Is VoIP Google's Next Frontier?

WindBourne writes "Apparently, Google is looking to some degree at VoIP. Of course, the question is whether they will support such items as Asterisk and FreeWorld or will they simply buy another company and tinker from that end."

Comments

Quality?

[Sierpinski]

A friend of mine has a VoIP service, and I think its horrible. He cuts in and out all the time, low volume (even though he says he's almost shouting) and there's constant static. I don't know who his carrier is, but if thats any indication of the general quality of VoIP, then I'll stick with my landline and cell phone.

Anyone else have good or bad experience with VoIP quality?

Re:Quality?

[booyah]

Using an Avaya VOIP system at my office and remote sites (over vpn) i have to say its good to great quality. cant tell that the user is on an IP or a normal digital set.

having my parents and a sister on Vonage, I would say its at least as good as my cell.

I would give a comparison compared to a land line but i never use one. sorry.

Re:Quality?

[dsginter]

Anyone else have good or bad experience with VoIP quality?

It is all in the codec (and configuration thereof) that your provider uses. Most of the cheapie services will optimize for bandwidth rather than quality for the sake of saving money but Vonage does the opposite, in my experience. Their quality is better than that of a traditional landline.

The thing is, you can get CD-quality out of VoIP if conditions allow (and they eventually will). So don't let this FUD up your view of the technology.

Re:Quality?

[andy1307]

I have some issues with my internet service(Adelphia), not with my VoIP provider(Vonage). There's a two second delay before the conversation starts but other than that, I am generally happy with my service. I have the 15$/month plan and I never run out of minutes. I use a cell phone for long distance calls. You can set it up so that if your internet connection is down, the calls to your VoIP line get forwarded to your cell phone(or office phone if you prefer). I had a problem using a VPN connection when I had the VoIP box in front of my linksys router. You can open up the right port to fix that but i've been too lazy. I have the VoIP box behind the linksys router and it works fine.

I DO have a problem with using multiple lines. You have to plug in your phones to the VoIP box. You can fix that by cutting off the power supply coming from your LEC line.

Re:Quality?

[Momoru]

I have VOIP at work and its great...i've never once experienced any kind of break up, and calls sound as clear or clearer then normal. You also get lots of neat digital features on the phone itself that make VOIP even more useful.

Re:Quality?

[vvhitekid2]

Some voip isn't really for everybody yet. The people who are going to see the best results, and will consequently love it, are not the same people who are gonna stick it on their wide-open 802.11b router and call it good, all while maxing out their bandwidth with P2P stuff.

You will generally* get the most out of it if you know a little bit about firewalls, networking, and traffic shaping. After some tweaking with my Avaya set-up and my FreeBSD firewall I now have just about perfect quality.

* The commercial voip providers I've been looking at are now offering the hardware to handle the traffic shaping, etc.

Re:Quality?

[xero9]

I've been using BroadVoice for a while now and recently trying LiveVoip and I must say I think the quality of the audio is much better than any cell phone I've ever talked on. Now if only I could take my VoIP phone in the car with me..

Re:Quality?

[mpest]

I have Vonage. I got the service because I lost my cellphone one day and needed to stay in contact.
When you order the service, they send you an adapter to use w/ your regular analog phone. Since I needed to use it right away, I downloaded the softphone (it is an extra $10/month, which I found very dissapointing). Anyway the quality was horrible. First I tried to use it w/ my built-in mic & speakers, and I had to repeat everything 3 times. Then I tried it with a headset and it was only slightly better.
A few days later the adapter arrived in the mail and I set it up and plugged in my phone. The quality was infinitely better, just about as good as any cell or landline. So that's my experience with Vonage - the softphone sucks, but w/ the mta it works fine.

Re:Quality?

[Jim_Maryland]

Anyone else have good or bad experience with VoIP quality?

VoIP has been working well for me so far. My VoIP provider is SunRocket and my broadband is Comcast. I haven't experienced any of the static or dropped calls that you mention, but I've only been with them for about one month so far. The annual plan offered by SunRocket runs $199/year (USD) or roughly $16.58/month, which is much lower than my Verizon bill (about $34/month) without long distance service (I used my cell phone for long distance). One of the features that is really nice for me is that I can pick a second line and assign it to any area code they cover. In my case, I assigned it near family members so they don't have to call long distance to reach me.

My guess is that your friends problem is more related to broadband service or possibly hardware issues.

Re:Quality?

[Average_Joe_Sixpack]

I use Vonage for my home office and the experience has been positive enough that the rest of my consulting group is converting to save on calling card costs. A couple of things to consider.

* Latency - If you're an online gamer and can consistently find several servers with low ping, then you should be good for VoIP. I dumped cable broadband due to the network latency going to hell in the late afternoon when all the kids returned home from school. With DSL this has never been a problem.

* Get a good router or build your own router - The original Vonage router (Motorola) is supposed to be in front of your home network router/switch, but I was finding it would crash frequently under heavy traffic. Tried putting the Vonage router behind a cheap home Linksys (later Netgear) router and still had to perform daily resets. Finally purchased a used Netopia R9100 and it's been excellent.

You can also try building your own router using one of the Linux router distros. They have bandwidth shaping utilities that can prevent connected clients from sucking all the bandwidth. Great if your kids like to run P2P.

Re:Quality?

[Big_Al_B]

If you've ever called anyone using a LD calling card, or if someone has called you with one, you've probably used VoIP and not even realized it. Most LD calling cards use VoIP carriers to cut costs.

My parents call us all the time, and it sounds just fine.

(Also, I my work desk phone is IP, and it sounds great. Of course, I'm a network engineer for a IXC/CLEC/ISP/VoIP provider. So I may be biased about our service :) .)

Re:Quality?

[johnjaydk]

It is all in the codec (and configuration thereof) that your provider uses.

Are you for real ?

The codec determines the bandwith/voice quality tradeoff that's true but thats less than half the issue. The real deal is quality-of-service (QoS) in layer 2 (ethernet/atm etc) and layer 3 (IP). When you have QoS in hand and a reasonable bandwith ALL-THE-WAY through then you've got a real VoIP system.

I happen to do this stuff for a living and QoS is rather hard. In particular when you don't have much control over your customers (crappy) networks.

Re:Quality?

[Kergan]

Actually...

Within core networks, VoIP is no issue: there's no bottleneck. Most if not all carriers route your phone calls using VoIP at one point or another.

Within corporate environments, VoIP isn't much of an issue either -- given sufficient bandwidth.

As for consumers, err... well, they'll have to wait. ;)

Re:Quality?

[e2d2]

Your cell phone gets better service than VOIP can offer. Jesus man tell me who your carrier is, I want to sign up!

He cuts in and out all the time, low volume (even though he says he's almost shouting) and there's constant static.

Maybe he's talking to you on his cell phone?

Re:Quality?

[pathos49]

I have used various VoIP providers for the last two years. Have settled on Packet8. The quality can vary markedly from provider to provider but also from pipe to pipe. DSL is usually worse than cable. BTW, I only have VoIP in my house and use about 1200 minutes a month. While Skype is really sort of neat, it is the worse froma quality perspective. Sounds like talking in a tin can.

Re:Quality?

[bahwi]

VoIP Quality can be really good, it depends on the compression and the client being used, as well as the server. One thing I found was you have to disable any big bandwidths uses before-hand(bittorrent, downloads, etc).

The ideal situation would be for these programs to receiver an event handler when a call is being placed or received, and pause their downloads automatically.

But sometimes your provider can just be horrible, and then it's time to switch.

Re:Quality?

[nblender]

It's not a 2 second delay.. It's a "I don't know where to send media until I get some from the other side" delay. See: "IETF believes IPv6 is the answer to everything and therefore NAT does not exist so we shall not pay lip service to it in any RFC's."

Re:Quality?

[dsginter]

Are you for real ?

Sure thing.

The real deal is quality-of-service (QoS) in layer 2 (ethernet/atm etc) and layer 3 (IP). When you have QoS in hand and a reasonable bandwith ALL-THE-WAY through then you've got a real VoIP system.

But 99 percent of people will not have the luxury of end-to-end QoS through their home broadband connection (maybe if they get VoIP through their broadband provider but it is doubtful that a Comcast or SBC will send a tech to setup QoS on the router). The only thing that QoS can help with is prioritization inside the gateway (so that little Joe's mp3 download doesn't interrupt Little Jane's VoIP call).

