receive calls to/from any other SIP user. or something :)

--
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices
Re:softpackets by Doc+Ruby · 2005-01-04 09:53 · Score: 1

That's a handy service bundle from an ISP. But I'd prefer the SIP/VoIP to be all "under the hood", though open, so other parties to the calls don't even know it's not POTS. A SIP softphone through Vonage seems the closest we can get, as its SIP directory is wrapped in the "universal" telco exchange system.

--
--
make install -not war

Unfortunately, they'll probably charge more for it by tgd · 2005-01-04 07:34 · Score: 1

Their softphone is a pretty nifty thing, too, but not worth paying extra for. I've been using them for a while now and love their service. It was nice visiting my parents over the holidays and bringing my PAP2 with me, so my phone line followed me, but paying an extra ten bucks a month to use the soft phone seems silly.

I'm sure this will be the same way, if not more expensive.

Great idea! by word+munger · 2005-01-04 07:35 · Score: 4, Funny

Combines the crappiness of VOIP voice transmission with the unreliability of cell phones! Now we just need to get Microsoft in on this to really ruin it!

--
ScienceSeeker.org

Re:Great idea! by badmammajamma · 2005-01-04 08:30 · Score: 1

Actually the sound quality is quite good.

--
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
Re:Great idea! by chrispl · 2005-01-04 08:46 · Score: 1

Sadly this is already happening with my setup. I use a T-Mobile MDA III phone (aka Blue Angel) which has built in 802.11b and runs Windows Mobile. I use the PPC version of Skype to make calls, mostly because of it's excellent routing around firewalls and end-to-end encryption.

The good: Make free calls to PCs, cheap calls to POTS from airports and bars in far-away places. War-walking the city streets for free long distance is fun!

The bad: Windows Mobile crashes...ALOT. When using Skype the CPU demand of the heavy encryption drains the battery fast. On top of the increased battery use of the wifi this drains quickly leaving around an hour of talking off a full charge. Also if your connection to the AP is interrupted the TCP/IP stack crashes and you have to do a soft reset.

I have a theory that T-Mobiles WiFi drivers are so poor just to persuade people NOT to do exactly what I am doing with it. Free phone calls.

--
What post? The one you're carrying inside your rusty innards!
Re:Great idea! by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2005-01-04 08:48 · Score: 1

No mention of security (the articles don't), I also hope that it has a mini web server to more easily enter a WEP or WPA key, and allow multiple profiles so it can operate from home, work, etc.

A wireless VoIP phone does sound intruiging, set up a WAP with an outdoor antenna and you can get a phone with a lot more range than typical home cordless phones can get. But it would still be more expensive and you might have more spectrum issues.

Another problem is that WAPs have inflated range ratings. The 30mW ones claim as much as 300 meters when the connection is unreliable at half that distance.

Speaking of Vonage by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:36 · Score: 0

Has anyone else seen the ads on TV? If so, I've got a question for you. What is the song that plays in the ads? It sounds so catchy, but there's no words so it's nearly impossible to google. It sounds like someone saying "Woohoo, woohoohoo!"

Please, help me! The only way I can get it out of my head would be to play it over and over and over until my brain explodes. Thanks!

Re:Speaking of Vonage by dr_dank · 2005-01-04 09:58 · Score: 1

General Motors has the same song on their commercial. Evil is spreading.

--
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
Re:Speaking of Vonage by OldeClegg · 2005-01-04 20:45 · Score: 1

Japanese girl group, the 5,6,7,8's. Lookey here for album: amazon
Re:Speaking of Vonage by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-05 01:02 · Score: 0

DUDE! You are AWESOME! Thank you SO much, you have no idea. I have my sanity back now as I can play the song until it wears out in my head. Would you like a gmail invite as my way of saying thanks? ;)
Re:Speaking of Vonage by dr_dank · 2005-01-05 02:41 · Score: 1

Oh word, they were in Kill Bill.

--
Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?

Bandwidth. by tgd · 2005-01-04 07:37 · Score: 1

The bandwidth usage of VOIP isn't very high, like 8k/sec or something. I don't even notice it over my cable modem. You'd need a lot of people using them to badly clog a public access point.

