Call Someone – Without Having To Talk To Them

waderoush writes "After a long beta period, Boston-based MobileSphere launched a 'straight-to-voicemail' service yesterday called Slydial. If you call 267-SLY-DIAL and listen to a short ad, you can then be connected to the voicemail inbox of any US mobile phone subscriber, without causing their phone to ring. Sounds kinda useful — but incredibly, MobileSphere is pitching the service as a way to avoid actually communicating with all those difficult, boring people in your life. In reply to suggestions that Slydial erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction, a MobileSphere exec says the company is just combating technology with technology, by helping people take control of whether and when to talk with their friends, family, and coworkers."

Comments

Pound?

[oahazmatt]

Typically, can't you just hit # on most systems and go straight to the voicemail? It worked that way on two of my previous mobiles.

Re:Pound?

[sdpuppy]

Sure you can hit # to get right ion to voice mail, but you have to be fast otherwise you might have to talk to an actual person and we can't have that now, can we?

Re:Pound?

[Scotteh]

Their phone would ring too. This service is supposed to avoid that.

This feature would probably be most useful if you know the person can't be disturbed (ie. they're in a meeting). You could just slydial them and leave a nice descriptive message.

Re:Pound?

[jejones]

Well, yes, but... you have no way to be sure that the receipient's cell phone doesn't ring (the phone company long ago made sure that the caller and callee's rings don't sync up so that the number of rings couldn't be used to encode messages, e.g. one ring for a boy, two for a girl), and there are reasons for that other than not wanting to talk to someone--say you know that the recipient won't want to be disturbed, but will want to get the message as soon as the meeting/surgery/fire drill/etc. is over.

Re:Pound?

[Joe the Lesser]

or you could, you know, go see them in person if you have something important to say.

Re:Pound?

[Chris Burke]

Sure you can hit # to get right ion to voice mail, but you have to be fast otherwise you might have to talk to an actual person and we can't have that now, can we?

If I don't want to talk to someone, I call them and let it ring and let them pick up. Then I just start screaming "I'm gonna cut off your head and shit down your neck!" over and over until they hang up, and then I never have to worry about talking to them again. Sometimes I have to talk to the police, but hey, who ever said you could reach never-talking-to-anyone nirvana without a price?

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Haven't this company heard of SMS? You can message your friends without talking to them.

Re:Pound?

[mikek2]

"This service is supposed to avoid that"

I just tried it... the target phone rang.

Re:Pound?

[Mordok-DestroyerOfWo]

It would be great for those awkward next day calls. "No baby I called you. Check your voicemail! Your phone was probably in a blackout zone."

Re:Pound?

[sm62704]

In soviet Russia, people avoid listening to YOU!

As usual, the headline is bass-ackwards. It's kind of hard to leave a voicemail without talking to them, now isn't it? What the headline should say is Call Someone - Without Having To listen To Them.

This feature would probably be most useful if you know the person can't be disturbed (ie. they're in a meeting). You could just slydial them and leave a nice descriptive message

Or you could text or email them. There are times I could have used this service; for instance, when I want to impart information without getting into an argument.

Re:Pound?

[gnick]

If I don't want to talk to someone, I call them and let it ring and let them pick up. Then I just start screaming "I'm gonna cut off your head and shit down your neck!" over and over until they hang up, and then I never have to worry about talking to them again. Sometimes I have to talk to the police, but hey, who ever said you could reach never-talking-to-anyone nirvana without a price?

You know, at first I thought you were joking, but that's an interesting idea. I may have to try that with my mother-in-law. I'm such a laid back guy that my wife would sooner believe that her mother was hallucinating/going senile/whatever before believing that I'd actually called her up screaming and threatening. And I'm off the hook with ever dealing with her because she'll think I'm a psychopath. Everyone wins!

Thanks for the tip!

Re:Pound?

[0100010001010011]

Sort of, this is how you do it on Verizon right now. For free.

Call your OWN voice mail.

"You have no new messages."
"Main Menu"
"To send a message, press 2"
[Presses 2]
"At the tone please record your message"
[Blah blah blah]
"Please enter the destination number and press #"
[My own number]
"Checking destination"
"Repeats [My own number]"
"To send your message now, press #"

Hang up, 3-4 second later, phone vibrates that I have a new message.

I've never done this across providers, but when I had AT&T 5 years ago you could do this through them the exact same way. You know you can even *ghaps* reply to a voice mail. Listen, it's one of the options.

It's not News for Nerds. It's Slashdot.

Re:Pound?

[story645]

This feature would probably be most useful if you know the person can't be disturbed (ie. they're in a meeting).

a) texts. At least that's what every one I know does when they're not sure if the other person is in class (or they know the other person is in class.)

b)call later if it's not urgent

c)if it is urgent enough, maybe the meeting should be interrupted (texts work great here too, as person can scan and decide if it needs to be dealt with right away)

d)they should have their phone turned off in any meeting where phones aren't allowed, (unless they're waiting for an urgent call anyways-in which silent + looking at phone # should work just as well.)

Re:Pound?

[veganboyjosh]

Do you have a source for the reason you give for the phone companies not syncing the incoming and outgoing rings? I've always wondered about that.

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the Netherlands both Orange and KPN had a similar service (you needed to call e.g. 515 or so and you just press the voicemail you want).

Nothing really mind blowing thus.

Re:Pound?

[dontmakemethink]

That only skips the outgoing message - "Sorry I couldn't come to the phone" etc. It does not skip the phone ringing or prevent the person from answering. You still run the terrible risk of two-way communication of someone you're calling!!

Re:Pound?

[HTH NE1]

I can just hear the promotional jingle now: "Reach out, reach out and snub someone. Reach out, reach out and just say, `Bye!'"

("Let your fingers do the talking; it's a flip!")

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, that's a 'hash' not a pound.

A pound is a measurement of weight, or alternatively the currancy of the UK.

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that with a lot of phones, they beep when they get a new voicemail. And some of them keep beeping.

Re:Pound?

[HTH NE1]

"Please enter the destination number and press #"
[My own number]
"Checking destination"
"Repeats [My own number]"
"To send your message now, press #"

Hang up, 3-4 second later, phone vibrates that I have a new message.

I'd rather it require that I actually press # before it sends the message. Maybe the early hang-up was a friend trying to prevent me from drunk-calling an ex-girlfriend and leaving an embarrassing message on her voice mail.

(/wonders if he should head off the inevitable, "You're posting to Slashdot. What ex-girlfriend?" response with some witty self-deprecating rejoinder.)

Re:Pound?

[lordofwhee]

You're posting to Slashdot. What ex-girlfriend?

Re:Pound?

[houghi]

Usefull? If I can not be disturbed and in a meeting, I either turn off the phone, so it goes directly to voicemail or do not pick it up, beacsue it is in silent mode and you will be tranferd to voicemail.

Perhaps I know best when I do no want or can not be disturbed and not the preson calling me.

And most of the times when I see I missed a call, I just call back instead of listening to my voicemail.
Also when I get a voicemail, I get a message, disturbing me during my precious meeting that you did not want to disturb.

Re:Pound?

[0100010001010011]

I should say, I did press the # button.

Re:Pound?

[Mix Master Nixon]

As would I.

Re:Pound?

[arunkv]

Their phone would ring too. This service is supposed to avoid that.

I just tested out SlyDial against my cell phone and the phone did ring once. The caller ID also revealed the number as the one I used to call SlyDial. Not so sly after all.

Re:Pound?

[jejones]

I wish I did have a source... I remember hearing about people avoiding long distance charges by that means long ago when I was young (before divestiture when long distance was expensive!), but forget where I read about phone switches trying to defeat the technique by intentionally ringing the caller and the callee out of sync.

Re:Pound?

[Thirdsin]

Caller: Hi boss, :cough cough: won't be able to :cough: come in today. :cough, sneeze: 'click'.

Re:Pound?

[FLEB]

For most that I've seen, you can turn the phone off (not silent, not vibrate), so it won't even go on the air to check for VM until it gets turned back on.

Re:Pound?

[JebusIsLord]

You can usually just dial the access # (the number their phones call when they hit "voicemail"), and then press # (if your number has a mailbox on it, to back out) or you'll be prompted for the mailbox #. Enter their phone # and you're in.

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Although I can't prove what the OP said, I have something mildly interesting to add. I have 2 prepaid cell phones that get full bars, one is on the AT&T network, and the other is on Verizon. I also have a Grandcentral phone number that forwards to both of them at the same time, and the AT&T phone always rings one extra ring before the Verizon one starts ringing. I could never figure out why this was, but maybe it is related.

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just tried calling my own cell and I hit # but it didn't work. I tried pushing * and that didn't work either.

Re:Pound?

[Jay L]

Just to add more unsourced "I seem to remember" goodness...

I seem to remember reading an article in the 1980s - right around the time caller ID was introduced - that explained how the phone companies would rotate the standard 96V ring signal - 2 seconds on, 4 seconds off - among three groups of phone lines (vaguely akin to three-phase power), so that in any given two-second period, only one-third of the "ringing" phones were physically ringing. This reduces their power requirements.

Presumably the ringback tone doesn't have those strenuous high-voltage requirements. We had multiple phone lines in our house - a rarity, in those days - and I don't think it ever *was* in sync. So I think it's not that they intentionally made the ringback out of sync; they just never bothered to do anything that would put it IN sync.

I was about to theorize that ringback was generated by your outcalling switch, and not the incalling switch that generated ring voltage, but I remember that different local exchanges used to have different ringback tones, so that kills that theory.

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Grandcentral might be on AT&T and can get through the network faster. I'm on Verizon and I know when I call my friends that have Nextel it takes forever to start ringing.

Re:Pound?

[Dan541]

Off?

What is this concept?

We /.ers don't understand.

Re:Pound?

[curunir]

Using rings to encode information is a pretty poor way to do it, since you've got no confirmation that the person sending the rings is actually the person you expect to call. The way to do it is to abuse the collect calling mechanism. When I was in middle school, I used a system where I called my parents collect when my soccer practice was over and they simply declined the charges. But since they knew that I had tried to call them, the knew to come pick me up.

The system pretty reliably deals with the situation where you try to send explicit messages when you're asked to record your name (that was the first thing I tried, but it would make me repeat my name until I said a real name and not something like, "I'm ready to be picked up"). But you can still send signals on the sly without them knowing. For instance, in your example (one ring for a boy, two for a girl), you'd just place the collect call using either the name "Bobby Smith" or "Jenny Smith" and the caller would ascertain the gender from the name used...you could even use this mechanism to send the full name you'd chosen for the newborn. With a large collection of pre-arranged fake names, you could pretty reliably send messages from pay phones or over long distance without paying a cent.