If you actually go out and set up an Asterisk server and get a couple handsets, you'll find that the codec plays the biggest role in quality. Yes - QoS is nice when we can make use of it but, for the most part, modern broadband connections are "good enough" to make some assumptions and cater to the lowest common denominator.

We would be in a much better place if everything could be ideal.

Re:Quality?

[grasshoppa]

I have my own setup here ( asterisk + connect.voicepulse.com ), with a polycom 500IP phone ( sip ), and I use the ulaw codecs.

It's better than a landline, and it's lightyears beyond a cell.

There are a few issues: 1) No 911. I haven't set it up yet. This is specific to my situation, vonage and similar companies have this taken care of 2) I am not entirely dependant on my inet connection.

Re:Quality?

[grasshoppa]

Using an Avaya VOIP system at my office and remote sites (over vpn) i have to say its good to great quality. cant tell that the user is on an IP or a normal digital set.

Side note, off topic: Avaya RAPES people when they want to go VoIP. I got a quote for ~100g for my office setup which prompted me to go with asterisk. At the end of the day, it was 15g, with redudant servers with good hardware. If a server dies, the voip services can be transfered in a few minutes. I'm working right now to learn how to switch them transparently.

Re:Quality?

[swillden]

The real deal is quality-of-service (QoS) in layer 2 (ethernet/atm etc) and layer 3 (IP). When you have QoS in hand and a reasonable bandwith ALL-THE-WAY through then you've got a real VoIP system.

Both the codec and the connection are important. The codec and the bit rate determine define the upper limit on the audio quality. If the codec can't reproduce the audio accurately at the specified bit rate, your call is going to sound lousy even if every packet arrives instantaneously.

On the other hand, if your connection is lousy, either can't deliver the bandwidth required, has high (or highly variable) latency or frequently drops packets, you're going to have other problems.

I use Vonage on a Comcast cable modem, and the quality is generally excellent, unless I'm overloading my cable connection. I use a Linux router configured to do traffic shaping/policing and to give precedence to the VOIP traffic and that *mostly* works, but people I speak with report the occasional garble or dropout when I'm transferring large files.

My boss uses Vonage on a fairly low-bandwidth DSL connection and doesn't have a smart router to prioritize VOIP traffic, although he does put the Motorola VOIP box in front of his Linksys router/WAP, so the Motorola box should be able to do prioritization. In his case, his VOIP service gets really bad when he's sending large e-mails.

Assuming the connection is good, my experience with Vonage is that Vonage-to-land-line calls are excellent and Vonage-to-Vonage calls are astoundingly good. I don't know if I'd say "CD quality", but the audio is far clearer and louder than any phone connection I've used.

I do notice some latency, but I think that's only because I'm paying attention. After scrutinizing my VOIP connections for months, I now notice *massive* latency on my cellphone communications. My cell phone has almost twice the latency of my VOIP phone, but I never noticed it before I got VOIP and started obsessing over it.

BTW, it's fun to call my cell phone from my VOIP phone and hold them next to each other and listen to the "feedback". The large total latency (Almost 250ms, I'd guess) leads to some really interesting "echoey" feedback effects.

Re:Quality?

[Lumpy]

I have broadvoice and it works flawlessly, espically compared to the regular Land Line. I have had a 60hz HUM on my regular Telco line for 6 months, the technicians said "we cant trace it, it must be at the switching station" and left it at that.

i switched to broadvoice (9.95 a month unlimited in state calls can not be beat) am saving over $35.00 a month on comparable land line service and have no cutouts, and everyone thinks I'm shouting so I have turned down the amplification on my cordless from it's MAX setting that was required so people could hear me over the HUM on the old phone line.

your friend, was he using a decent VOIP-> phone hardware device? I have heard of problems with the 802.11 cordless VOIP phones, and the cheaper junk VOIP phones out there.

and if he is using software on a PC, tell him to spend $75.00 and get a real device and quit screwing around.... He will be happier with a sipura spa-2000 (2 line capable, easily UNLOCKABLE so scumbag companies like Vonnage can not disable your property like the linksys crap they push in the stores.)

Re:Quality?

[matth]

Mine is fine.. if he's cutting in and out it's his ISP *NOT* his voip provider.

Re:Quality?

[FireFury03]

He cuts in and out all the time

Is he using Skype by any chance? (Skype has these problems)
Of course, all VoIP services will suffer problems if you have a crappy ISP.

low volume

That's a problem with his (soft)phone or microphone - if he's using a softphone then turn the sound card volume up.

there's constant static

Never had that problem - I use SIP and it's as clear as a bell (even using a low bandwidth codec like GSM).

Re:Quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been using Packet8 (www.packet8.net) for over a year now and it worked so well that I disconnected my SBC phone altogether. It has saved me a ton of money too. I was in Sri Lanka for over 7 months and used it to make free calls to keep in touch with my friends and family here in the USA. Since I had a US number and calling the US/Canada is free, my friends could dial my us number and have it ring in Sri Lanka. I think their VOIP product is great!

Re:Quality?

[leloup]

Hah! I just switched back to Verizon from AT&T's Callvantage service.
Sound quality was great...when you could actually hear something.
On every call,I would get 20secs (yes I timed it and it was always the same) where I could hear the caller but they couldn't hear me.

Then the TA would disconect 5-6 times a day requiring that I call my wife on her cell to go unplug the darn thing and plug it back. She got really tired of doing that.

I ran it on a SpeakEasy (great company, BTW) DSL with 1.5/768 dedicated data line.

Nice as a second line. Wouldn't want to depend on it in an emergency.

Re:Quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

You should give packet8.net a try. When I compared the two services, packet8.net gives vonage a run for the money with no degradation in quality. I susbscribed to both vonage and packet8 for the trial period (2 weeks for vonage and 4 weeks for packet8). I kept packet8 and returned vonage, with packet8.net because its better value with unlimited us/canada calling for $19.99, while similar vonage plan $34.99 (now down to $24.99). Additionally, vonage wants to charge you every little, while packet8 allowed me to change my number just by e-mailing them and free of charge. Vonage also gave me a big hazzle because I was a day late in cancelling the susbcription, but since I bought it from RadioShack, they came to the rescue and helped me cancel the plan by dealing with vonage directly.

Re:Quality?

[grazzy]

Yeah thats right, blame the CUSTOMERS becuse you're selling a product that doesnt work.

Great buisnessplan you've got there. Worked it out yourself?

Re:Quality?

[Sandor at the Zoo]

I've tried Vonage, Lingo and now AT&T CallVantage.

Vonage has good sound quality, a very nice web site for managing your account and phone features, and poor support. However, they were unable to transfer my landline phone number after 8 months, so I started looking around.

Lingo had not-so-great sound quality, never really played with the web site, and the support was pretty nice when I cancelled the account within the 30-day trial period. They seemed all ready to transfer my phone number.

CallVantage so far has the best call quality (as far as I can tell -- I never did any real Vonage vs. CallVantage comparisons), the web site is OK (not nearly as nice as Vonage, but it gets the job done), and I haven't had to contact support. They were able to transfer my landline number in 10 days.

I'm paying $5/month more for AT&T compared to Vonage, but I'm saving $20/month by finally getting rid of my landline, so I'm happy.

When I first set up CallVantage, I had to put the VoIP box outside my firewall, because the CallVantage site has to contact it to start the service. Once it was active, I put it back inside my firewall and haven't had any problems. Vonage's service and the Lingo service set up from the get-go with the box inside my firewall.

Re:Quality?

[SnefruDahshur]

Many enterprises have had major problems with providing VoIP services to their employees because of this very issue. It's not that they don't have the big pipes, they do, but they are filled with all kinds of other stuff. As a result you get latency and jitter problems that make the VoIP unusable. QOS can help however. I imagine that as more people use their DSL for other services that QOS in the home will be needed as well.

Re:Quality?

[Big_Al_B]

Well, empirically, you can expect only about a 10% difference (0.5 points in a scale of 5) in predictive MOS scores between the lowest quality (G.728: ~3.6) and the highest quality (G.711: ~4.1) codecs commonly used for VoIP.

Jitter and delay introduced by intermediate networks has much more potential impact on MOS scores for VoIP calls.

Since Vonage, Packet8, et al. all ride across the public internet, starting with "Joe Bob's Broadband", VoIP packets generally get best effort delivery along with gramma's email.

Re:Quality?

[johnjaydk]

The only thing that QoS can help with is prioritization inside the gateway (so that little Joe's mp3 download doesn't interrupt Little Jane's VoIP call).