Re:Bandwidth. by matth · 2005-01-04 09:25 · Score: 1

What VoIP provider do you use? Vonage requires 90k/sec
Re:Bandwidth. by tgd · 2005-01-04 10:17 · Score: 1

90k bits per second, not 90k bytes per second. Thats peak, and its adjustable downward if that amount upstream bogs your broadband connection.

About to do this myself.... by metalligoth · 2005-01-04 07:38 · Score: 1

After many a mess with Sprint, and an unwillingness to use any of the other providers, I have been considering using VoIP on a PDA/Cell Phone for some time now.

The idea is that I would get something like the MDA/XDA III which is a Wi-Fi/Bluetooth Pocket PC that also has a GSM phone radio in it, and install a prepay card for when I need to make a call and there is no Wi-Fi around.

I don't know how it is in your neck of the woods, but where I live, even the local hick bar advertises that they have Wi-Fi now. I rarely go somewhere where there is no open Wi-Fi signal.

I'm going to start by testing using Wi-Fi on my laptop before I get the PDA.

Does who has done this, use VoIP on a PDA like it's a cell phone, have any tips?

Re:About to do this myself.... by vorovsky · 2005-01-04 08:27 · Score: 1

Vonage already offers softphone service. Although it wasn't designed for use on a PDA, of course the guys over at engadget had to make it work.

Nice and cool but.. by EinarH · 2005-01-04 07:41 · Score: 2, Informative

..not very convenient. Can you imagine the "yes I'm now within the free wifi AP, call me on my Vonage phone" ?

I would rather put my money on Skypes future VoIP GSM phone...

The Spyware/adware could make it suck though. But for convenience and international calls it might be a winner.

--

Melius mori in libertate quam vivere in servitute.

Re:Nice and cool but.. by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 11:25 · Score: 0

Um, its just like a cell phone. You're either in a service area or your not. If your not it cuts to voicemail.

Tsunami Amber Alert by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:43 · Score: 0

This post is important - the safety and well-being of a twelve year-old boy may be in serious jeopardy. http://www.kubed.org/blog/archives/2005/01/04/tsun ami-amber-alert/

Total Nonsense by brunes69 · 2005-01-04 07:47 · Score: 1

I dont' know what POS VOIP solution you were using, but here I can run Skype at modem-like speeds ( 5 KB/s ) and get quality as good (or even better than) my landline.

Since Vonage is developing the phone themselves, they could license Skype's technology, or develop their own, or any number of things. It is *very* doable.

Re:Total Nonsense by rpdillon · 2005-01-04 09:57 · Score: 1

That 90kbps is not 90 KB, and in KiloBYTES, but kbps as in kilo bps, or bits per second.

Divide by 8, and you'll see it's using about 11 KB/s, which isn't too bad, though still more than the skype bandwidth you mention.
Re:Total Nonsense by BlueTooth · 2005-01-04 10:15 · Score: 1

The codec that skype uses is freely available.
See:
iLBC

--
SPAM

Vonage: poor customer service by hondoslack · 2005-01-04 07:49 · Score: 1

Disgusted by their horrible VOIP customer service (and poor international service), I've switched VOIP providers. To cancel my Vonage service, I called their toll free number: it was busy, all day. Vonage WIFI, big deal. Also, any company that routes international long distance through phone cards - yes , I said phone cards - doesn't deserve a cent of anyone's business. (For those Vonage users that don't believe me, try calling a country that has a different ring tone than the US. Where's the foreign ring tone???) Sorry to use this post to rant, but I feel it is well deserved.

--
"...Teach a man to fish; you have fed him for a lifetime" -he has to want to fish, otherwise he won't learn!

Re:Vonage: poor customer service by Politburo · 2005-01-04 08:24 · Score: 1

Also, any company that routes international long distance through phone cards - yes , I said phone cards - doesn't deserve a cent of anyone's business.

Who gives a flying fuck how they're routing the calls? As long as it's reliable and cheap, I don't see what the problem is. And who appointed you the consumer czar to dictate who does and does not deserve business, anyway? Isn't that the job of each individual consumer?