Of course the advent of cell phones and VoIP solutions make these tricks somewhat less relevant.

Re:Pound?

[TheCastro]

I just tried this with my sisters phone calling it and having her call me, it does cause a ring, and then hangs up. If you try to answer nothing happens, bogus.

Re:Pound?

[mazarin5]

Letting it ring once or twice was common when I was a kid. For instance; when you had agreed to call somebody, but after they were supposed to be in bed. You would call and let it ring once, and they would call you back after the coast was clear.

Also, some girls had a system set up wherein you would call, let it ring twice, and then call back later. This gave them to opportunity to find a private place to call a call from a boy.

Although I do remember the collect call system:
(robot voice)
PLEASE ENTER THE NUMBER
555-1212
STATE YOUR NAME
heyDadcanyoupickmeupI'matthemall?
THE CALL HAS BEEN DECLINED

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHAAHAHAHA! That's the funniest post I've read in a long time!!

Re:Pound?

[yourfreequote.net]

Free No Obligation Quote on Auto, Home, Health, Life, or Long-Term Insurance! Shop Rates and Save! Visit http://www.yourfreequote.net/

Re:Pound?

[Anonymous Coward]

Fake names? When it became all automated, I would just talk as fast as possible... My folks would then just decline the call from "hey come pick me up from practice and please bring taco bell" and soon I would have me some taco bell and a nice ride home.

Re:Pound?

[Loki_1929]

Good info, but how did you get home from the mall?

Re:Pound?

[jez9999]

They might be able to stop its being done on the number of rings, but they can't stop you encoding binary or maybe trinary messages this way. 1 = ring for 1-2 seconds. 2 = ring for 3-4 seconds. 3 = ring for 5-6 seconds.

Re:Pound?

[schmeckelgruben]

I just tried it... the target phone rang.

Does your target phone ring to announce an incoming voicemail? My phone has a distinctive ring for incoming voicemails. I set it to chirp so that when I ignore an incoming call, I'll know if the caller left a VM for me to listen to later. If I hadn't set the VM ring preference to chirp, it would have made the default ring sound when I tested this. It worked just fine, BTW. (No ring, just a chirp.)

Re:Pound?

[mazarin5]

Good info, but how did you get home from the mall?

Because whoever answered the phone at my parents' house would hear "This is a collect call from 'heyDadcanyoupickmeupI'matthemall?' will you accept the charges?"

They knew that I needed to be picked up, and by saying no to the collect call, it didn't cost either of us any money.

Re:Pound?

[garwain]

>This feature would probably be most useful if you know >the person can't be disturbed Then why call? just send an email

It may "degrade" communication

[deft]

But only with the people you dont want to talk too.

The same way text messages and IM's do... and that's pretty useful.

I get it..

[Anonymous Coward]

Send email to xyz: "Dood, wanna join the party? It's, like, gonna be awesome!!!"

Send SMS to xyz: "Hey, chk ur email"

Then send the vmail to xyz: "Have your checked your SMS?"

Re:I get it..

[Anonymous Coward]

Send email to xyz: "Dood, wanna join the party? It's, like, gonna be awesome!!!"

I hate partisan politics.

Re:I get it..

[Dan541]

Followed of course by the conventional phone call.

What's the point?

[Igorod]

Because IM'ing, texting, and emailing someone doesn't do almost the same thing...if I'm calling someone it's usually for a reason, and not to just leave them a voicemail. But who knows, maybe there's a market for this kind of thing.

Re:What's the point?

[ystar]

"Hey boss! Sorry I'm leaving ANOTHER message! Working from home today as usual. Are you out of town? I've called three times today but you must be in an area without coverage. I really need to talk with you about some implementation specifics before I can start coding." (goes back to sleep)

Re:What's the point?

[KGIII]

My wife and I were just reading this. We would take this service and will likely make use of it for one specific person though I can think of a few other times when it will come in handy. (I'd actually consider paying for this in an ad-free form.)

• Calling an in-law
• Calling an annoying friend who likes to talk too much
• Getting quick messages from friends
• Leaving a quick message for my spouse when I'm too busy to actually talk

Re:What's the point?

[JCSoRocks]

Hmm, I think the second option would probably be the most common use. I can think of a number of people that are basically telecommunications black holes. Once you get sucked in... you can never escape. If you text them you get 10 back. If you actually end up talking to them you pretty much have to tell them that your leg is on fire before they'll let you off the phone.
Outside of that... listening to voicemail messages sucks. I avoid leaving them unless I must.

Re:What's the point?

[Hal_Porter]

Hey employee! Talk to bob about the implementation issues. And I'm gonna have to ask you to work at the weekend again.

Re:What's the point?

[OhHellWithIt]

There have been a few times when I knew my wife was at a meeting or something and I wanted her to pick something up on the way home, but I didn't want to disturb her during the meeting. The same might apply if it's late at night and the message can wait until the recipient wakes up -- and I don't plan on being up at that hour.

Of course, since my wife and I have cell phones on the same system, we can log into our own voice mail and send messages, and now, of course, there's texting.

Re:What's the point?

[ystar]

Of course, this only works if 1) your boss checks cellphone voicemail all at once, preferably late in the day and 2) doesn't expect office communication to be done via email/IM/etc...

This is probably more useful for, say, teenagers who know the moment they speak to their mom and dad they'll be told to go home, but with this they can fly under the radar for a few hours.

On the positive side of things, you can certainly convey much more in a voicemail than you can in a SMS text, if you know your friend is in a class or your coworker is in a meeting.

Re:What's the point?

[blueZ3]

That reminds me of the Dilbert where he's at home in the early hours of the morning and he calls his boss (to make it look like he's working) and says something like "It's 3 am and I'm here in my underwear thinking of you" then he says "Crap" and pushes a button and says "Crap" again. Dogbert asks "Did you just send a dirty voicemail to your boss?" and Dilbert says "No, I think I pressed the group code" :-)

Re:What's the point?

[KGIII]

My Unicel voicemail system isn't that bad so I don't mind too much. I do wish I could manage them online though. As for the in-laws? They're a bit like fish. They're nice to have around the house for a little while but then they begin to stink.

Re:What's the point?

[Lumpy]

and where the hell are those TPS reports??

Re:What's the point?

[residieu]

But if your friend is in class or your coworker in a meeting, your call should go straight to voicemail anyway. If he chooses to answer the phone in class/meeting, well, that's his fault not yours, he should have turned the phone off.

Re:What's the point?

[HTH NE1]

Mmm, yeah, and I'll forward you another copy of that voice-memo about cover sheets for your TPS reports.

Re:What's the point?

[Paco103]

What a sign of our lifestyle when this is modded insightful instead of funny.

Text text text text text...

[argent]

Voice mail is worse than talking to those boring people. I hate voice mail.

If I want to communicate with someone without calling them, I'll take text any day.

Re:Text text text text text...

[pilgrim23]

Text mail is easier to sort from spam; simply route Everything to trash. Problem solved.

Re:Text text text text text...

[Lumpy]

I love voice mail. I discovered on the last corperation's phone system you could detect when someone was away from the desk. so I made SURE every time I responsed I did so when they were away so they always got VM. I also never answered my phone so they always attempted to leave me a VM, fun part, my VM was always full, so they then email me.

I made it look like I was so fricking busy that they gave me a promotion to keep me from leaving. I left 6 months later anyways.

It worked great. I was able to get stuff done and I avoided the 800 interruptions each day.

Re:Text text text text text...

[iwein]

You're right. Leaving a voicemail is actually very impolite. It shows that you won't even take the time to write down what you're saying and you are happy to leave the other party to do all the filtering and parsing. I regularly delete voicemails without listening to them and refuse to apologize for it.

If something is important enough to interrupt me, call, chat, knock on my door (synchronous communication). If something isn't urgent an email will do fine. Voicemail has all the disadvantages of verbal communication, but none of the positives. It's a lazy boss' tool.

Re:Text text text text text...

[argent]

In hell, they make people like you take dictation via voice mail.

Re:Text text text text text...

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate voicemail, too. Enough that most of the time, if I call somebody and they don't pick up, I won't even leave any kind of informative message. I'll just say something absurd, then hand up. Most recently, I believe I said, "Heeey, voicemail!" I've also been known to sing part of a song. Obviously, that kind of thing is not always appropriate, but on most of the calls I make, it's okay.

It usually gets people to call me back more quickly that simply telling them what I want, actually.

Re:Text text text text text...

[QuantumPion]

Alltel, until they are acquired by Verizon :( has a service that converts your voicemails into text messages and sends them to you for a small fee.

Re:Text text text text text...

[twitter]

That's funny, I send text to the people I like. It's rude to reach out and touch people with a big clanging bell or other alarm device that sounds like a sick and angry bird. With cell phone users, you also cost them money. Voice communications with family are nice but that too is expensive and best reserved to times you know they are not busy.

Re:Text text text text text...

[argent]

Oh yes, I text the ones I love too rather than make them grovel through voicemail. Text is polite, voicemail is evil and rude.

Re:Text text text text text...

[jez9999]

Disagree entirely. I'm often doing something whereby I can't answer my phone, so I'd rather they left a voicemail than just hang up. As long as they give me some idea of what they were calling about so I can prepare myself before I call back. Most annoying is, 'Hi, this is x. Umm, could you give me a call? Bye.' I often don't bother because they haven't told me WTF I am calling them about. How hard is it?

Voice Messaging

[duerra]

Voice messaging is a lot easier and less dangerous than text messaging, and we do that all the time. I see nothing wrong with this, and in fact was just talking about this idea with some friends a few months ago. What with the iPhone's visual voice mail, I think this is good for the times when you want to quickly leave a person a message without wanting to disturb them, instead of sending them a text message. Now more phones need an easy interface for picking which voice messages you want to listen to.

Re:Voice Messaging

[JayAitch]

Except with this service you'll have to write their number down or memorize (unheard of these days) before calling them.

Re:Voice Messaging

[dubl-u]

I think this is good for the times when you want to quickly leave a person a message without wanting to disturb them.

That's exactly what I want. No disturbance, no conversation, just leaving them a quick note. Just like I can do with email. It dumbfounds me that we call it "voice mail" when the behavior is pure 1970s answering machine, and nothing like postal mail or electronic mail.