I do this sort of thing for our enterprise customers that have lots of locations all connected through our backbone. In order to run telephony through that system system without complaints QoS is no laughing matter. Joe and Jane tend to be CTO and CEO they have very little sense of humour.

And no QoS is not limited by gateways you just (easy to say) have to handle it on layer 3 also.

As to private customers. Show me the money an I'll give a fuck...

Re:Quality?

[elgaard]

> MOS scores between the lowest quality (G.728: ~3.6) and the highest
>quality (G.711: ~4.1) codecs commonly used for VoIP.

But iLBC is better on bad lines.

Re:Quality?

[Beetle B.]

I signed up a few months ago with Broadvox Direct - the price then was $20/mo (now $30/mo).

Initially, voice quality was good - better than cell phone but not as good as a land line.

Now it's a little worse, but still fine.

No noticeable latency. Many features - well worth the money.

The ATA that comes with it has QoS, so if you put it ahead of everything else, you should be fine.

Don't worry about bandwidth issues. At the better quality it uses no more than 90 kilobits/s - which will barely have an effect on anything you may be downloading. I've put it to the test - Web download, bittorrent, etc. No detectable change in sound quality or download speed.

Downtimes have been few and far between. However, keep in mind that VoIP is still in its infancy, and you just won't get the quality customer service that land line companies provide.

The other issue is regarding availability of 911 (frequently not possible on VoIP).

No regrets about the change - got rid of my landline.

Re:Quality?

[rob_squared]

"Their quality is better than that of a traditional landline."

Generally speaking, that's impossible since it uses POTS at some point. Unless you have a really shitty analogue party line. Oh, and its at 8kbps, so its not bad.

Re:Quality?

[rob_squared]

Trust me, its not big emails. Its either spamming or pr0n.

Re:Quality?

[Big_Al_B]

But iLBC is better on bad lines.

Fair enough. I'll be more curious about it, though, when carrier-class equipment supports it.

Re:Quality?

[swillden]

No, it's large e-mails. Sending 20MB PowerPoint files and the like.

Re:Quality?

[Em Adespoton]

I think we're seing two different definitions of QoS here -- the grandparent's being the actual quality of the network; routing times, dropped packets etc. The parent is talking about server QoS -- namely, packet prioritization. This is definitely nowhere near as important as the quality of the network service.

Re:Quality?

[Big_Al_B]

Actually, I think they both were discussing the merits and realities of end-to-end QoS for VoIP. The difference in perspectives is that the great-grandparent is discussing consumer VoIP services running over consumer broadband, where end-to-end QoS is a remote possibility at best, while the grandparent is discussing a QoS-enabled and geographically diverse enterprise network running VoIP.

Either way, IP QoS is not usually defined in the various terms you used. IP QoS commonly refers packet delivery delay times, jitter (i.e. differences in delivery delay for packets in a single flow), L3 packet-marking (IP Precedence, Diffserv), L2 and MPLS packet/frame-marking (802.1Pq Ethernet CoS, MPLS EXP), and egress-queuing (priority queues, class-based weighted fair queues, etc.)

While call-control servers, IP phones, PSTN gateways, etc. can mark packets with IPP or Diffserv, it's the routers and switches (e.g. the network) that prioritize packets by queuing and processing them based on their markings.

They also provide for mapping IP-layer packet-marking into 802.1Pq and MPLS marking when the originating equipment doesn't support those protocols. Finally, routers and switches may use traffic identification methods (source IP, destination IP, source port, destination port etc.) to mark or re-mark certain packets, if required.

Another Day...

[Colourspace]

Another story about what Google *might* be looking to do... Anything else new going on in the world of tech?

Re:Another Day...

[Cyberax]

Maybe we should start stories about what Google might NOT be looking to do?

Re:Another Day...

[BohKnower]

Is Solar System's Colonization Google's Next Frontier?

Re:Another Day...

[memoriesofgreen]

http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/03/google_guns.htm lHere one, for example

Re:Another Day...

[wild_berry]

I wasn't even sure that the article even said that much. Google refused to comment for the article (perhaps because it's irrelevant, perhaps because they're looking for something), and the article says that they pumped people for opinions.

"Nothing to see hear..."

Re:Another Day...

[rob_squared]

"Maybe we should start stories about what Google might NOT be looking to do?" #1: A search engine.

And for my next trick...

[DisprinDirect]

I'm feeling lucky, connect me to a random phone number...

Re:And for my next trick...

[zalas]

Now that you mention it, if Google brings VoIP, would they somehow tie searching into it? It would be nice to say Google for the nearest Italian restaurant and then click a link to have Google dial it for you.

Re:And for my next trick...

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh. Exactly how would you plan to do this? Your phone is the phone. The computer isn't the phone. The computer doesn't even have anything to do with VoIP. Your phone plugs into an adapter which plugs into your router. At no point does your computer become involved.

Re:And for my next trick...

[ticktockticktock]

If you've ever used AT&T CallVantage, you can use your computer to dial numbers on your VoIP adapter (no matter which of the 3 adapters you use from AT&T) right from their web site. Choosing a number and dialing from their web site rings your phone that is connected to the adapter, then when you pick up, it then rings the number you wanted to dial. So the parent poster's idea of tying that feature with dialing numbers that are in the results of searches isn't that far fetched.

Re:And for my next trick...

[sysadmn]

That's only until the SEO/Scammers get wind of it. Then it's "I wanna get lucky. Connect me to a random 1-900 number."

Re:And for my next trick...

[Anonymous Coward]

AdSense + VoIP = conversation-interrupting-relavent-voice ads

Re:And for my next trick...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is also possible using Vonage.

Of course?

[corporatemutantninja]

You mean "of course" only in the sense that Slashdotters will all ask about Asterisk, right? Not that any consumers, business people, analysts, or journalists will ask that question....

Re:Of course?

[John_Renne]

I'm not sure wether business people, analysts of journalists will ignore asterisk. I worked at a bank for a couple of years and just as I left I hearded they were considering asterisk for their callcentre.

Re:Of course?

[M.C. Hampster]

Heck, even the majority of Slashdotters might not care either.

I love it when someone makes a comment like that in their submission. As if the question that is on their mind is "of course" what everyone else is thinking.

Re:Of course?

[FireFury03]

Heck, even the majority of Slashdotters might not care either.

I don't think anyone will care whether they're using Asterisk or not so long as they support the standard protocols (i.e. don't become another Skype). Bothing about what they run internally would be like saying "I don't use the Google search engine because it doesn't run on Apache" - Google speaks HTTP so who cares what's running on the back end?

In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Google looking into supplying guns

Is Google Looking Into OSTG?

[datastalker]

After all, it would be a prime target for a geek company... and it would explain all these Google stories!

Re:Is Google Looking Into OSTG?

[coder.keitaro]

OH NO!

Not Slashoogle !

Another Google rumour?

[CleverNickedName]

Any sign that they may be developing Duke Nuke 'em Forever?

AOL is getting into the VoIP market too

[andy1307]

AOL: You've got VoIP

How about improving...

[should_be_linear]

Googe Search engine? Here in Czech Rep. user base of Google dropped to 10-20% because local engine jyxo.cz wipes floor with google. And they will expand to other (so far central) european countries too.

Re:How about improving...

[gclef]

You sure? I think it's just that google has too many vowels for your standard Czech to feel comfortable with.

Re:How about improving...

[Anonymous Coward]

Listen, Google is an e-mail provider, a map server, and a USENET indexer. They can't be bothered to provide Web search too.

Re:How about improving...

[hey]

What makes jyxo.cz so good?

Hype?

[offensiveweapon]

Don't get me wrong, I love Google. I think they're a great company that clearly has a lot of success ahead of them. However, it just seems like there's a lot of hype and speculation about them just because they're Google. There's all this buzz everytime Google seems to be moving in a new direction. But isn't it possible they're just doing what any up and coming company would do by exploring their options for growth and diversification into new areas? Put it this way: company X could be doing the same thing, but there are no news stories about them...

Re:Hype?

[m50d]

Yes, it's exactly like that. However, would you *want* to read about another company doing it?

Re:Hype?

[Sebastian Jansson]

I think it is because google has such a good track record. When google does something you know that it wont have spyeare for one. Just think of VoIP application with the ease and functionality compared to Picasa, for free*. That is more encouraging than when the former owner of Kazaa release their software**.