I don't use Vonage, so I cannot speak to how reliable and/or cheap they are.
Re:Vonage: poor customer service by hondoslack · 2005-01-05 13:36 · Score: 1

I insulted no one with my post, so your flame is unappreciated.

Vonage routing their calls through phone cards is a sham, since the call quality is horrid, and the calls I placed internationally only connected maybe 10% of the time. Compare that with my current VOIP provider: calls are direct to the country in question (local ringtone), are crystal clear, and of the 10 calls I have placed in the last week, every single one has connected beautifully. Oh, and did I mention 6 cents a minute cheaper than Vonage.

Comments like yours keep people on the fringes and afraid to speak their mind for fear someone will make them look like a tool. Lighten up, I'm just trying to help people not waste their money like I did. FYI, I still haven't been able to disconnect my service, because they won't answer their ^$%#ing service line. That alone should keep people away.

--
"...Teach a man to fish; you have fed him for a lifetime" -he has to want to fish, otherwise he won't learn!
Re:Vonage: poor customer service by Politburo · 2005-01-06 02:09 · Score: 1

I'll say what I will. You're not obliged to respond, you know. People that are afraid to speak their mind on a place like this have serious issues that are beyond my control. Sticks and stones, etc..

My main objection with your comment was the language "doesn't deserve a cent of anyone's business". The assertion was based on a trivial fact -- that they use phone cards to route calls. If you had said what you said above "the call quality is horrid, and the calls I placed internationally only connected maybe 10% of the time," it would have made a lot more sense.

Perhaps it was not intended, but there was an elitist feel to how you worded your objection. When you talk about what people "deserve", you are placing yourself above others and implying that you are in a position to judge (while also implying that others are not in that position).

Also, by hinging your objection on a technical detail (calling cards), rather than an observable problem (call quality), you imply that using phone cards is inherently bad. While that may be true, you offered no reason why that would be the case. I have used international phone cards many times, and it is not plainly obvious to me why they in and of themselves would be the problem.
Re:Vonage: poor customer service by hondoslack · 2005-01-12 07:13 · Score: 1

Point is well taken. Often when writing quick comments, it is difficult to keep it coherent and well structured, and the end result is often not very good. You see, we are all in the same boat after all. No need to fire cannons at one another.

--
"...Teach a man to fish; you have fed him for a lifetime" -he has to want to fish, otherwise he won't learn!

it's unfortunate from vonage by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 07:52 · Score: 0

It's very unfortunate that this is coming from vonage. There service is pretty good, but there customer serivce and tech support (contracted through Earthlink I think) are just horrible. You could wait an hour on hold, and then they'll disconnect you accidently or won't be able to help you. They take over a month to reply to email that returns with a standard "Your email is very important to us, and will make every effort to reply promptly" auto-message. I still use them, but I wouldn't reccomend vonage too highly. There fine so long as you never have problems.

Nice by CypherXero · 2005-01-04 07:53 · Score: 1

This is great. I've been looking into VoIP lately to replace my aging PBX system, and I already have a wireless network in place at my house. Another great benefit will be able to take the ability to make long-distance charges for a small, monthly fee, with you, by using the wireless VoIP phone. If it works good, and it gets high ratings, I might look into this, once my VoIP plans start coming into place.

easier way to add more phones... by SethJohnson · 2005-01-04 07:53 · Score: 1

Instead of locking into those vtech phones and buying expensive additional handsets, here's another way to skin the VOIP throughout the house cat.

Plug a phone cord into your Vonage box and plug the other end into your wall phone outlet. Go outside, find where the telephone line leaves your house and heads for the pole. Cut that. Plug your vonage box into your network cable. Now all your wall outlets should be live for making Vonage calls.

--
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!

Re:easier way to add more phones... by Politburo · 2005-01-04 08:09 · Score: 1

Note that this will disable your 911 service. I highly recommend that no one do this.

Interesting... by JohnnyCannuk · 2005-01-04 07:54 · Score: 2, Interesting

And, I believe being done in Toronto by Starnix (along with a few other cool things). Remember this?:

"That's one PDA doing the job of two desktop PCs, a notebook PC, and three telephones."