Re:Voice Messaging

[Constantine XVI]

The only two places I ever dial numbers from are:
1) My head
2) Google Maps for Mobile, and those are typically one-time-only

Re:Voice Messaging

[xaxa]

Voice messaging is a lot easier and less dangerous than text messaging

How are text messages dangerous?

One feature I would like is a "non-urgent" text message, that appears in the recipient's inbox, but doesn't vibrate/ring/beep their phone.

Re:Voice Messaging

[Amorymeltzer]

Except the (i)Phone still has to notify you that you received a voicemail, odds are in exactly the same way it would if you received a text message. And you're much more likely to quickly look at an SMS than whip out your phone and listen to a rambling message, especially if you're trying to be discrete (class, office, date, etc.). Visual voicemail is the same interface for a text message, except it's comparatively cumbersome to access. There are times when voicemail is necessary, but for the vast majority of human non-interactions, texting is just as good, if not better.

Re:Voice Messaging

[Anonymous Coward]

I played around with a voice messaging service (like IM's but for voice) on an iPhone application - Nikotalkie.

It was pretty cool (but seems no longer maintained at the moment)... easy to use while driving (unlike texting) since it was simply recording quick voice recordings, no text fees, send to multiple people, etc. I would like to see more of something like this and less texting - which I've never liked typing on a keypad (or even an iPhone touch pad).

Re:Voice Messaging

[pdxp]

Voice messaging is a lot easier and less dangerous than text messaging

Yeah, last time I sent a text message my thumb cramped up, so I couldn't grab the steering wheel in time to avoid a head-on collision with the lady driving the wrong way on a one-way street because she was blathering away on her phone.

Re:Voice Messaging

[cleatsupkeep]

I believe they meant sending them, not receiving them (in the context of driving or doing something that requires concentration).

But additionally, listening to a voice message is probably safer than reading a text message.

Re:Voice Messaging

[roaddemon]

1) I remember my parents' number because it was mine for 17 years or so, and my wife's because she made me remember it. I don't dial either of those numbers anymore.

2) Don't most phones support clicking on the number in mobile maps or is it just iPhone? Sorry, couldn't resist :)

Re:Voice Messaging

[jargoone]

2) Don't most phones support clicking on the number in mobile maps or is it just iPhone?

If you're using the iPhone you'd better be using mobile maps, because you can forget about copying and pasting it.

Sorry, couldn't resist :)

Me neither. :)

Re:Voice Messaging

[Constantine XVI]

Yes, GMM supports clicking the number to dial, which is what I was trying to say.

PS: The BlackBerry GMM also does voice search and transit routes :)

Re:Voice Messaging

[roaddemon]

I'd post a comment on how the transit routes sound cool, but my AT&T contract expressly forbids me from making a positive comment regarding any iPhone competitors.

Re:Voice Messaging

[Cro Magnon]

Generally, if I'm communicating with someone I don't want to talk to, I'm at work, which means I'm not driving anyway. :)

you say that

[Anonymous Coward]

. In reply to suggestions that Slydial erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction,

You say that as if it's a bad thing :-)

Pound Sand.

[freenix]

As soon as service providers realize there's a buck to be made, say good bye to that feature and this questionable service.

Re:Pound Sand.

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

I want to see how Twitter can turn this into an anti-Microsoft thread.

You're on, Twitter, make us proud.

Re:Pound Sand.

[ssintercept]

C'mon, He's yer buddy...

Re:Pound Sand.

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded +1 insightful to piss off the "mod down because of the person, not the statement" people.

Re:Pound Sand.

[FunkyELF]

As soon as service providers realize there's a buck to be made, say good bye to that feature and this questionable service.

You have it all wrong. As soon as they realize this, they will find a way to charge you 10 cents every time you bypass straight to voicemail.

asynchronous communication

[naz404]

neat. provides the asynchronous communication like what sms and e-mail provide.

pretty nice when you don't want to carry on conversations and just want to leave messages that people can check and respond to at their leisure.

why can't you do something like this without having to listen to ads tho?

I hate voice mail

[iminplaya]

It costs me money every time I retrieve it. Just dial my phone, and I'll call back from a landline. You remember landlines, don't you? Or are they all gone now?

Re:I hate voice mail

[JCSoRocks]

Why does it cost you money? Are you retrieving it from your cell phone only? You know that you can just call your cell phone number and then hit "#" and then your password and just listen to it that way... right? I've been able to do that on the last three carriers I've been on. It's worth a try if you haven't already tried it.

Re:I hate voice mail

[Grave]

It probably costs money because he's using prepaid cellular service instead of monthly. I have to wonder about the economics of prepaid cellular plus a landline - is that really cheaper than going with just a monthly cell phone?

Re:I hate voice mail

[iminplaya]

My work is kind of spotty. I don't want to make any commitments I might not be able to keep. So I pay as I go. Peace of mind and all that. Worth every penny.

Re:I hate voice mail

[tony1343]

Landlines suck, deal with it. I use a cell phone, and Skype where I can call most of the damn world free for $9.95 a month. Why would I want to use a landline, so I can pay a fortune and get a lot of calls from telemarketers?

Re:I hate voice mail

[Anonymous Coward]

why not disable the voice mail service then?

Re:I hate voice mail

[Piranhaa]

What if you're in an area with little to no coverage? It happens all the time to me, in my basement when my phone is in my pocket and under the desk, where the person will hear the phone ring multiple times and go to Voicemail. I hear nothing. Either they think I will see their number on my display (which I dont), or they leave a voicemail message and I'm like 'wtf' ?

I think voicemail can be good.. But if I know someone tried contacting me and left me one, I call them back before I check it. that's just me though

Re:I hate voice mail

[Anonymous Coward]

heres a tip from someone in the wireless phone biz: if you have free mobile to mobile calling (most do nowadays, even on prepaid), calling your own mobile number will take you to your voicemail. this method uses your free mobile to mobile minutes and NOT airtime like your voicemail speed dial does. infact, you can change the speed dial to do it this way:

  change your "voicemail" contact to "yourownphonenumber"p"yourpassword"# example:
1234567811p1234#

this assumes your phone number is "123-456-7811" and your password is "1234". the "p" inserts a pause, and the # is typically required after putting in your password.

voila, free voicemail checking from your mobile.

Re:I hate voice mail

[iminplaya]

Landlines suck, deal with it.

That's a horrible thing to say. Landlines are extremely reliable. It even survived a hurricane. I was on the phone the whole time. Plus, it's where my internet comes from. I guess you don't quite get the mileage that I do. Believe me, cell phones suck much harder, but they are a necessary evil for work.

Re:I hate voice mail

[iminplaya]

Well, for the purposes of this article, that would be rather...illogical, but that that is my plan, if I could just do it without fat-fingering the damn tiny key pad on my phone.

Re:I hate voice mail

[Cro Magnon]

It depends on how much he uses it. If he jabbers on for hours every day, he's better off with a monthly plan. If he uses it for 10 minutes the whole month, he's better off with prepaid.

Re:I hate voice mail

[Cro Magnon]

On every cellphone I've ever had, the sound quality totally sucked compared to my landline. The bill isn't bad if you don't use the extra bells & whistles and don't call people in Timbucktu. And since the "Don't Call List", telemarketers haven't been that bad.

Re:I hate voice mail

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, all Landlines are gone to the land where mice will be in the next 5 years....

Re:I hate voice mail

[Dan541]

free for $9.95 a month.

Ummm..

Ok.

You can then be connected to the voicemail inbox..

[Bri3D]

And therefore guaranteed to never receive a response!
I don't think I -ever- check my voicemail unless I've accidentally missed a call I know is important, and almost nobody I know checks theirs on their personal cell either.
Text messaging has replaced leaving voicemail for reminders and invitations, as it's much easier and more convenient.
I think this is a service far past its time. Maybe it would have been useful in the 90s.
Work is different, but this isn't exactly targeted at businesspeople.

brilliance...

[ckuttruff]

Gives the game of phone tag a whole new dynamic...

Soon to be scooped up.

[Anonymous Coward]

The kind of companies that try to make money off ringtones are not going to let this service last long, so it's a moot point. Expect it to be yet another "extra" feature you can pay for each month. Telco greed knows no bounds.

At last!

[4D6963]

Finally! A way to call my mother so that she'll stop bitching about me never calling and at the same time avoiding making it last 50 minutes everytime. A win-win situation!

Yes, I do call my mother sometimes, it's just more convenient than yelling from the bottom of the basement for food.

Re:At last!

[vapspwi]

This seems to be the response that's closest to what came to my mind when I read the summary. There are times in relationships (parents, friends, girlfriend) when you are in some way "obligated" to call but don't actually want to have a conversation. It seems a little underhanded, but when you combine this service with the still-existent vagaries of cell phone coverage and behavior ("no, really, I tried to call but it went straight to voice mail!"), it allows you to take the easy way out of fulfilling an obligation. It can also allow you to gain the upper hand in a game of "phone tag" (say, when you're having a fight with your girlfriend) by putting the ball back in the other person's court.

Like I said, it's a little underhanded and probably not the healthiest way to communicate in a relationship, but I can imagine a few applications for this kind of thing.

JRjr

Re:At last!

[4D6963]

(say, when you're having a fight with your girlfriend)

I.. err.. do I even need to comment?

Re:At last!

[JCSoRocks]

Have you considered an intercom system? Nerdy and convenient! Alternatively... you could just set up a text-to-speech unit and strap that to her and then send text messages to it giving her various messages like... need food, need laundry, need bath... Or I suppose you could just stop yelling and get yourself a megaphone - saves the voice for rock band.

Re:At last!

[Slightly Askew]

"...yelling from the bottom of the basement for food"

Don't you mean yelling for your mother f*#@ing chocolate milk?

Re:At last!

[xaxa]

I just call whilst on a train.

"Hi mum. [...boring...] By the way, I'm on a train, it there's a tunnel I might--CLICK"

Re:At last!

[4D6963]

I just call whilst on a train.

That's a good idea, but I don't want to avoid long conversations with my mother THAT bad that I'd take the train just to ask her to bring me some food..

Re:At last!

[jeepien]

The tunnel dodge doesn't work here. I can get on a train, go under the Hudson, and end up at Penn Station in Manhattan, and have five bars all the way, on VZW.

Re:At last!

[xaxa]

The tunnel dodge doesn't work here. I can get on a train, go under the Hudson, and end up at Penn Station in Manhattan, and have five bars all the way, on VZW.

But does your mum know that? ;-)

When they get GSM working on the London Underground (soon, IIRC) I won't be going out of my way to tell her. "I was on the Tube" is a good excuse for not answering a phone at inconvenient times (e.g. if I'm drunk).