*They can get their money from internet-to-phone calls.
*Wich actually have proven to be better than you'd think no spyware there, so don't hesistate to try/use Skype.

Re:Hype?

[BB101]

I think the hype is justified, I've seen Google, Google suggest, GMail, Google Maps, Local Google and have been blown away by all of them.

By the by, im a professional web developer, google hold the bar for me.

How does it work?

[Anonymous Coward]

How does VOIP work, once the signal has reached the necessary switch, how does this then get piped through to the relevant phone line without the (say international) phone company kicking up a stink as it is not receiving the appropriate international fee.

Re:How does it work?

[Big_Al_B]

One of the many price hooks of VoIP is that the calls are cheaper because they circumvent these fees. The PSTN switch that gateways the SIP/RTP or H.323/RTP into SS7/TDM is considered the originating switch.

In some cases, the call may translate several times between IP and PSTN worlds. Any PSTN origination or terminating fee tarriffs apply to the PSTN legs only, so international call billing may occur at several legs, and be billed each leg as a local, LD or a "cheaper" international call based on which carriers originate and terminate the various legs.

Regardless, the terminating PSTN carrier will see some termination fee based on the incoming trunk type.

Re:How does it work?

[Tony Hoyle]

Depends where you live... in the UK VOIP rates are much higher than PSTN rates.

I needed a US number for support calls, and it worked out *much* cheaper to get a broadvoice account in the US (and take the latency hit) - $5.95 a month - than use any of the UK providers.

Re:How does it work?

[spyroux]

This is the current problem of VoIP.

If you want a something working you need :

* a gateway from PSTN/POTS to VoIP in _your_ country. This is very difficult to found (in Belgium). Without this gateway, nobody from an other network could get in contact with you.

OR

* an other standard system.
For example, a new country code, available for local price from every where. You have a problem because on Internet, dial somebody in USA or in EU is the same and not on the current PSTN/POTS network.
If google could make something here, It could be great.

What's the big deal with google and VOIP

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone can do VOIP once the billing system is in place. The rest is cake. In fact, if anyone is interested in CLEC franchises in SEUSA or CA (so you can install your GW to PSTN) or just wants blocks of phone numbers, they are readily available and cheap.
Heck, a semi literate monkey can get into the VOIP biz.

Re:What's the big deal with google and VOIP

[Anonymous Coward]

Oo oo oo? Ah ah ah. Ee ee ee?

Translation (Monkese to English): Is that so? I'm semi-literate. How do I start?

It would be interesting....

[nbharatvarma]

...to see where Google is headed. VOIP would be something drastically different from what it has been doing till now.

I don't think Google is going to develop its own implementation of SIP / H.323 or something like that. It would probably use available ones like Asterix so that it immediately strikes a good note with people. Also, in case microsoft decides to go ahead and do something in VOIP just because Google is doing it (for competition sake) it will definitely not use Asterix will it :)

Unless Google provides something new other than the existing services which are already provided by companies like Skype, it is just like using its 'monopoly' to an advantage.

Of course, this is all speculation depending on whether Google is really interested in VOIP.

Re:It would be interesting....

[Drencrom]

It is spelled Asterisk not Asterix

Slashdot

[imipak]

Perhaps Google are trying to corner the market in pointless "Maybe Company X is going to launch Product Y!" speculation stories on Slashdot. Tough market, if so.

Slashdot should change its slogan

[mshiltonj]

"Slashdot: News for nerds about Google. Stuff that matters about Google. Rumors about what Google might do next. Google, Google. Google."

Re:Slashdot should change its slogan

[nacturation]

Personally, I think Google could use a little more cowbell.

VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Total_Wimp]

I use my cell phone for everything. I get "free" use of long distance all the time and "free" minutes on nights and weekends which means I can stay on the phone for hours without needing to tie up my network connection.

People who operate like me are growing and land-line use is shrinking. We don't care about long distance charges. VOIP is a niche and will always be a niche and Google suddenly "getting into it" will mean nothing more than a modest new revenue stream until VOIP moves from mostly irrelevant to totally irrelevant.

Sorry, I just calls 'em as I sees 'em.

TW

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Skye16]

Yeah, I guess you're right. I mean, why would anyone pay 25$ for unlimited useage at any time in the US and Canada when they can pay 60$ a month for 500 or 600 minutes daytime and free nights and weekends?

I use my cell phone for emergencies or when I'm in the car; smallest plan I can get. When i'm out doing something, I'm out doing something, not talking on the #%*!ing phone. And I'll be damned if I wait until 9pm just to hold a relatively decent conversation with someone.

I know there are a lot of people out there like me. I disagree with your "niche" assessment; it will never take over the whole market, no, but it will have more than 1 or 2% of the market share.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[rindeee]

I couldn't disagree any more strongly. I have a wife and kids at home. There is a great deal of phone use during "peak" hours when using a cell phone would cause one to go broke. I already use an enormous number of minutes on my cell for work, and have no desire to use more than I do. For $25 a month, I, my wife and kids can talk all they want, when they want to whomever they want. That makes working phone costs into the family budget a WHOLE lot easier. Cell phones are great, and they fill an important gap, but they do not (in most demographics) compete with landline.

ER

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Anonymous Coward]

you must be blind, because you can't see worth shit.


bet you didn't call this!

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Total_Wimp]

Cell phones are great, and they fill an important gap, but they do not (in most demographics) compete with landline.

For now. But this article speaks of the future. A whole generation of college students is now seeing the landline as mostly irrelevant. They'll continue to see it that way as they enter the workforce, have kids, and buy those kids their own cell phones.

Landlines, as you point out, are not irrelevant _now_. But their the trend is definately moving in that direction.

Put another way, would you have invested much money in a buggy whip company if you could go back in time to 1900? Or typwriters if you stepped in the time machine to 1980? Or consumer landlines if you stepped in the time machine to.. well, no need to step. You'd take your short term profit, not invest for the long haul.

TW

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Total_Wimp]

Sorry better story.

TW

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, a whole generation of college kids loves cell phones.

And a whole generation of college kids is going to have a huge wake-up call when they have to pay the friggin bill themselves!

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[gl4ss]

*I use my cell phone for emergencies or when I'm in the car; smallest plan I can get. When i'm out doing something, I'm out doing something, not talking on the #%*!ing phone. And I'll be damned if I wait until 9pm just to hold a relatively decent conversation with someone.*

and i'll be damned if i have to wait untill i get home to have that phone call.

(with my usage anyways the bills have never been an issue here in finland..)

voip is still very landline-like experience. and the truth is that very few people(that are under 40) get landlines anymore here in finland when they move to a new apartment. pretty simple reasons too.. landline per minute prices are not attractive when calling to cellphones and 99% of your personal calls would be to cellphones(if i get a call from my grandpa.. it's from a cell. if i call my aunt it's to her cell, if i call any of my friends it HAS to be to cell because they simple as that don't have landlines - and if they're home and i'm home i could just as well skype).

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Skye16]

I guess that fits your lifestyle. Me, when I'm out and about and need to make a phone call, it's more along the lines of "where are you?", "where am I?", "do we need milk?", "how much beer should I get?", "I'm on fire, what do I do?", etc, etc. It's a 1 minute conversation, tops. When I want to have an actual conversation, well, I want to be home to do it. I know I'm not the only one.

Like I said before, I'm sure that VoIP isn't going to be a "niche", but I'm also sure it's not going to take over from cell phone useage. For some people, it just makes sense to have a cell phone. For others, it isn't monetarily practical (and, frankly, those little phones suck when you try to hold them against your shoulder and talk). I'm pretty confident they'll both hold very healthy shares of the market in the long run, provided the telcos (or cablecos) don't slap them down in some manner.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[bahwi]

Actually, they have some great rates such as $15 or $20 a month for VoIP, but my cel is $130/mo.

Damn, I got unlimited GPRS, we need a VoIP client for Symbian. Then my life'd be free. =)

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Spoing]

1. Landlines, as you point out, are not irrelevant _now_. But their the trend is definately moving in that direction.

Just like traditional cell phones are moving toward extinction. Seriously. If you have an IP phone and an open connection, why bother with paying monthly fees?

The only other thing that needs to be dropped is the concept of a 'phone number' that you have to rent from a telcom company so people can find you. DNS routes, so why not use that? IP:spoing.jones@myserver.home.voip

Unfortunately, it will take 10-20 years; 10 for practical tech to catch up and to be widely used, +10 more for bad habits to be dropped.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[interiot]

Okay, look.... heavily networked cell phones are DEFINITELY IN OUR FUTURE. VoIP will be one benefit, but there are many others, and this is NOT a niche thing.