I suspect using a trimode card with any PDA\Palm\laptop you could home brew your own version of this that could pick up GSM as well.

Still, pretty interesting...

--
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha

WOOT by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:01 · Score: 0

Im gonna move next door to you and download some ProN ! WOOT !

Re:WOOT by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:26 · Score: 0

better yet, i'll move in next door and pirate stuff ... and have the lawsuits delivered to your door.

Here's the plan... by F34nor · 2005-01-04 08:02 · Score: 2, Interesting

1. Everyone with a broadband connection gets a Wifi point and make it free.

2. Everyone get a VoIP account.

3. Everyone gets free cellphone service in major metro areas and suburban areas.

4. WiMax comes out and the coverage increases by miles.

5. Both Cell phone and POTS companies go out of buisness and are replaced by a pure IP network the opperate as a messure of bandwith density as a mesure of distance from a optical fiber.

6. anti-profit

Re:Here's the plan... by DarkHelmet · 2005-01-04 08:44 · Score: 1

The phone companies will still be around. They'll just profit further by no longer having to support phone towers, or CDMA / GSM systems.

--
/^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
Re:Here's the plan... by wedg · 2005-01-14 04:23 · Score: 1

This is bloody brilliant. So how do you go about sending a message that says, "Feel free to jump on my network," versus, "I'm lazy, and didn't secure my network?"

--
Jake
Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;

Heh. by stonecypher · 2005-01-04 08:04 · Score: 1

Though many slashdotters have pointed out that this isn't new, I feel the need to point out that should this begin to succeed, Nintendo and Sony will mop the floor with this thing.

--
StoneCypher is Full of BS

SIP: moving away from numbers - friendlier devices by valmont · 2005-01-04 08:15 · Score: 1

Advocating SIP

Advocating a better connected lifestyle

Finally, my Xmas wish: The Ultimate Handheld device for, now, 2005.

We don't need numbers to get in real-time touch with one-another. We need smarter devices interconnected with address books, presenting users with actual contact information, and obscuring the means by which you're getting in real-time touch with each-other.

--
Extraordinary Vacations. Exceptional Prices

Two stories down on the front page... by daveschroeder · 2005-01-04 08:16 · Score: 1

three new Samsung phones, all running a Microsoft OS

Re:Been using Vonage (OFFTOPIC) by harryk · 2005-01-04 08:17 · Score: 1

If your serious about it, then allow me to forward a referral to you. That way you get the month free, and I get a service credit equal to your plan rate. It really works out, and personally I'd appreciate it. email me at my yahoo account. harryk20022002

--
think before you write, it'll save me moderator points.

Pic of the phone by kid_wonder · 2005-01-04 08:20 · Score: 1

http://www.utstar.com/Solutions/Handsets/WiFi/

Spec Sheet

--

"Oh, you hate your job? There's a support group for that, it's called everyone, they meet at the bar."

maybe GSM/GPRS Bluetooth for home or office by johnjones · 2005-01-04 08:27 · Score: 1

ok what GSM providers should do

bluephone put bluetooth accesss points for the home intergrate into the base of cheap POTS phones (bluetooth can go 100 Meters but like WiFi big solid wall does nothing for reception )

lots of cheap access points in the home AND office when your out and about GSM when your at home calls are routed through POTS landline

or rather than landline use VoIP

the GSM people could be ISP's and broadcasters think of IP TV tivo all billing through your mobile/cellphone

they would love it (lots of money to be made)
you just have to have a GSM network and be able to get broadband to your customers

regards

John Jones

prediction by supernova87a · 2005-01-04 08:27 · Score: 1

It's difficult to choose what side to be on after thinking seriously about it. Of course you want communications to get cheaper and cheaper, but we *need* big telecom companies to provide us the very services that make this sort of thing possible. If free wireless calling takes off and starts being perceived as a dangerous trend, telecoms will fight tooth and nail to prevent this -- through regulation, infringement suits, whatever.