Asynchronous communication is great

[Anonymous Coward]

Works fine in the shape of E-mail. You choose when you want to answer and you get time to think first.

Beats "Hello, uhh, uhh, let me get back to you on that. I'm on lunch now, I shall look it up when I get to the office. Yeah, I don't have that address with me right now."

"I have to look in the book for that data, let me see. *flap* *flap* umm *flap* BURT? WHERE IS THE GREEN CATALOGUE? THE GREEN? ... YEAH, A CUSTOMER WANTS TO KNOW."

This is the vocal equvalent of texting

[Anonymous Coward]

It will "arrive" when they put a decent visual user interface on the receiving end. Instead of an audio interface, I want to riffle through my voicemails by looking at a list of them that includes who sent them, and lets me listen to them in any order.

Re:This is the vocal equvalent of texting

[Constantine XVI]

Check out YouMail (http://youmail.com/). Universal visual voicemail, each VM shows up as SMS or e-mail, automated voice-to-text, and has a website that works in most smartphone browsers. The personalized greetings are a nice bonus.

Re:This is the vocal equvalent of texting

[egomaniac]

The iPhone does this, and it's fantastic. I previously hated voicemail to the point that I would generally just ignore it -- they'll call back if it's important! iPhone's visual voicemail has made it pleasant to use again.

Re:This is the vocal equvalent of texting

[Anonymous Coward]

this service r0x dude...thanks.. added some funky personalized greetings

person on the other end may still be pay roaming f

[Joe The Dragon]

person on the other end may still be paying roaming fees so they may be a bad thing for them even more so if they are over seas.

Somewhat related...

[SCHecklerX]

I stumbled upon this gem while looking for a quick way to enable/disable forwarding on my blackberry:

http://www.geckobeach.com/cellular/secrets/gsmcodes.php

It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[Kelbear]

It's another tool in the handbag of communication and ettiquette.

Visits being the highest priority and inconvenience.
Phonecalls being the next step down in priority and inconvenience.
Voicemail.
E-mail.
IM.

Use the appropriate tool for the level of urgency. Bothering everybody with a visit on your timetable is extremely disruptive to THEIR timetable, so it should only be done when it's called for.

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[Constantine XVI]

Voicemail.
E-mail.
IM.

Most people I know put email as lower urgency then IM. IM is typically real-time, but not real-time enough to completely halt whatever you were doing. Email and VM is usually "respond when you get a chance"

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[sm62704]

It's another tool in the handbag of communication and ettiquette.

Ma'am, most of us here are guys. We don't carry handbags. We do, however, carry toolboxes. I don't know any guys that carry handbags, but I do know women who use toolboxes. And I've never yet seen any tool in a lady's handbag, unless you consider lipstick, bubble gum, tampons, kleenexes, dildos, revolvers, condome, and the like "tools".

If at first you don't succeed, use a bigger tool.

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[fastest fascist]

If you know you just want to deliver a one-way message, why not just send an SMS? The user cases outlined in the article seem to be exactly what people use text messages for.

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[balbeir]

From my POV you have the order of IM and email flipped around. IM has higher priority and higher inconvenience than email. If someone IMs you there is this expectation from he other side that you respond if you're showing online. So it's more intrusive With email there is no expectation like that from the other party

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[iangoldby]

Well, I think you've got face-to-face conversations and phone calls the wrong way around. How many times have you been talking to someone face-to-face when their phone has rung and they've interrupted the conversation to answer it? Seriously annoys me when that happens.

I heard a story about someone who was interrupted so many times while trying to talk to his boss that he eventually gave up and phoned (from the next cubicle) instead. He finally got his uninterrupted conversation.

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[Anonymous Coward]

Man bag?

Re:It's not necessarily antisocial, just practical

[Dan541]

1. Too logical.
2. Too simple.

verizon voicemail

[Anonymous Coward]

For verizon if you hit 2 from your own voicemail you can put in the number of any other verizon customer and send a msg directly to their voicemail.

Re:verizon voicemail

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

Oh, it only works with other Verizon customers? The only person I've ever tried that with also has Verizon.

i despise talking on the phone

[circletimessquare]

my cell phone is permanently on mute, i don't have a home phone. text me or email me. its asynchronous communication, far superior. i don't have to immediately interrupt what i'm focused on to deal with something usually trivial

i've had trouble in my jobs because of this, i subtly train employers not to call me. i purposely miss their calls, let their call ring while i'm sitting there, and then i send them an email right after they call: "did you just call me?" i never call them, and always email

people romanticize dealing with someone directly as something that is lost. well people also romanticize the great depression and world war ii era london. people romanticize their teenage years (they are painful for everyone). what people romanticize means shit

i live in times square, and people romanticize how it was before it had been disneyfied and turned into just another mall setting. well i remember pre-giuliani times square: prostitutes, heroin addicts, and stinky adult stores. fuck that. people romanticize all sorts of crap. but its just empty pointless nostaligia, and has no real merit or valid argument on its behalf

saying something is lost with less people talking to each other in person or on the phone is bullshit. its not better. email and text is far superior to the telephone

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[evilphish_mi]

I for one would rather talk to somebody in person about something that may be confrontational. E-mail doesn't communicate emotions well at all, and body language can be very valuable in certain circumstances. So no e-mail isn't superior to the telephone or face to face conversation in all cases.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Grrrrr. I'm antisocial. GRRRRRR.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

i've had trouble in my jobs because of this, i subtly train employers not to call me. i purposely miss their calls, let their call ring while i'm sitting there, and then i send them an email right after they call: "did you just call me?" i never call them, and always email

Congratulations on being a complete assbag. Asynchronous communication is superior for some things, but some instances do require real-time conversation, typically any kind of emergency communication. Would seeing this in your email box whenever you got around to it really be better than just picking up the phone?

To: circletimessquare
From: someguy@someemail
Subj: House on fire

Body: Hey, just thought you should know that your house is on fire.

Regards,

    -Someguy

That's all pretty irrelevant anyway, if your boss insists on using what you consider outdated tech to keep in contact with you, you're pretty well obligated to use it, otherwise he's free to find someone else who will.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[timholman]

saying something is lost with less people talking to each other in person or on the phone is bullshit. its not better. email and text is far superior to the telephone

Back when the telephone was first invented, people complained that the art of writing letters to one's friends and families was being lost, and nostalgia for the pre-telephone era was rampant. Now more than a century has passed and we have come full circle, with people have once again writing friends and relatives on a regular basis, albeit in a different medium.

So take heart: your great-great-great-grandfather would be in complete agreement with your sentiment. Writing is often better than talking face-to-face.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

You're never going to be successful in a business capacity with that mindset. Why? Because most people in business rely on the phone. It's 'relationship building' 101. You don't build business relationships over email or text.

Personally, I agree, I also hate talking on the phone...but I recognize I have to if I want to be successful, because I'm the minority with that opinion. I know what I prefer, and its not the phone, but almost everyone around me, personal and/or business, relies more on the phone, so I force myself when I know it makes sense.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

i've had trouble in my jobs because of this, i subtly train employers not to call me. i purposely miss their calls, let their call ring while i'm sitting there, and then i send them an email right after they call: "did you just call me?" i never call them, and always email

If I were your employer and you pulled that shit I'd leave you a voicemail that says "you're fired." Then I'd have you arrested for trespassing when you showed up at the office, having not checked your messages...

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[lysse]

And without capitalisation, even emailing you is a disincentive to communication. Well played, sir.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[MyNymWasTaken]

Talking over the phone is not equivalent to talking face-to-face.

Firing off an email bears no relation to the art of writing letters.

Slashdot users taking pride here in their lack of communication skills is wholly unsurprising.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[chris_mahan]

Reading body language is also really hard to do over the phone. You can get voice tone though.

If it's something important, meet face to face.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had a couple employees like this, and then I fired them.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[LunaticTippy]

You are comparing the golden age of letters with "l8r d00d lol" and twitter?!?

Let me guess: in the future there will be bound volumes of the SMS of celebrities? It is actually sounding plausible.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[sm62704]

I for one would rather talk to somebody in person about something that may be confrontational

I would rather be able to compose my communication and not go flying off the handle. I've found that expressing emotions is almost always counterproductive.

E-mail doesn't communicate emotions well at all

It saddens me that you would say such a thing.

body language can be very valuable in certain circumstances

I'm afraid I'm a bit of an assburger; I don't read body language well at all. Probably the main reason I can't get a decent girl friend.

That said, I prefer face to face EXCEPT when I'm angry.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[sm62704]

He's written like that for a long time (check the date on the comment linked).

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't care for talking on the phone either, but I'm not stupid enough to confuse my preference for email with its "superiority", nor to confuse other people's preference for the phone with some LOL NOSTALGIA nonsense I pulled out of my ass.

And by the way, you're not "training" your bosses to do anything but avoid relying on you for anything important. Your passive-aggressive bullshit is so flimsy and transparent you could wrap it around sandwiches to keep them fresh. They DO see through it, and they ARE treating you accordingly.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Grishnakh]

I don't know about you, but when I write emails, they don't have any text-speek or other such crap in them, and are generally decently thought out. I consider email to be the best method of communication right now for most things. You can make it as formal or informal as you wish. True, stupid teenagers may write emails just like they write their idiotic text messages, making them completely incomprehensible, but that doesn't mean the rest of us (those of us over 30) do the same thing.

Email is a great replacement for paper letters. It allows you to compose your thoughts in a more formal and organized manner than running your mouth (either on the phone or in person), leaving out a lot of unnecessary emotion. It also allows you to save copies indefinitely, for future referral. In addition, it's much faster to read an email and understand something than to listen to someone run their mouth.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[evilphish_mi]

I suppose it helps that I have learned to control my emotions very well over the years. Even when I'm angry most people would never know when talking to me. As far as body language goes, I'm decent at reading it. I can usually tell when people are lying to me, or when somebody is genuinely excited about something instead of just telling me what I want to hear. Those nuances to me are very important, especially at work.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[jeepien]

Umm that's okay, you don't sound like someone with whom it would be enjoyable to speak.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Your life sounds real exciting.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Cro Magnon]

Slashdot users taking pride here in their lack of communication skills is wholly unsurprising

LOL! My communication skills is gr8!!!1one!

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I've found that expressing emotions is almost always counterproductive. E-mail doesn't communicate emotions well at all

It saddens me that you would say such a thing.:*(

Fixed that for you. :)

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[pxc]

Reading body language is also really hard to do over the phone. You can get voice tone though.