Back in the 80's, when PCs went from being separate little boxes to being part of the global network, we found all sorts of new uses for computers. Computers became an order of magnitude more useful.

When cell phones have really responsive, always-on data network connections, there will similarly be a profusion of new ways to use your cell phone. At that point, you're essentially carrying a miniature extension of the internet in your pocket, which allows the internet to reach out and touch even more things in your life. Yes, geeks will take this way too far, but there are extremely practical things that NTT DoCoMo are considering, for instance. Examples are point-of-sale interactions (e-cash, mediated by your own personal connetion to the network, allowing additional possibilities), barcode scanning (barcodes are everywhere... allowing you to search for reviews on a product, or easily create a shopping list, etc), physical entry authentication (eg. at work). Yes, some of these require some small amount of additional hardware, but the fact that DoCoMo is considering these now, means that there's a good chance that some of this additional local-internet-interaction hardware WILL be added by many cell phone manufacturers in the future.

In the far-off future, we WILL have little star-trek devices that have very fast and snapppy GPS readers, fast network data connections, etc. They'll be like current desktops, miniaturized to fit in our pockets. The cell phones that will be available in a few years will be intermediate devices that start the process of removing all limitations of our current cell phones, allowing people to implement many of the applications that they wish they could now.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[NeoSkandranon]

I doubt i'm the only one in the college generation that realizes free long distance (to home or whereever) can easily compensate for whatever price difference there might be between a landline and a cell plan. Not to mention whatever other extra functionality you get from your cell (SMS, web, portability, whatever)

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[drinkypoo]

I mean, why would anyone pay 25$ for unlimited useage at any time in the US and Canada when they can pay 60$ a month for 500 or 600 minutes daytime and free nights and weekends?

Uh, they wouldn't. They'd pay to get portable access. They'd pay to have one phone number that works all over the country, and to be able to make and receive phone calls at any time.

When I'm out doing something, I typically find it extremely useful to have a cellphone. Sooner or later everyone will have a mobile phone and be completely used to having communications at all times.

Just because you have VoIP and mobile doesn't mean everyone does. It also doesn't mean it's the right solution for everyone.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[drinkypoo]

VoIP will probably push cellular companies toward a model that does not involve using a cellphone during the day driving people into the poorhouse. It still only takes so much bandwidth to make a cellphone call, so as new networks that have more bandwidth available are implemented, the cost of providing a phone call goes down and they will be trying to sell people other services like streaming audio and video. Those customers who pay for that stuff will subsidise phone use for the others.

Cell phones directly compete with landlines all over the place. While I have spotty coverage even at home (though it's better with my new phone than my old one) my SBC line regularly had problems that rendered it unusable for any purpose, including emergency. I almost never have "No Service", it's usually "Emergency Only". So at the very least I can always call 9-1-1. Even my land line didn't provide that.

VoIP is not any kind of solution for me either, because comcast is incompetent and I regularly lose my connection for no apparent reason and have to reset my modem. It might be fine for a month, and then I have to reset it three times in one day, and no it's not a hot day or anything like that.

As mobile phones become even more ubiquitous, the coverage will continue to improve. You can still get mobile phone coverage in vastly more places than you can get broadband internet, making it a more serious competitor to POTS than VoIP, at least for the immediate future.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[The-Bus]

The trend is not moving in the direction of having only cell phones. The trend is moving into being easier to contact, having your own number, and not paying extra for long distance.

In any large enough WiFi area (say, the proposal in Philadelphia), VOIP becomes cellular. Cellular still has problems of dropped calls, bad signals, bad quality, high expense, and many other things. If you live anywhere outside of the Eastern corridor or major metropolitan areas you find out that no service is 100% reliable nationwide.

If I was in college now, I would see more value from a $25 VOIP box than from a $50 cellphone. Or I might not.

The answer is going to be the company that puts both of those together into one product, hardware and software wise. When you're home, you talk on your wireless phone over VOIP. In the middle of a call you realize you have to pick up some milk and drive away. You begin to be out of range for VOIP, cellular kicks in. On the way back to the store, you get another call on the same phone. Cellular minutes start counting. Once you park, VOIP is in range and kicks in.

A very similar system to this already existed in Germany five years ago. Don't ask me why it's not been in the U.S. since then.

Remember, it's not about VOIP vs. Telephone. It's just plain communications. Smart companies will build based on that, not specific technologies.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[harryk]

Look at your cost of the cell phone by comparison to the cost of the Vonage unlimited plan. I too use a cell phone, but am able to keep it at a rather small plan, because I don't have to use it for my long distance calls. Moreover, because I'm able to use either, my wife and I both can be on calls to long-distance relatives (this happens more than you might imagine).

Land lines are not a thing of the past, and while I agree that mobile communications are the wave of the future, I think that your statement that VOIP is a niche is WAY off.

VoIP is a type of service, currently used to replace the local carrier for the landline service. As wireless mesh networks begin to emerge (and some are) I think you will start to see more companies comming out with VoIP enabled cordless phones.

Within the next year (this year if your eager) I believe you will be able to find a part cellular (generic term) and part VoIP phone that will be able to use either service, based on whats available. Eventually I think its the mobile service providers that will really rake in the profits for VoIP as they can build large wireless networks.

If you don't believe me, take a look at Nextel. Wanna know why the service is ONLY digital, thats right, becuase its an early implementation of VoIP. The phone is programmed with a 10.x IP address and all communications are transmitted digitally accross its network.

Its only a matter of time before other providers offer a similar technology.

harryk
my 2 cents

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Anonymous Coward]

You are forgetting a whole segment of the population that has ties to the rest of the world. A lot of the US population consists to people who immigrated from other countries and have family there. There is a huge global telecom industry that sucks these people dry. For instance, I am an immigrant from Sri Lanka, and using MCI, AT&T or SBC, a 1 minute call to Sri Lanka costs $1.05. What a rip off! A calling card can help you bring your costs much lower, typically around 20c a minute, but you'd have to dial an 800 number and then dial your phone number that you need to connect to. Calling card providers also have many tricks up their sleeve, such as 2 or 3 minute rounding, service fees, connection charges, etc... anything squeeze the user for a few more pennies. Usually, making a call using a calling card is very inconvinient... often having try several times, every time dialing the 1-800 number, inputting your pin and then the number you want to call.

I switched to a VOIP provider (www.packet9.net)for this reason... my girl friend was in Sri Lanka and I didnt want to pay $1.05/min to the phone company or go thru the inconvinience of having to use the calling cards. Using Packet8, the calls were 20c a minute with 1 second rounding and no worries about busy lines, connection charges or what ever. To make things even better Packet8 had a plan where you can buy the equipment for $75 a DTA and call as long as you want between these DTAs for free. So, I got my self the regular US/Canada unlimted calling for $20 a moth plan, and also bought a DAT for $75 a month. I sent the $75 DTA to my gf in Sri Lanka and kept my $20 a month plan to use as my regular line... all of a sudden I can make free calls to my gf in Sri Lanka for as long as I want! well, for the cost of ADSL there (about $20) I dont know if Packet8 still has the plan where you buy the equipment for $75 plan, but I saved so much money and called my gf far more often before we got married in July last year.

Another point to consider about VOIP is this... you might not care about VOIP, but a lot of the calls, even those that you dial with a calling card goes thru VOIP these days. Even the big greedy phone companies are starting to use VOIP behind you, without you not even knowing it... do you really want to pay the same price when they route your call over IP and pocket the difference?

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[NardofDoom]

Unless, of course, you live somewhere with chronically crappy cell phone reception.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Total_Wimp]

More accurately I might have said, "consumer VOIP over their wired home internet connection is a niche market." VOIP most definately is the wave of the future as far as, "all voice traffic will go over IP" is concerned. But as a low-cost alternative to a proffesional carrier's service, it will all but disapear.

Why? Because the proffesional carrier is going to promise you the service no matter where you are, poor service notwithstanding. The proffesional carrier called Nextel obviously understands VOIP, but they don't sell VOIP. They sell cell service. The consumer that buys Nextel service doesn't bring his own internet service and doesn't care that he's talking on VOIP. All he cares about is that he can recieve or place a call wherever he happens to be standing. And he happens to be paying about as much as any other carriers cell service.