They will be fighting a losing battle. But even so I have to say, someone must do the job that they (the telecom companies) do. Who else will lay the fiber and launch the satellites? Not your coffeeshop wireless hotspot owner I can tell you that. Maybe what they need to do is take advantage of those markets where they provide services that IP/broadband cannot -- like rural phone services. But even there the profits are probably miniscule.

Re:prediction by the_mpls_guy · 2005-01-04 09:55 · Score: 1

you dont happen to work for the phone company.. do you?

Parent was total nonsense by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:41 · Score: 1

I dont' know what POS VOIP solution you were using, but here I can run Skype at modem-like speeds ( 5 KB/s ) and get quality as good (or even better than) my landline.

That is physically impossible, unless you have the worst land line imaginable.

Since Vonage is developing the phone themselves,

It's not. It's from some Taiwanese firm.

In actuality... by Svartalf · 2005-01-04 08:43 · Score: 1

You can opt for (or have foreced on you...) a "lower bandwidth" that makes sense. Most hotspots can manage something like 10 or so 20-30kbps streams- and that's really, really all you need for a better than mobile phone quality session. G.711's nuts. G.729, GSM, or SPEEX will do a much better job at 8-16kbps for each voice channel (one up, one down...). Sadly, most of the people doing VoIP are using G.711 because of QoS reasons. It's much more resilliant to dropouts and latencies than the other codecs.

--
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas

nice vonage ad on /. ! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 08:45 · Score: 0

Gee, there's a story about a product released in November 2004, and I see an ad from vonage!

Way to push those advertisers, guys!

not true by SethJohnson · 2005-01-04 08:57 · Score: 1

Vonage offers 911 service. Check here.

After you stop paying your regular phone bill, I do not believe your line is alive for 911 service, anyway.

--
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!

Re:not true by wolrahnaes · 2005-01-04 13:51 · Score: 1

Legally it is supposed to be, but in many cases this has been proven to not be true.

--
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
Re:not true by Politburo · 2005-01-05 02:17 · Score: 1

As the sibling points out, the phone line must provide 911 service by law. Luckily I've never had the opportunity to test this law.

Vonage won't help me if there's no power, or if my internet connection is down. I realize that there will be very few emergencies where the power/internet is out, but I'd rather be safe than sorry.

I'm not against VoIP. I use it at home. But we still have a hardwire phone and a connection to the local telephone network in the case of an emergency.

Cheaper rates on international calls by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 09:08 · Score: 1, Informative

You could buy an international calling card from http://www.discall.com and call an 800 number in the US for access and then call France. That would be a lot cheaper than the awful rate Verizon is charging you.

Somebody pinch me! by WebCowboy · 2005-01-04 09:09 · Score: 2, Funny

A new wireless phone product that isn't about

* being powered by Windows
* playing music and annoying ringtones
* takes even more megapixels of pics than ever before!
* plays microscopic video

No--it's about a phone that...get ready for it...improves the ability to make phone calls! What a new and novel idea! It's about F***in' time, and I have to say that this is the first phone that has piqued my interest in a long time.

Re:Somebody pinch me! by the_mpls_guy · 2005-01-04 10:00 · Score: 1

considering that voip is really popular in the PC to PC calls, is gaining ground in PC to land line calls, and is also starting to emerge as a true phone to phone technology; It seems to me that applying viop to wireless/cellphone concept is the next logical evolution of this technology

Re:Been using Vonage (OFFTOPIC) by NardofDoom · 2005-01-04 09:12 · Score: 1

I'll ask my wife about this tonight. Thanks a lot!

--
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!

cheap service by MindStalker · 2005-01-04 09:21 · Score: 1

Mentioning VoIP does anyone know of any cheap VoIP service that can be used for the once a day calls my Tivo makes, obviously needs adapter, but very few minutes will be used.

Re:cheap service by MindStalker · 2005-01-04 09:23 · Score: 1

before you answer, use the usb port, its a DirectTivo.. so option is not available.