That's not entirely true. If you know someone well enough, you can hear facial expressions over the phone (if they're talking at the same time, of course). I can hear the difference when my friends are smiling, squinting, etc.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[multipartmixed]

> I subtly train employers not to call me. i purposely miss their
> calls, let their call ring while i'm sitting there,

I hope you're good at what you do.

Because I'd fire your ass if I caught you ducking my calls.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[LunaticTippy]

That all sounds great, and I agree with you, but we're a dying breed. Most people under 20 think email is a quaint relic they'll check a few times a week. More and more people my age (pushing 40) have abandoned email, IT professionals aside.

It's sad how often people won't give me their email address. They say they don't use it. They say "What's your myspace?" or "Facebook me" or twitter or some other depressing nightmare. I don't know why people are abandoning the last civilized thing about the internet. I'd say spam, but when I am forced to open a friendster account or some such thing I am inundated with spam.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? I've found that most of the time you really want something done pronto, you gotta call them. I am in constant daily contact with many people, email and telephone wise. Telephone is a much higher priority than email. If someone emails me, that means I'll get to you when I can. If someone calls me, that means they need something asap.

If you email me and want something done ASAP, it probably won't happen to your expectation.

Keep in mind email is not guaranteed delivery. It can get lost, it can get delayed. Phone calls either work or fail, and you know either way.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[dbcad7]

And I despise "texting" and using email from or to a phone. First of all most phones are a lousy interface for entering text.. and second it takes longer than talking, and third IT'S A PHONE.

You know, I generally don't like talking on phones much either.. but I know that communication in business is important.. ducking calls, or wasting my time making me screw around with texting on a phone will lead to some very interesting communication between us.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[Grishnakh]

That all sounds great, and I agree with you, but we're a dying breed. Most people under 20 think email is a quaint relic they'll check a few times a week.

Yep, I've heard and read this, and seen it a little with a few teenagers and young 20-somethings I know.

More and more people my age (pushing 40) have abandoned email, IT professionals aside.

Huh? Now this, I've never heard before, and certainly haven't seen in my circle of friends (small though that may be). I'm 34, and I can't imagine abandoning email. Then again, I'm an engineer (not exactly IT). But all my non-engineering friends and acquaintances seem to have the same attitude as me regarding social networks, texting, etc.

It's sad how often people won't give me their email address. They say they don't use it. They say "What's your myspace?" or "Facebook me" or twitter or some other depressing nightmare. I don't know why people are abandoning the last civilized thing about the internet. I'd say spam, but when I am forced to open a friendster account or some such thing I am inundated with spam.

This is truly depressing. Why on earth would anyone want to use some stupid social network for private email, when all your messages are visible to everyone that can see your page? Has everyone suddenly decided they don't care about privacy any more? That's sure what it seems like.

Re:i despise talking on the phone

[assassinator42]

Facebook and MySpace do allow you to send private messages. I've never used Twitter, but I'd imagine most other "social" sites allow that as well. Of course, people don't mind if some things are seen by everyone.
I prefer instant messaging for informal communication and email for (more) formal communication or something I want to have a record of.

Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[hipresha]

You will never be able to get the telemarketing people off your back then, since they now can fill up your voicemail with their messages without having to experience that you hang up on them.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[dubl-u]

You will never be able to get the telemarketing people off your back then, since they now can fill up your voicemail with their messages without having to experience that you hang up on them.

Probably not a big worry. Telemarketing thrives on abusing human politeness.

A nice old lady has a hard time saying no, or thinking straight with a mile-a-minute, hard-to-interrupt speech on whatever garbage the telemarketer is selling. They get their money by demanding direct action from you in the instant; none of them just politely leave a number and ask you to call them back later.

With voicemail, you can easily delete a message without the same social pain that you get from hanging up on somebody. So there's a lot less benefit in voicemail spam than there is in live calls.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[Dracos]

This was my first reaction, too. I wonder if this creates a loophole in the Do Not Call list, since they're not actually calling the numbers?

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[mikael_j]

A similar profession that could make good use of this is tech support/helpdesk. Being able to leave a voice message to inform a user of the status of their trouble ticket without getting dragged into a lengthy conversation about how horrible the helpdesk is for not solving problems before the users have even noticed them. That way you could actually sit down and call back to those 30 or so users who filed trouble tickets yesterday without having to schedule 10 minutes per call when all you were going to do was tell them "We figured out your problem was that you were hitting the Save button instead of the Print button, the Print button is the one that has the text Print and a picture of a printer on it".

/Mikael

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[corbettw]

Yep, that was my first thought, too. What's more, I can't see any reason why a telemarketing firm couldn't use this company's services (or if not them, a competitor, or do it themselves depending on how open the technology for it is) to blast out voicemails to 1,000,000 people at one time. Say hello to voice mail spam, the next iteration in annoying advertising.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[LunaticTippy]

I've been getting similar marketing calls for months now. My phone won't ring, but I am notified of a missed call. There is no voicemail. The temptation to call back to see what long-lost friend moved to an unfamiliar area code is probably pretty effective.

If I call back from a land line I get hung up on. If I call back from my mobile they try to sell me real estate. The best part is this is all illegal, but the fly-by-night offshore spammer couldn't care less. I don't report them or keep track of the numbers anymore. They're only used once.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[Mr. Shiny And New]

This already happens to me on my landline. Voicemails appear from nowhere and they're for ads. Luckily, when listening to the message I can hit a key to skip through to the end for quick deletion. Funny, I just noticed that the key sequence for 'begin listening, skip to end, delete' is 1-3-3-7.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[jeepien]

I haven't found that to be true.

First of all, I almost NEVER get telemarketing calls on my VZW phone. But even so, in my experience, telemarketers tend not to leave messages.

Their only shot is to bilk you while they have you. I'm sure that leaving messages has such a low return rate that they've realized it isn't even worth having a robot do it.

Besides, if they leave a message, they have to give you a way of calling them back, which means, if you're on the do-not-call list, a way of suing them.

Re:Telemarketing will probably make use of this..

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they all ready are. :(

My phone just beeped at me and when I went to check it the screen said "1 missed call". After looking at the details it listed (no number) and I had a voice message. The voice message sounded like an automated sound byte encouraging me to take out a student loan from studentloan.com. Not only that, the sound clip seemed like it would go on forever (infinite loop?); I deleted it after taking down the url/phone number in case I want to call and complain (not that it would do much good).

Anyone else experiencing this?

Rest of my Friends

[Lord Apathy]

Cool, now I don't have to talk to the remaining friends that I have.

Re:Rest of my Friends

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool, now I don't have to talk to the remaining friends that I have.

...oh wait, I don't have any!

you can do this with ATT and maybe other providers

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are on at&t and so are they, just check your own voicemail, and in the options, you can leave a message for a phone number. I haven't tried it from AT&T to other providers yet.

I hate voicemail with a passion

[Quattro Vezina]

I despise voicemail.

If someone calls me, I miss the call, and they leave a voicemail, I just call them back from my missed calls list, and I don't even listen to the voicemail.

All voicemail does for me is leave an annoying icon on my screen and make my phone beep on bootup for 30 minutes.

If anyone tries to use this service with me, they will end up not communicating with me at all, as I never check voicemail.

I wonder if AT&T will turn off my voicemail service if I ask them to.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Joe the Lesser]

Funny, if someone calls me, and I miss it, and they don't leave a voicemail, I assume it wasn't important and don't call them back.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[pla]

I wonder if AT&T will turn off my voicemail service if I ask them to.

Probably not - Companies generally resist disabling "nuisance" features (and especially ones that they can nickle-and-dime you for).

You can, however, usually set the number of rings before it goes to voicemail... And very few people will actually wait 12 rings just to leave a message (and if they do, you might want to actually take the call).

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[strelitsa]

If you never check voicemail, do you at least record something stating that you never check voicemail? While I'd personally be happy as a clam if voicemail were to disappear tomorrow, 99.9 percent of those with whom I interface have and use it.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[xaxa]

I wonder if AT&T will turn off my voicemail service if I ask them to.

On every phone/network I've ever used (in the UK), there's been a number to call, or an option in the voicemail-checking system, to turn voicemail off. It beats having that stupid icon, plus if people haven't left me a voicemail they're more likely to text or email (or MSN) me.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Joe Random]

I don't even listen to the voicemail.

Why not? Often, the voicemail contains all of the info needed for you to determine what action needs to be taken, including whether or not a callback is even necessary.

When I call someone, I only leave voicemail if doing so would add useful information. Something like "I need your input on something by 4:00 today, but I'll be out between noon and 1. Give me a call when you get a chance." That lets them know that I require a callback, and what timeframe we're dealing with.

Another example might be "I need you to email me that file by tomorrow afternoon. Thanks." In that case, no callback is required as long as they email me the file in a reasonable timeframe.

The problem is that idiots think voicemail should be used for "Hi, I just called you. Call me back." as if my phone doesn't keep track of incoming calls.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Known Nutter]

annoying icon?

are you serious, sir?

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Rob the Bold]

If you never check voicemail, do you at least record something stating that you never check voicemail?

It doesn't help. I had a VM greeting that said I don't check my messages and people still left them. Optimists, I guess.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Cro Magnon]

The problem is that idiots think voicemail should be used for "Hi, I just called you. Call me back." as if my phone doesn't keep track of incoming calls.

If I don't recognize the number, "Hi, I just called you. Call me back." is the only way they'll get a callback from me. I don't call unknown numbers without voice messages.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Culture20]

Or it was so terribly, unbelievably important that they hung up and dialed someone else so they could talk with a human instead of a machine. If I know who called me, I generally call back.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[iangoldby]

I hate voicemail with a passion too. I hate being put through to voicemail. I will ring back if you are not available to answer the phone now. I don't want to leave a message, and I don't want to pay for a wasted call.

I want an option that simply prevents my call being answered if there is no one there to answer it (rather than diverting to voicemail).

Of course British Telecom have realised they can make a mint out of voicemail and now with their 1571 voicemail service on virtually everyone's home telephone by default you just can't get away from it. I frequently get someone's voicemail just because they didn't get to the phone fast enough in the requisite number of rings.

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[Quattro Vezina]

#%$@*$#@*&

I need to proofread better. That should be "30 days", not "30 minutes".

Re:I hate voicemail with a passion

[againjj]

The problem is that idiots think voicemail should be used for "Hi, I just called you. Call me back." as if my phone doesn't keep track of incoming calls.

Three problems with this.