Now, it's very possible that a plain-old networking company, not affiliated with a traditional "phone" company can put up a nice mesh data network that works in major cities and that consumers will then use special VOIP handsets to place and recieve calls to/from any phone number all at a flat data fee. That would be VOIP in the truest sense and people will eat it up. But what will you really have at that point? It'll be Nextel with flat pricing. Think about it.

In that sense, you and I will both be right. You'll be right that we're using VOIP and I'll be right that we're using cell service. But big VOIP companies like Vonage will be nowhere near the picture. Their niche marke will have dried up in favor of the service the carrier offers.

I hear one more question coming on. Why wouldn't companies like Vonage just make use of the prevailing wireless data network? Won't they still be important so you can use ANY data network. In a word: No. Why? Because it's F-ing expensive to build a reliable, ubiquitous wireless data network. These networks WILL charge for their services. You, as a consumer, will not want to get multiple service contracts from multiple data vendors, just like you strive to avoid that kind of thing now with your broadband and cell services. Since you'll be using a single vendor, they'll maximise their profits by selling you not just the data service, but the VOIP service that goes with it, just like curren't cell carriers sell you data to go with your voice. That will end up cutting Vonage completely out of the loop, much like AOL finds it extremely hard to get their service bundled with most broadband providers today.

In the end, you'll end up with a wireless service that will resemble our current cell services in almost every way except they'll be faster and they'll likely have a different pricing model.

TW

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[rob_squared]

Whoa, you want to call anyone at ANY TIME, but you have to be at a computer w/fast internet to do so? So do you spend your whole day at home? Some people actually like going into the big bright room with the green and black flooring.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Skye16]

Yes, and some people, when they go to that big bright blue room with green and black flooring don't want to be on the phone when we do it. When I'm out and about, I refuse to be on the phone. if it's necessary, that's one thing, but generally speaking, if I'm going to have a long conversation, I'm going to be in the comfort of my home.

Re:VOIP is as the future... just like dial-up

[Kilamanjaro]

I pretty much agree, but I don't think the view of cell phones is being taken far enough fast enough. For one, 'cell phones' are going to be around for a long time if by 'cell phone' we mean a wireless device to communicate with. Pretty much everything else about them is going to change.

For instance the latest mid- and high-range Sony Ericcson and Nokia 'cell phones' are fully on the way to being true convergence devices [wirelesss communicator, PDA, megapixel camera, MP3 player etc. where, for example, "etc" already means (this time from Motorola) 'cell phones' with useful walkie-talkie functions].

As more 'cell phones' also support, first Wi-Fi; then WiMAX, followed by UWB [ultra wideband], and beyond, AS WELL AS VOIP, then what we may still be calling a 'cell phone', even in a short while, is going to pack one heck of a wallop. This changing technology package is going to translate (like the article referenced on changing University use discusses) into significant behavioural changes, and subtle but perhaps long reaching architectural ones (In the UK the public phone box is moving in the direction of the Dodo).

In the meantime, the present 'cell phone' operators are going to have to do even more rapidly what the airlines (surviving) did in the mid to late 20th century - which was to redefine their core business from 'flying aircraft and carrying people' to 'travel'. It sounds simple, but it's part of the reason today that, on some days (and quite regularly), I can fly more cheaply from London to San Francisco AND back, than one way from Detroit to L.A. Equally, the commuications equivalent may well involve a similarly radical change from a focus on the technology and infrastructure of communications, to providing the kinds of communication services we really want any-which-way.

I suspect this is going to mean for one, VOIP 'cell phones' will become a reality with a twist, where that VOIP 'cell phone' may well be a wireless-talking PDA/convergence device that ALSO supports other communications protocols (:-) - like todays 'cell'-ular technology (CDMA, GSM). With the airlines in mind, it'll take more than a tweak to the present communications business model.

Differently, in Europe, for example, albeit at different rates in different countries, 'cell phone' contract customers are dying in droves as the ease and convenience of pay-as-you-go phones explodes in use. So much so, that ALL of the operators now provide these contract-less services. Indeed, some of the most popular new cell phone operators [e.g. Virgin Mobile - in the UK, and spreading] are network-less operators [i.e. they lease capacity on someone else's network]. So the 'cell phone' evolution increasingly extends to market use business models as well.

First, in Europe, with the advent of 3G services (finally!), a 'cell phone' with a megapixel camera and broadband bandwidth can 'effectively' (hmmm) function as a micro television camera AND as a television screen [CNN is already doing "free" video downloads" on Vodafone]! This means you've got the beginnings of a portable video studio in your hand [now mate that with a 60GB iPod].

In the long run, IMHO, the range of technical and business alternatives will coalesce into strange new forms around the core notions of: "can I get a signal (not how or what kind)?"; "what kind of service does the darn thing provide (not how)?"; and can I have "this" wrapped up in a truly personal and mobile package (service personalization, number portability and payment options, for example).

The only things I'm sure of are that: the signal is going to get faster and quieter (UWB for example promises power levels one thousandth of present handsets), that you're going to be able to get that signal practically anywhere on the face of the planet without having to 'call home'; that your handset will provide functions like a PlayStation 3 (to come) on steroids, and that you'll still call the darn thing a 'cell phone'!

Speculation

[mr_tommy]

Speculation on Google's intentions is almost as pointless as it is trying to guess when you'll die. The problem with basing stories on things like this (Google meeting with industry players) is that they could be doing so many other things; The Times run a similarly factually weak story early this year about how the company had plans to launch a VoIP service imminently. They based it of a story that Slashdot covered a month prior about how the company was buying dark fibre; now yes- it could be used for VoIP, but could be used for thousands of other things.

My point : Google != Microsoft. They haven't got a history of "leaking" stuff prior to product launch, and I doubt they'd do it this time.

Biting the hand that feeds you

[Anonymous Coward]

"Slashdot: News for nerds about Google. Stuff that matters about Google. Rumors about what Google might do next. Google, Google. Google."

writes mshiltonj AT gmail DOT com.

Google in the phone business ?

[jpiggot]

Great.

Now it'll take four to eight weeks for my phone number to appear in the directory.

The truth about Google

[91degrees]

Many people believe that Goooogle is an honest and righteous company. I was researching the company as part of my employer's ethical business policy, and I was surprised about what I found.

At first I was impressed by Google's "Do No Evil" policy. This was until I doscovered that it wasn't a policy. It was a reminder. The board of directors are inherently evil and need to repeat the mantra to stop them from committing great sins.

First of all, Google trawls thorough the internet, copying everything it takes into its local cache. This is potentially copyright infringement, and theft of bandwidth. This is opt-out. Not opt-in. They also have no policy regarding long term storage of user's data.

But these are just surface problems. I did some further digging and was frightened by what I found. Google gained its success amde froma pact with the devil in 1999. Since it is a satanic product, mere use of google puts your soul in jeapordy. A google search for ""Satan" will give "The church of satan" and not one of the much more popular sites warning againt evil The CEO of Google eats children. Once a week, he orders that a child is taken from his dungeon, and slaughtered, then roast for 3 hours. After this, it is served to the CEO and guests. Those who do not join him are executed. Those who do are damned.

So I warn you. Stop using google. If not for your own soul, for the children.

Re:The truth about Google

[91degrees]

I'm sick of /.'ers on their endless rampage against Satan, like they don't all run windows like everyone else.

Interestingly, the Church of Satan website was produced on a mac. Shoudl I throw Apple into the axis of evil with Google?

Re:The truth about Google

[Anonymous Coward]

"Do No Evil" easilty transposes to "o No DEvil".

See how the capitals are growing word by word?

Well google's capital is growing that way too.

Coincidence? hmmmm. You must be new here.

Google IS SATAN

Ok now back sorting my brimstones.

Re:The truth about Google

[WindBourne]

They can recognize good.
Satan likes to pervet all that is good.
He will try to hide what he does.

Just once.

[jwcorder]

I would love to come to slashdot just one day out of the week and not see an article about what google MIGHT be doing or COULD be doing tomorrow. This is not news. Let me know when they ACTUALLY do something. And then only when it's something cool.

They got the technology

[LupeSpywalper]

Maybe Google have found a way to search phone conversations. Maybe even in real time. So I can find an interesting conversation going on and just drop in.
And of course they will tie it to their map service. And no more dialling wrong numbers with their "did you mean" functionality. And maybe they could do a javascript "suggest topic" for those dull conversations ?