Seen also on Wi-Fi Planet by Zoinks · 2005-01-04 09:45 · Score: 2, Informative

More detail and a picture over here

Re:Seen also on Wi-Fi Planet by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 10:42 · Score: 0

Even more details at the UTStarcom site and some product specs to boot

Re:Not time yet - yeah right by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 10:15 · Score: 0

You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Just sign up for a cell phone account (att, verizon, doesn't really matter). Then get a data cable for your phone to go into your laptop. Then get a crossover cable and hook that up to a wireless hub (if your laptop can broadcast then you can even skip this step, stupid). Then you have a portable solution that can compete with the biggest cellphone companies, unless their monopolist tactics run you into the ground. RTFM.

Oh, and GOOOOO LINUX.

It's not a cell phone phone ... by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 11:00 · Score: 0

I can't wait to pull one of these out on one of those airplanes they're talking about setting up for wireless internet and explaining to some brain dead stewardess, "It's not a cell phone phone, it's voip commincation terminal. The rules only say no cell phone phones ... "

No, one individual might. by way2trivial · 2005-01-04 11:11 · Score: 1

have any experience with vonage? and it's bandwidth use? i do- and it's really high...

--
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random

Re:No, one individual might. by euphgeek · 2005-01-04 23:29 · Score: 1

I do. I have a cable modem and I don't notice any high bandwidth usage at all.

IPv6 by bustersnyvel · 2005-01-04 11:20 · Score: 1

Too bad they don't say anything about IPv6 support. Without that, I'm not going to buy it. It's nice to have a WiFi phone and all, but without IPv6 it isn't worth that much to me. In my opinion, IPv6 with it's mobile extension is a perfect match for VOIP.

my h6315 does all this right now! by collin.m · 2005-01-04 11:58 · Score: 1

Just as a note: everybody can use his/her h6315 ipaq as a GSM/WiFi phone. I do it since I have my h6315. The software is free and it works great all over the place.

Re:my h6315 does all this right now! by nycmaddog · 2005-01-14 14:58 · Score: 1

Too bad the h6315 doesn't work. Biggest pile of crap I've ever owned--and I've owned a lot of crap.

How does it login to the hotspot? by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-04 12:04 · Score: 0

All of the different hot spot providers have their own, non-standard web page based logins. How does this phone login to the hotspot?

And when I go to Starbucks, or Wayport, do I have to pay for a day of connectivity just to get a phonecall? Or sign up for a monthly subscription for all these providers?

Re:How does it login to the hotspot? by nycmaddog · 2005-01-14 15:02 · Score: 1

I'd be surprised if Starbucks allowed this to play on their Tmobile operated network. If this really is the first step in the death of the cell phone service as we know it, I'm sure TM will put pressure on Starbucks to protect their hotspots for as long as they can (3 days till some enterprising hacker figures out how to crack the network).

Not the first.. by msimm · 2005-01-04 12:10 · Score: 1

This is by no means the first wifi phone. Its cool and the price point looks pretty attractive, but if your interesting in existing technology check it out:

BroadVoice branded Wisip Phone (standards standards standards)
Pulver Innovations (unbranded) Wisip Phone (for the purists)
Cisco's sexily titled IP Phone 7920 (like they'd be behind the curve!)
and
Zyxel's Prestige 2000W

There's probably more, but thats what google coughed up for "wifi phone" tonight (in the first couple of pages..I have a life you know. Just kidding!).

--
Quack, quack.

No, this isn't new by almaw · 2005-01-05 01:25 · Score: 1

The XDAIIs / MPS III / Orange M2000 will do this, as they're basically a 2.5g modem (GPRS, etc.) with bluetooth, wifi, etc. in a PDA form factor. Because you can run any PocketPC app on them, you can do what you like:

http://www.my-xda.com/xda2s.html

come on, philadelphia! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-05 04:00 · Score: 0

now, if philadelphia implements their city-wide free wireless plan, i'll be hooked up... in a year and a half when my cell contract is up anyway.

Re:my h6315 is something terrible right now! by Anonymous Coward · 2005-01-18 08:00 · Score: 0

With t-mobile's h6315 all i got was bad reception, quick battery death w/ wifi turned on, and I could not get any softphones working for voip. Seemed like the processor or memmory was overwhelmed. Poorly designed unit, for sure!

Slashdot Mirror

Vonage to Produce a WiFi Phone

213 comments