(1) I do not call back people that do not request a call back, since otherwise I will assume that they have judged the call inconsequential if they need to wait for a reply. Examples might be, "I want to chat if you are available," or "I would like your input for a decision I am making, but the input is not required," or "I was hoping you could tell me something, but if you can't I will call someone else."

(2) Both my wife and I have had the experience that our phones do not in fact track every incoming call. For example, when the phone is off or has no connectivity, the calls are often not tracked. Also, at seemingly random times an occasional call is not logged.

I find it irritating when people call me back when I have not left a message. If I had wanted a call back, I would have said so. Just like in the old days, with land lines and answering machines. Mobile phones are no different to me.

invaluable resource

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking as an anonymous coward and a tech support worker, I believe this service will be an invaluable resource to help us increase our response times.

I can now report back to my boss that I called back everyone in the message queue. Not my fault I got their voicemail, eh?

Did they?

[ShiNoKaze]

In reply to suggestions that Slydial erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction, a MobileSphere exec says

Did they actually reply? Or did they redirect to a prerecorded message saying this?

Makes sense to me...

[RushMoom]

... more like the asynchronous aspect email but with the ability to actually communicate with some inflection, emotion, etc (plus, you can do it when you're away from your computer). A lot of times I'll want to call someone just to tell them one thing, but don't bother calling because I don't feel like interrupting their life over it.

I can see myself using this.

Definitely plan to use this service

[Luyseyal]

I definitely plan to use this service. That way, I can leave annoying voice messages on the phone of a certain individual who prefers to annoyingly text me instead of confronting me over the phone. Then, I won't have to talk to her -- I can just call and leave another voicemail explaining how she's wrong.

Haha!
-l

Re:Definitely plan to use this service

[corbettw]

Seems like sending her an MMS of her sister topless would make for a more interesting confrontation.

(Interesting for the rest of us, at any rate.)

Re:Definitely plan to use this service

[pi_rules]

That way, I can leave annoying voice messages on the phone of a certain individual who prefers to annoyingly text me instead of confronting me over the phone. Then, I won't have to talk to her

So... how long ya been married?

Re:Definitely plan to use this service

[Hektor_Troy]

Dude ... grow a spine. Do what a real man would do. Climb the stairs to get out of the basement, kick open the front door and yell at your mother as you run away.

Guess who

[Anonymous Coward]

It's intresting that this is coming out as the political ads are ramping up. I won't be surprised to find my inbox full of "vote for Barockoly" ads.

Great idea!

[ErichTheRed]

I'm sure anyone in IT can relate to the concept of someone you'd rather not talk to, but have to leave a message for. I have several people like this that I need to work with. Having a conversation with them is like root canal therapy sometimes. Being able to leave them messages and not actually speak to them would definitely lower my daily stress levels.

Call me anti-social, but these people could drive anyone nuts.

Re:Great idea!

[kabocox]

I'm sure anyone in IT can relate to the concept of someone you'd rather not talk to, but have to leave a message for. I have several people like this that I need to work with. Having a conversation with them is like root canal therapy sometimes. Being able to leave them messages and not actually speak to them would definitely lower my daily stress levels.

Call me anti-social, but these people could drive anyone nuts.

What about that one guy across from the office that you don't work with, but his personal habits just drive you up the wall when ever he just attempts to say hi? O.k. Him just saying hi would be a vast improvement. It's more like every time I speak to him he says something like Do you spend all day looking at porn or something else along those lines. I privately hate the guy's guts and would avoid him if at all possible, but he sits in the cube next to me, and I have to pass him to get out of the office door.

Re:Great idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

I sure can relate to that, one of the guys I'm sharing office with has quite a lot of various biological sounds. Out of breath when he enters the office (20m. walk from his car and 1 flight of stairs!!!) - and quite loud trying to get his breath back.
Then there is his gum (nicotine addict) chewing, always chewing, can't keep his mouth shut so we get to hear all the gory details.
Drinking a glass of water? Well you bet he will share the enjoyment of that by a loud "ahhhhh" after dunking it.

Oh and then there's the cubicle stalker, if he hears someone talking about something interesting he will come all the way over and join in - and he keeps talking, long after the victims have signaled they want to go back to work by putting on their earphones.

the right tool for the job

[SoupGuru]

I don't think people are using the right tool for the job in this instance. There are plenty of other technologies that allow you to get messages to people without interacting with them and allowing them to access the message on their own terms.

Maybe my next entrepreneurial adventure will be a service that you can call from your mobile phone, leave a message, and my staff will hand write the message on decent stationary and snail mail it the recipient.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[dubl-u]

I don't think I -ever- check my voicemail unless I've accidentally missed a call I know is important, and almost nobody I know checks theirs on their personal cell either.

Seriously? Whenever I see the little voicemail icon lit up, I check it. You really just ignore the messages until they get auto-deleted unless you think there's something especially good in there?

I set up a legit version of this for myself

[IGnatius T Foobar]

There are times when I just want to send a voicemail home without ringing the phone -- often because it's late and I don't want to wake anyone up. Since I'm already running Asterisk, I just registered a DID with IPKall, which is a free service. When I dial the IPKall number, it goes straight into voicemail. So if, for example, my wife wakes up in the middle of the night and sees the VM light on the phone blinking, she can push the button and find out that I'm stuck at work on an overnight project, or whatever. If, on the other hand, the purpose of my call is important enough to wake someone up at home, I dial the main number and the phones ring.

Re:I set up a legit version of this for myself

[Anonymous Coward]

What about when she's riding your neighbor and in the heat of climax because you're NEVER FUCKING HOME and she needs to get off with a companion rather than a soulless corporate drone.

It is nothing new at all, very old in fact

[dreamchaser]

Most corporate voicemail packages have allowed exactly this, internal to the organization of course, for many years. It's not a new idea, and it does have its uses.

Re:It is nothing new at all, very old in fact

[pluther]

Not just corporate voicemail packages either.

With my old cell phone (AT&T), you could dial the voicemail number, escape from your voicemail (#+Something) and leave a message for any other AT&T customer.

You could also set up groups and leave the same voicemail for several people at once. I think you had to pay extra for that feature, but I never tried using it.

Re:It is nothing new at all, very old in fact

[Anonymous Coward]

Not surprising, considering that voice mail was originally invented as a replacement for the combination of the dictaphone (URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictaphone/> since most of y'all are probably too young to have even heard of it) and secretaries.

Its actually a shame that some of the editing features that were present in the original voice mail system because of that design goal are missing from most modern voice mail systems.

Erodes and cheapens? Hardly.

[jesdynf]

This service means you do not interact with people you don't want to interact with, and therefore increases the percentage of pleasant interactions you enjoy throughout the day.

That's not erosion, that's added value.

Re:Erodes and cheapens? Hardly.

[Anonymous Coward]

This service means you do not interact with people you don't want to interact with, and therefore increases the percentage of pleasant interactions you enjoy throughout the day.

Yeah, and once you've eliminated all interactions, you'll get infinite value, since anything divided by zero is infinity!

I can already to this (VZW)! Anyone else?

[TonyXL]

I have Verizon Wireless, and if I connect to my voicemail, I have the option to record a message and have it sent to a phone number that I enter. I've used it from time to time. Not sure if I can send to a non-VZW number though.

Re:I can already to this (VZW)! Anyone else?

[mikek2]

I've tried vxmailing from my Verizon phone to a non-Verizon #... no dice.

I can do this already

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

I can log into my own voicemail and send a voicemail message to any number without actually calling them.

Re:I can do this already

[TheZalm]

I came on to say the same thing. You can already do this, at least with Verizon.

Re:I can do this already

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

Scratch that. Apparently it only works with people who have the same provider as me.

good thing it's free

[notgm]

full disclosure, i work for a provider.

i tried it on my phone, i went to a regular busy. I hung up on sly dial and the target mobile rang once.

i'm not impressed, and i'd be concerned about the nature of the connection they're making - there's no privacy statement about what numbers they keep on record, there's nothing to keep them from recording conversations.

I've wanted this for a long time

[linuxwrangler]

Pretty much ever since we had answering machines I've thought it would be great to be able to leave a message without ringing the phone.

A typical situation is that I listen to a message and want to respond but it's not an appropriate time. Instead of remembering to call the next morning, I'd much rather be able to call right then and leave a response that the person can retrieve when convenient.

It's only fair...

[bwcbwc]

The call recipient can choose to avoid taking calls from people not on their A-List, now the caller has the same option.

I just tried it... didn't work

[mikek2]

I just tried Skydial using my personal & work cell #'s.

First off, the ad was much more than the promised "10 seconds"

Secondly, when Skydial said, "We're now connecting to you xxxx's mailbox", my other phone started ringing.

Anyone else?

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Overzeetop]

Funny, I'm just the opposite. Voicemail means one of my clients has a problem that can't wait. Either that or it's a real estate agent who equates "emergency" with "need something trivial". All I get via SMS are ads or notifications from my cell provider, which I routinely ignore. As for reminders...that's what having a PDA phone is for, right (or does your wife need to keep tabs on you?).

As long as...

[rodney dill]

...messages left are flagged that they went straight to voice mail I wouldn't care. Otherwise the 'Liars' out there would try to pass off that they called, but were bounced to voicemail.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[amRadioHed]

Well I don't plan on calling you so I won't have that problem. I don't know anyone who doesn't check their voicemail. I don't always do it right away, but I always get around to it sooner or later. How on earth do you know if you missed an important call if you don't check the message?

Obligatory Grammar Nazi Post

[scottfk]

The headline should read "Call Someone - Without Having To Talk To Him" (him or her, if you prefer) rather than "them".

"Someone" is a singular indefinite pronoun. Thus the object of "to talk" must also be singular.

Re:Obligatory Grammar Nazi Post

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they/them havE become the defacto gender-neutral singular pronouns.

Not exactly correct.

[khasim]

Send email to xyz: "Dood, wanna join the party? It's, like, gonna be awesome!!!"

Yep.

Send SMS to xyz: "Hey, chk ur email"

Yep.

Then send the vmail to xyz: "Have your checked your SMS?"

Nope. More like:
"uhh hh hhh uh dood? I uh hh huh h mmmmmmm wanted to callyouabouttheparty and uh uh uh uh the party is ...."

Repeat for about 10 minutes.

I HATE voice-mail because almost no one knows how to leave a message CORRECTLY.

Correct method:
"Hi! This is *name* at *call back number* and I wanted to talk to you about *subject*. Once again, this is *name* at *call back number* calling about *subject*. Bye!"

Incorrect method 1:
"Hi! This is *name*. Call me."
Unless you are the girlfriend/boyfriend. Then it is allowable.