... targeted voice ads...

[BewireNomali]

... they'll archive all of your convos so they can intelligently search them, etc... you see where I'm going.

Isn't anyone worried that Google, in its clear aim to be all things to all people (ad supported, no less!) is now a burgeoning evil-empire threat (OS/Hardware independent). *shrugs*

These days I can tell the subject of my gmail emails by looking at the ads before I even read it. That was enough to send me scrambling for a rediffmail account.

Re:... targeted voice ads...

[m50d]

It's not a question of threat, they are an evil empire *right now*. So far they've been doing only minorly evil things, and slashdot has ignored them. But they are now obliged to put profits before all else, and make no mistake, they will.

Hotsheet.

[hot_Karls_bad_cavern]

::ring::ring::
-------------
"Dick."
"Bush. Say listen, we got uh ... thingy goin' on over here with them googuhl folk."
"wtf?"
"Naw, sersly, they got some new Very onerous Intercontinental Puhbombs."
"P bombs ... what?"
"Yeah, yeah and that's them folks that help those, uh, whatchacall'em ... poor people find all that informations on how blowed'in' things up and steal musics. Listen, can i get 'em?"
*sigh* "I'll get my coat. See you in a few."

Google Acquires Gun Company...

[sounddesignz]

...Just to Screw with People's Heads http://www.bbspot.com/News/2005/03/google_guns.htm l

"Search Inside"

[BenBenBen]

Heh, imagine being able to Google every phone call ever. Kind of an open source society.

Re:"Search Inside"

[Anonymous Coward]

PLEASE! Just as long as I never have to hear of another vaporware product from Google again. We wouldn't have to worry about how they "have the intention" to move into something new.

Are Mousepads in Google's future?

[Dan East]

Apparently, Google may begin manufacturing Mouse pads. According to an anonymous source, Google submitted an order for 150 pads. "Why would Google require so many mouse pads at once? Obviously they wish to study and analyze these pads so they can begin manufacturing themselves".

Another source said that some Google employees have had medical X-Rays as part of their health care screening. No word yet on when Google will begin manufacturing their own X-Ray equipment, but giving the combination of ivy-league graduates, the company-sponsored free-time employees are allowed, and the fact that they run a successful search engine, it is obviously only a matter of time. Look out General Electric!

Dan East

Makes Sense to Me

[Rollsbot]

It makes perfect sense to me. Everyone keeps saying that VoIP will be the end of the traditional phone system. So, what's everyone waiting on? Probably, a big company like Google get behind it and ensure that it's reliable, easy to use, and accessible.

What's more, imagine how valuable a Google ad would be if that ad resulted not only in a visit to your website but also a call to your business. Advertising has always been about getting calls; this makes it that much easier.

Re:Makes Sense to Me

[Slightly Askew]

So, what's everyone waiting on? Probably, a big company like Google get behind it and ensure that it's reliable, easy to use, and accessible.

No, we're waiting on broadband availability and reliability like most of the other top industrialized nations enjoy. I anticipate huge response if/when BPL becomes more prevalent, as this is the best solution for a large land mass like the USA.

we are google, you will be assimilated...

[kloidster]

Google is to the information-age as Microsoft is to the computer-age.

As the web grows, their (or anybody else's) index will take longer to update, introducing a lag as to the relevancy of their links. They must know this as they are apparantly moving into new areas to grow their revenue. I wonder if they will be as profitable in things other than pay-per-click advertising...this move into VOIP seems like a move out of desperation.

[As far as those who contend the Microsoft analogy, then I would have to argue that google-bombing is perhaps the equivalent to an information virus. Sure it doesn't crash your system like a normal virus on an OS does, but it does crash the relevancy of their index.]

Come on

[mattmentecky]

It seems safe and trendy to speculate on anything Google is doing in the future.
A fanboy craze has swept Slashdot and it is safe to say that every interation that Google does or says or might do or might say, or hasn't done yet etc. gets reported like it is breaking news.

This isn't flamebait, it is just perspective people. Google made a great nifty little search engine, got boatloads of cash with their IPO, and now they are looking to spend and increase market share in...well, just about everything...

Here is my speculation of Google's future: they will have their hand in every project that they can, and if that isn't true, the speculation that they might will be reported regardless.

VoIP is a bitch to get right

[Anonymous Coward]

And almost no one has done it yet.

Annoys me how so many executives are pushing VoIP without any proper engineering.

Bah!

Google shouldn't follow Microsoft's approach...

[Anita Coney]

... and jump on every trend that comes and goes. It should stick with its core business: Helping people find porn.

Suggestion: New Slashdot Section.

[Chatmag]

Create a section for Google related articles.

Use "The Brain" from "Pinky and the Brain" for the icon.

Re:Suggestion: New Slashdot Section.

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, Larry, what are we gonna do tonight?

The same thing we do every night, Sergey. Try to take over the world!

Another Beta?

[lbmouse]

Why don't they just focus on getting the shit-load of other projects they have in Beta out to production?

Log phone calls

[skynetos]

Yeah and next thing you know GOOGLE is Logging your phone calls, recording your phone calls etc...

Indexing your address book...

Google's track record and current practices do NOT make me feel comfortable using them as my phone carrier.

Nick D

In related news...

[A.K.A_Magnet]

Google launches Google Monitor !

Google Executives introduced today the latest of Google services, based on Google VoIP.

Google Monitor will record every VoIP conversation Google and its partners route, and will allow you to search for vocal patterns to match a particular conversation you had you would like to listen again.

Sadly, the day turned awkward when it was reported on Slashdot, the (in)famous technologist blog, that searching for "Google and dominance of the world, we 0wn j00 n00b haha and BillG sux dickz" (sic!) in the Google Monitor Search Engine and clicking the "I'm lucking" button directed to a private conversation Larry Page and Sergey Brin had about this very service.

"We were simply high, man", declared the Google founders when we asked them for further explanations.

Well, it definitely explains many moves the company from Montain View had these last few years.



(I don't endorse this comment, I'm testing a beta quantum computer at my local university and it seems the Quantum Leap put some text from the future in my paste buffer ;) Or it seems I share something with the Larry/Sergey from the future :p)

Google is beta than u

[ThomS]

"Of course, the question is whether they will support such items as Asterisk and FreeWorld or will they simply buy another company and tinker from that end." My spidey sense tells me some beta services are approaching.

Google's REAL next frontier

[ca1v1n]

Google Pony (beta):

By combining advanced cloning, genetic engineering and nanotechnology, Google will provide a pony, free, to every boy or girl in the world that wants one. The ponies are photosynthetic, so they require no food, and they are infused with nanobots that recycle their own waste, so there's really no reason your parents can't let you have one.

Re:Google's REAL next frontier

[NeoSkandranon]

No you can't have a pony timmy! We don't have any windows that get enough sunlight to keep one healthy

Sipgate

[Hank Chinaski]

I'm using the VoIP provider Sipgate for 2 month now almost exclusively for all non-mobile fone calls. It works like a charm and is dirt cheap. With the fritz!box fon i can even use my old analog fon which really is very comfortable. It's so simple that even my mother in law uses VoIP in her home. I'm urging every i know to switch to VoIP.

Links:
Fritz!Box Fon
Sipgate

Core competency

[blackhedd]

What does Google do better than anyone else in the world? They can efficiently make observations and draw inferences across all of the world's electronic information. It's by far the biggest in-cache working set ever.

So how can you apply their unique knowledge to produce a VoIP service that is qualitatively better than can be offered by anyone else in the world? If there is no concrete answer to that question, then they shouldn't offer the service- it would be a bad business decision. Do any of you PhDs out there in slashdot-land know the answer?

Re:Core competency

[narcc]

Do any of you PhDs out there in slashdot-land know the answer?

No. In slashdot-land, we all program in pascal and eat candy.

Free VOIP

[soceror]

Skype is free and its quality's AWESOME!

Re:Free VOIP

[blackhedd]

Skype doesn't play nice in the sandbox with the rest of the world. I hope you're not thinking Google would buy Skype and try to suppress SIP... horrors!

Re:Again?

[Uninvited Guest]

No offense intended: that link didn't quite post right:

Techdirt: Why Is CNET Trying To Invent A Google VoIP Story?

The evidence that Google is considering VoIP really is pretty thin.

Artificial intelligence

[nounderscores]

They have your webpages. They have your email. Soon they will have your voice.

We get signal!

Have you got anything without Google?