Incorrect method 2:
"Hi! About the thing that blah blah blah blah blah *ten minutes pass* blah blah blah bl" Cut off by message limit timer.

I prefer email and text because it takes MORE effort to type in excess material than voice-mail does.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Machtyn]

Agreed. Often, I get vmails of the 2nd incorrect method. Though, not to exaggerate too much, it's a 1.5-3 minute message where the phone number is stated at the end. So, I have to listen to the entire thing again to get to the blasted phone number.

I completely agree on your "Correct method". That's how I leave my messages for my victims... er, contacts.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[qoncept]

Incorrect method 1:
"Hi! This is *name*. Call me."
Unless you are the girlfriend/boyfriend. Then it is allowable.

I'm trying to think of something clever to say but I've got nothing, so I'll just say it. What the hell is wrong with you? When I see a voicemail from my wife I almost immediately push 7 to delete it. "The girlfriend" doesn't have anything to say, so it's never allowable. The fact that they leave a voicemail at all is the root of the problem.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[cduffy]

I'm trying to think of something clever to say but I've got nothing, so I'll just say it. What the hell is wrong with you? When I see a voicemail from my wife I almost immediately push 7 to delete it. "The girlfriend" doesn't have anything to say, so it's never allowable. The fact that they leave a voicemail at all is the root of the problem.

The question could be turned around: What is wrong with you, to marry someone so uninteresting (and about whom you care so little) that you don't care what they have to say?

Uninteresting is a bug -- a serious, showstopper bug. I'm paying for my wife's law classes right now partially to decrease the chances of "uninteresting" ever happening. How is it that you get to a point where you don't care about the root cause (not being interested in your wife's communications) and just complain about a symptom (those uninteresting communications occurring)? Think about it for a bit.

I don't generally criticize people's personal relationships -- but dude, you went there first. A long-term committed relationship with someone you don't want to hear from just isn't a good place to be.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[sm62704]

I HATE voice-mail because almost no one knows how to leave a message CORRECTLY.

I don't even have voice mail set up on my phone, and I don't leave voicemail unless I know the person doesn't have caller ID (rare these days). If I can't answer the phone I don't need a message; I'll call you back. I'll assume that if you see I tried to call you'll call me back.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Eivind]

That don't sound patronising at all, no way dude.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[qoncept]

I think you took that a bit more seriously than I meant. No need to question my relationship with my wife. But "call me" isn't interesting, no matter who says it. If I see my wife called I call back without a voicemail. If she said anything worth saying in the voicemail, she'll say it again.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[anagama]

Everyone who knows me knows to NOT leave voicemail. I hate voicemail -- it's such a waste to have call in, retrieve a message that says "Hi it's Joe -- give me a call", when all the relevant information is on caller-id. People who know me don't leave a message and I just call back based on the "missed calls" menu.

Now, if the phone is dead or out of range, the greeting comes on in one ring. In that case, it is acceptable to leave me a message, in all other cases, it is only acceptable to hang up. It takes just a small amount of time to train your friends, and saves tons of wasted time going through the voicemail message.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[cduffy]

Fair enough; I did indeed take some of your words more seriously than they were intended to be read. Please accept my apologies.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[HTH NE1]

If I can't answer the phone I don't need a message; I'll call you back.

Maybe the person calling doesn't need or want to be called back and can deliver the reason for the call in a voice mail message.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[bograt]

Incorrect method 2:
"Hi! About the thing that blah blah blah blah blah *ten minutes pass* blah blah blah bl" Cut off by message limit timer.

Swingers

Re:Not exactly correct.

[T3Tech]

If I see my wife called I call back without a voicemail. If she said anything worth saying in the voicemail, she'll say it again without me even having to say I didn't listen to her voicemail.

Fixed that for you.

At least 99% of the time my wife will repeat anything left in a voicemail that wasn't just a "give me call when you get this, love you." message.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I'm sorry that your cell phone only has enough storage for one number, but for most of us, finding our friends' and associates' numbers isn't really that much of a chore these days.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[The FNP]

At least she will right up until the point where she uses this service to ask for a divorce.

--The FNP

Re:Not exactly correct.

[QuantumPion]

Heh, I'm the complete opposite, I almost never answer my phone. Most of the time I prefer voicemail so I can get to it when I am free, instead of annoying people in public or the office like a jackass.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[gknoy]

People who know me don't leave a message and I just call back based on the "missed calls" menu. ...It takes just a small amount of time to train your friends.

Agreed. I tend to just call people back directly, and ask what's up -- and if they ever ask if I got the voicemail, I say "No, I called you first". It's marginally less convenient for them, but that's balanced by the fact that most of the time the voicemail is a waste of my time. ;)

Re:Not exactly correct.

[defaria]

Why do you insist that I leave you a number? Ever heard of caller ID? Geeze!

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Anonymous Coward]

To your correct method, I would add that it's also nice to have a "on Monday at around 7pm" in there since some voice mail systems use the time to either indicate the time in excruciating detail or bury it a couple of menus deep (both techniques to make you stay on the line longer and use more minutes).

Also, incorrect method 1 also works with members of your family. I only wish I got voicemails that said, "Hi! It's your mother, call me." (she, of course, uses incorrect method 2). Also, I find, "Hi! It's me. Call me." is also acceptable for family and significant others since parents and children can pretty reliably recognize each other's voices and you can figure out that it was the SO if it isn't a family member (especially when you've likely got a call log on your cell indicating who the call was from and when the call happened).

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm the reverse. If you didn't leave a message, you never called school of thought. I'll just assume you decided it wasn't important, asked someone else or will communicate the message to me otherwise.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually enjoy having what would otherwise by an Instant Messaging conversation via email. I find that it slows the pace reducing errors and improving the wheat/chaff ratio of the content.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer email and text because it takes MORE effort to type in excess material than voice-mail does.

Especially if the caller is Female.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Dan541]

Why not disable the voicemail?

Re:Not exactly correct.

[MarkGriz]

Incorrect method 3:

"Listen, asshole. No one hangs up on me. We're through!!! And -HA- one more thing... I've been cheating on you!!!!"

Unless you are the ex-girlfriend/boyfriend. Then it is allowable.

Re:Not exactly correct.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thats how you talk to your friends?

How about:
Dude, (its [you name])|(*nothing here cause they know your voice*) party at (place and time).

Re:Not exactly correct.

[anagama]

For those times when my phone is dead or out of range. In that case, I get no caller-id info so if the caller wants to hear back, he or she will have to leave a message. It's easy for the caller to tell though -- the voicemail comes on in one ring.

Looks like a way to evade the Do-Not-Call list

[Animats]

This could easily turn into spam. The problem is that this may not be considered a "call" under the Do Not Call list rules for cell phones. It might be legal to spam via this route. Uh oh.

Erodes and cheapens?

[taustin]

Slydial erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction . . .

No, what erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction is being so boring that your friends would rather talk to your voicemail than to you.

Useful indeed!

[moniker127]

this is a pretty good idea. Much of the time i try to call someone, they are at work. With this i can call them without interrupting what theyre working. Its basically SMS without the text, with voice instead. I think it could indeed be useful. I am just disappointed that i didnt think of it first.

get it for free?

[halfEvilTech]

What I already get this service for free. Just move to the midwest and all your calls are automatically dropped or the calls just ring straight to voice mail with no indication.

this could be good

[GregNorc]

I know a couple people who just can't shut up, what should be a 3 minute phone call stretches into a half hour or longer. I'd love to have this option.

Remembering landlines?

[pluther]

Those are those old phones that charge you extra money every time you call someone outside your immediate geographical area, right?

And charge you an extra monthly fee to even have voicemail?

And that you can only use when in your own home?

Yeah, I think I remember my grandfather talking about them.

Re:Do not want.

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree with what he just said.

How practical

[LeotheQuick]

Now instead of thinking up elaborate ways to avoid doing what's right we can just pay someone to cover up our lies

Verizon

[Bodero]

Actually, this can already be done on Verizon Wireless to Verizon Wireless calls, and maybe AT&T as well.

Dial your OWN voicemail, then once you get to the main menu, hit option 2 to send a message. It then asks you for the 10 digit mailbox number (which is the subscriber's phone number with area code), it says their recorded name, and allows you to leave a voicemail.

I've used this to try to determine who called me if they don't leave a message - the system will play their recorded clip of them reading their name.

Re:Verizon

[Dekortage]

Mod parent up.

I've done this with Verizon too, though more for the reasons that Slydial aims for.

Re:Verizon

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty sure that only works for the network you're on: Verizon to Verizon or ATT to ATT

Re:Verizon

[prestomation]

Sprint also does this through your voicemail.

Re:Verizon

[D Ninja]

I've used this to try to determine who called me if they don't leave a message - the system will play their recorded clip of them reading their name.

Ooo...very nice tip. Thanks for the heads up.

On a side (but related) note, I really hate when someone calls me back when I dial a wrong number. Conversation goes something like this.

Me: [calls wrong number]
Me: Oh crap! [hang up]
My Phone: [ring, ring]
Me: Hello?
Random Person: Who is this?
Me: Ummm...who is this?
RP: You just called my phone a second ago. Who are you?
Me: I did? No...I don't think so. I was looking at pr0n a minute ago. I definitely wasn't calling your phone.
RP: [silence]
Me: [hangs up]

Re:Verizon

[urcreepyneighbor]

Next time it happens, how about saying along the lines of: Yeah, sorry, I dialed a wrong number and I didn't know what to say. Awkward, you know?

The person will be shocked by your honesty.

Re:Verizon

[Mix Master Nixon]

I gave up my mods on this topic to say that Random Caller Identification is a brilliant use of Verizon Option 2.

Re:Verizon

[pen]

Yes, most voicemail systems already support this. The only problem is figuring out what provider the number you want to call is on. That is exactly what this service does -- it looks up the correct provider and then leaves a message on their voicemail system.

Re:Verizon

[Skye16]

Or better yet, "Well, I misdialed, and rather irritate someone I didn't know by attempting to speak to them, I just hung up.

Kind of weird how the positions have been switched, isn't it?"

Re:Verizon

[kchrist]

Of course the polite thing to do is apologize for dialing the number in the first fucking place, thus avoiding the whole call-back situation.

Seriously, how difficult is that? It takes two seconds and isn't nearly as rude as just hanging up in someone's ear while leaving them wondering who the asshole who just called them was.