[Henk Poley]

Well, there's Google, egg, sausage and Google. That's not got much Google in it.

Re:Have you got anything without Google?

[Anonymous Coward]

Would you shut up?!

More Google VoIP speculation from 6 weeks ago

[Rescate]

Google Plans Free VoIP In the UK

Posted by timothy on Mon Jan 24, '05 01:49 AM
from the thinking-ahead dept.

jarich writes "According to this news article, Google may be preparing to offer free Voice Over IP telephone service in the UK. This sounds related to a previous Slashdot article about Google starting to buy dark fiber. So what are they planning? A free service like Skype (computer to computer only) or more along the lines of Lingo or Vonage?"

Ssssh, don't tell anyone!

[Gneral Tsao]

Sources tell me that Google will be unvieling a PDA/GPS/Cell Phone/Newspaper/Shopping Cart that will combine it's email, mapping, VoIP, news, and pricing services. It's a secret! Ssssssh! So I'm told it will also integrate seemlessly with iPods and most pants. In addition they'll be translating their page into several new languages including Ancient Canadian Hieroglyphics, Brazilian Cuneiform, and American Kanji (Simplified). Look, we've got to stop jumping everytime they make a twitch. I'm pretty sure most new services that Google has unveiled have not recieved any coerage here until they were in at least beta stage. I don't recall hearing anything about Google Maps until it was made publicly availible. Maybe I was wasn't plugged in enough, but I hadn't heard about gmail till their "April Fools'" announcement either. Seriously people, cool out... you're turning into Apple rumor people (and I'm a Mac user!).

Re:Ssssh, don't tell anyone!

[Anonymous Coward]

Heheh - "Cuneiform"

Do no Evil?

[jthayden]

Whatever happened to 'do no evil'? It seems pretty clear that in order to be a telcom business, you have to be evil.

Here's the answer...

[robyannetta]

All they have to do is buy Skype and *BAM*, they become their own telecom overnight.

MCI, Verizon, The Bells, Google. Why dosen't that sound right?

Google 'Talk Sense'

[DieByWire]

The VOIP will be free, but, a little voice will whisper into your ear sales pitches that will be relevant to your conversation.

He'll clearly identify himself as a sponsered part of your conversation, though. No confusing him with a real, unbiased friend.

VONAGE warning

[tburt11]

I jumped on VOIP by starting up with Vonage
I signed up. Free Router!
$30 Activiation fee -- Surprise
OK, so the router wasn't really FREE. Whatever.
I did not receive the router for 3 weeks. But, I was charged for that 3 weeks of service. Huh?
Then I discovered Asterisk. Got the Digium Card. Got a voicepulse number and all is good. But what to do with Vonage?
Surprise.. Vonage is NOT usable with Asterisk.
OK... I don't need Vonage. So cancel Vonage... Surprise... $40 Cancellation charge. Which will be refunded, if you return the router IN THE ORIGINAL BOX. Well geez. I threw out the box..

Net result. About 45 days of Vonage service cost me over $100.00, and 21 of those days, I did not even have equipment!

The quality was good, but their service sucks, probably because they are growing so fast. But still.

If you choose Vonage, make sure you're not going to cancel, and be forwarned of those surprise charges.

hmmm

[Some_Llama]

Seems like every day there is a new slashdot article entitled "Is (fill in the blank) Google's new Frontier?".

Is Google really going for "everything" under the sun or is Slashdot just fascinated with this company?

Any good UK based VOIP providers?

[Colin Smith]

Recommendations?

I'm going to be making a *lot* of phonecalls in the near future and would like to keep my costs down.

As you mentioned they're college students

[Colin Smith]

Once you move out and have to pay for the stuff yourself, 1p/min and free VOIP->VOIP calls starts to become attractive.

Are burgers in Google's future?

[khallow]

I think you're imagining things. Several Google honcho's were discovered wolfing burgers at an undisclosed restaurant location. Obviously, they wish to study and analyze these burgers so they can enter the bustling fast food industry.

But another source says that Google is really entering the fast food consumption industry. "Burger consumption is the growth industry of the 21st Century. With Google's extensive infrastructure, massive capital funds, educated employees, and agressive appetites, they have the weight to throw around."

Google's Mission

[krunk4ever]

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. (from http://www.google.com/corporate/)

i don't see how providing VoIP would organize or make information accessible and useful... just doesn't seem to have any part of their mission statement.

Vonage? No thanks!

[Nik13]

Most of the cheapie services will optimize for bandwidth rather than quality for the sake of saving money but Vonage does the opposite, in my experience.

Vonage sounds good, but it does sound no better than my cheapie VoIP provider. Haven't had a problem either ways. The only differece I ever was able to notice is price.

Vonage is just as expensive as my old lanline, which was already way too much (my main reason to switch to something else). My cheapie provider cost me between 1/3 and 1/2 of what vonage would. In fact, I have a hard time finding any provider that charges more than them (so far I have not found one). To me, it looks like average service at 2 or 3x the price...

That's until you start looking deeper, then you see vonage here doesn't even have 911 service, whereas my cheapie provider has e911. (I get more features overall, not just e911)

Re:Vonage? No thanks!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who is your cheapy provider ?

would you trust a telco who can't spell "phone"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I know, German, you guys spoil all my fun.

A prediction

[terpri]

Someday you'll call your google to remind your google to go to the google to pick up more google for your google

The Killer App for the 21st Century

[Anonymous Coward]

I want Dialup over VOIP!

Could a Google Toilet Be Next?

[condour75]

The recent hire of plumber Ed Kowalsky has the Internet abuzz with rumors that Google (GOOG) may offer a toilet service in the coming months. While Google has not released any official statement, technology insiders believe that the popular search engine may see a huge opportunity for profit in the lucrative home fixtures market, currently dominated by American Standard and Kohler.

gtoilet.jpgSpeculation about the gtoilet has focused on its anticipated feature set. "The possibilities are limitless," said Internet pundit Irwin Grimace. "Judging from past initiatives like gmail, we can expect a huge increase in storage capacity and a better user experience. Why flush when you have eight times the storage of other systems? A urinalysis feature could allow the system to gauge metabolic statistics and other medical data. And it goes without saying that the search function in a gtoilet would be nonpareil."

Others are more guarded in their anticipation of the gtoilet, citing privacy concerns. Anton C. Sousa, columnist for the magazine Desktop Weekly, noted: "If the Gtoilet follows the lead of Google and Gmail, the business model will be targeted ads. Sure, it would be nice to see ads for All Bran or Metamucil after an atypically long session. But do you really want internet advertisers to know how drunk you were last night?"

Details of the contract between Kowalski and Google are sketchy, but sources revealed that Kowalski has ordered three vaccuum breakers, a cone washer, and a j-bend from his supplier, and that he has only scheduled one week onsite with Google.

A whois of the domain gtoilet.com revealed no registration, and it is expected that attention to the gtoilet will wane somewhat on Friday, when a three-minute Japanese cartoon about a masturbating robot is due for release.

Re:Could a Google Toilet Be Next?

[qualico]

Ya I'm starting to get tired of everything Google.
How about Google continue to focus on improving its search engine?

Search engine technology still has much room for improvement IMHO.
It's frustrating when you can't find what you're looking for and Google is working on some other service to offer.

My fear is that they will grow into a massive consuming organism with little symbiotic intentions bent on monopolizing everything.

No thanks, we have enough of those types of companies already.

VOIP will take over according to Gartner

[mamladm]

Actually, a Gartner study said that the last PSTN phone call on the planet will be made some time in the year 2020.

Considering that phone companies themselves are getting into VOIP and it is far more cost effective to deliver voice services through a general purpose packet network than through a special purpose circuit network, you can bet that VOIP will eventually take over all telephony.

Gartner may be off by a few years, but they are unlikely wrong in their assessment that circuit switched telephone networks will completely disappear because they will.

You can use Vonage with Asterisk in two ways

[mamladm]

Vonage have an optional service that allows you to connect to your Vonage account using a SIP phone (X-Lite). This costs $15 per month extra and is only available *in addition* to the basic service that comes through their set top box. However, you can configure Asterisk to be a SIP client on that Vonage option.

Another way to use Asterisk with Vonage is to connect an analog FXO port on your Asterisk server to the phone jack on your Vonage set top box. Not exactly very elegant but it works.

Yeah, and Czech beer is better than American beer

[lorcha]

But at the end of the day, who makes more money? Budweiser or Budvar?