Re:Verizon

[Anonymous Coward]

It only works if you want to reply to voice mail left by another Verizon customer in the same roaming area. It does not work across carriers and across areas on the same carrier's network -- i.e. if some one calls your Verizon NY number from a Chicago number , you will not be able to reply. Both caller and callee have to be on the same network and in the same geographic area.

Re:Verizon

[Skye16]

Are you kidding me? It's twice as rude. It's one thing if you misdial and I begin reaching for my phone, it's quite another when you stay on the line, knowing you misdialed, just to further inconvenience me.

I'm sorry, but you're utterly wrong on this and I hereby challenge you to a duel.

Re:Verizon

[kchrist]

I'm assuming that the hypothetical caller doesn't realize he dialed the wrong number until the other end answers the call. In this case, it's much more polite to apologize than to simply hang up in their ear.

Re:Verizon

[D Ninja]

Ah...perhaps I should clarify.

In the two cases this has happened to me, I got the person's voice mail and it was *obviously* a wrong number. So, I just hung up instead of leaving a(what would have been an awkward) message.

In the first case, the guy calls me back immediately. It was annoying that he even had the gall to do that.

In the second case, the person called me back two days later and then hung up as soon as I picked up the phone and said, "Hello."

Either way...how hard is it just to NOT CALL BACK? Who cares who called you? That's what annoys me about it.

In cases where someone actually picks up the phone (and I didn't realize I was dialing the wrong number - which tends not to happen too often), I apologize and then hang up. End of story.

Hope that clarified my position a bit.

Re:Verizon

[Weezul]

Yes, but you'd be pretty foolish to be using a non-GSM network. :P

Re:Verizon

[jez9999]

You're seriously missing an opportunity here. If it sounds like a hot chick, and she actually bothered to ring you back, this is a women who returns calls, and better still you already have her number! Ask her what stuff she likes and where she lives. Maybe some pics of here semi-naked via txt.

Re:Verizon

[MarkGriz]

Works on AT&T as well (same procedure as described for Verizon).

I found that this can also be done from a landline as well.
When I dial my voicemail (with speedial 1) I noticed that it isn't dialing my cell #, but rather some other number. I though that was strange, because with my previous phone I always dialed my own number to get my VM (which still works on my new phone BTW).
Dialing this "other number" from a landline gets you into the VM system and prompts you for the 10 digit mailbox number.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[squiggly12]

Yes, I actually just let my voicemail pile up and then I clear it out whenever I feel like it. 4 play new messages, 77 delete, 77 delete, so on so forth.
Just to make people leave voicemails I'll never listen to!!!

Used to be able to do this...

[camperdave]

You used to be able to do this on land lines. In this neck-o-the-woods, you would dial the number to reach the Bell voicemail retrieval number (416-210-0xxx), then dial the number of the recipient. You would get their Bell voicemail, and could leave a message without thier phone ringing. Bell disabled that feature a number of years ago, though. Apparently, telemarketers were exploiting it.

Finally, I've been waiting for this.

[Anonymous Coward]

This service comes as a great beacon of hope to all us shy/antisocial bastards who don't want a direct reply when calling girls.

meetings? silence your phone

[Animaether]

Seriously, if they are in a meeting - or elsewhere where a ringing phone is frowned upon - have them silence the thing.

But I'm sure the marketing people will love this. Now they can 'call' you while circumventing a ton of provisions, including telling them to stop calling you right in the very phone call. .. not to mention kids and pranksters.

I'd check my contract on the services rendered by my provider to see if this can be blocked.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Grishnakh]

Seriously, if they are in a meeting - or elsewhere where a ringing phone is frowned upon - have them silence the thing.

That would make too much sense. Besides, lots of people forget to silence their phone, until they are suddenly embarrassed by it ringing during a meeting or movie.

But I'm sure the marketing people will love this. Now they can 'call' you while circumventing a ton of provisions, including telling them to stop calling you right in the very phone call. .. not to mention kids and pranksters.

I don't know about your voice mail, but on mine, if I don't want to listen to a message, I just press "7" and it's immediately skipped and deleted. It's not like I have to sit there and listen to the whole thing. While I might not get the satisfaction of insulting a telemarketer when he calls, it's a lot faster than talking to a real person.

I really don't see the problem here. It seems like a great alternative to text messaging, which I absolutely hate.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[dsanfte]

"Seriously, if they are in a meeting - or elsewhere where a ringing phone is frowned upon - have them silence the thing."

Yeah. Call them during the meeting to remind them.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Skye16]

Except that my father is often exceptionally busy while he is at work, but still keeps his telephone on in case of any emergencies. What to do when I want to call him and leave a message for him to call me back when he's done with work? Texting won't fly at all.

This would be perfect for those times when I need to talk to him, but can't pinpoint a good time for him in advance, so I can leave a message and he can hit me up at his convenience.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[conlaw]

But I'm sure the marketing people will love this. Now they can 'call' you while circumventing a ton of provisions ...

...and leaving evidence of what they've done.

47 CFR Â 64.1200 (a) (1) (iii) No one may make a call to a cell phone using an automatic dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice.

The easiest way to get cell phone numbers--or other private numbers--is by using an automatic dialer. And these people almost always just leave prerecorded messages. Just save their vocal graffiti and send a copy to the FTC and/or the Secretary of State in your state or the state from which they're calling.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[bill_mcgonigle]

Besides, lots of people forget to silence their phone, until they are suddenly embarrassed by it ringing during a meeting or movie.

Then there's me, who always remembers to silence the phone for the movie, and then misses the next six hours of calls because I was jabbering about the movie while walking out of the theatre instead of re-enabling the ring.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know about your voice mail, but on mine, if I don't want to listen to a message, I just press "7" and it's immediately skipped and deleted.

And if you don't like spam then you can just delete it without reading it, right?

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Grishnakh]

Yep, that's why I never turn my phone off, even in movies. I just set it to vibrate. Even though the vibration makes some noise, it's not nearly as much as a ring. Besides, I get very few calls on my cellphone anyway, except from my wife, who's always with me in movies, so the chances of me receiving a call in a theater is extremely low.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Zakabog]

Seriously, if they are in a meeting - or elsewhere where a ringing phone is frowned upon - have them silence the thing.

A silenced phone makes a lot of noise in a quiet setting while it vibrates in your pocket.

I'd like sometimes to go straight to a persons voice mail. Sometimes you just don't have enough time to fully talk to a person but texting is inconvenient. You can just leave a quick voice mail and they'll get your message.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, lots of people forget to silence their phone, until they are suddenly embarrassed by it ringing during a meeting or movie.

What's needed is a way that proprietors of various establishments can set a cell phone policy wirelessly that cell phones will automatically adhere to. So if the meeting room, movie theater, restaurant or wherever had a device that told phones that they could only vibrate and not ring, it wouldn't be necessary for people to remember to silence their phones because their simple presence in an area where ringing is prohibited would do that for them.

There's no technical reason why this couldn't be done, it would just take a couple of years before all the old cell phones were replaced with compliant ones. We just need a specification and a law mandating it and setting fines for people who abuse the technology (i.e. disabling the feature on their phone or carrying a portable device to make phones nearby silent).

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Grishnakh]

What's needed is a way that proprietors of various establishments can set a cell phone policy wirelessly that cell phones will automatically adhere to. So if the meeting room, movie theater, restaurant or wherever had a device that told phones that they could only vibrate and not ring, it wouldn't be necessary for people to remember to silence their phones because their simple presence in an area where ringing is prohibited would do that for them.

There's no technical reason why this couldn't be done, it would just take a couple of years before all the old cell phones were replaced with compliant ones. We just need a specification and a law mandating it and setting fines for people who abuse the technology (i.e. disabling the feature on their phone or carrying a portable device to make phones nearby silent).

Of course there's a technical reason this won't work. What if I happen to be walking past a restaurant, but am still outside it? Why should my phone be forcibly disabled? The restaurant doesn't own all the area outside its walls (such as in a leased shopping center). A restaurant doing such a thing would be grounds for a lawsuit, and rightfully so.

Come up with a way to only disable phones within the walls of the establishment where the policy is set, and you'll have no argument from me. But saying there's no technical reason this can't be done is lunacy. I suppose you could have the restaurant install a fine metal mesh screen in its walls (creating a Faraday cage), but 1) that would be expensive, and they inevitably wouldn't bother, and 2) that would keep all cellular transmissions out, so there'd be little point in requiring a standard for cellphones to adhere to--any establishment concerned about cellphones can, in fact, already block them by doing this, but they aren't.

Sorry, but in my view, the only way for establishments to be able to set policies like this is the old-fashioned way: they need to put up signs, and then when people violate the policy, two muscle-bound dudes need to bodily throw them out. Of course, establishments aren't going to do this, because they're so afraid of "offending" someone or getting sued that they'll allow customers to be abusive and annoy other customers. (Of course, bars and clubs even now seem to have no problem with having bouncers bodily throw people out when they act up, and they don't get sued into oblivion. Why other businesses can't do this I don't know.)

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Anonymous Coward]

I really don't see the problem here. It seems like a great alternative to text messaging, which I absolutely hate.

Don't see? Perhaps you should read your post. You hate texting - fair enough. Other people hate even knowing a telemarketer thought about calling them. Assuming both are valid issues, the problem is not having a technological means to combat them. Thus, your carrier should let you deny all text messages, or disable v-mail, or disable this straight-to-v-mail feature. You see, the problem is that your vision is myopic.

Captcha: trolley. Love it!

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[socsoc]

Isn't that why we invented asynchronous communication mediums like e-mail and texting? Why won't texting fly? Just e-mail his phone (most providers do have e-mail addresses associated with each number) or text him to please give you a call when he has a moment. I'd be more pissed at suddenly getting a voicemail message notification and wondering where the hell it came from and spending minutes checking it rather than a quick text.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[socsoc]

A silenced phone makes no noise and doesn't vibrate in your pocket, a phone set to vibrate does.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Anonymous Coward]

Come up with a way to only disable phones within the walls of the establishment where the policy is set, and you'll have no argument from me.

Faraday cage ;)

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Anonymous Coward]

TLDNR

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Skye16]

Because he is old and has a tough time figuring out his coffee maker.

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[bickerdyke]

...except from my wife, who's always with me in movies, ...

...of course...! ;-)

Re:meetings? silence your phone

[Heian-794]

I really don't see the problem here. It seems like a great alternative to text messaging, which I absolutely hate.

I think it's great too; I work overnight and am completely out of sync with most people's waking hours. I can't call them when they're sleeping, and most people have ringtones even for mobile e-mail, so I risk waking them up. I want them to be able to get my message and listen to it at their leisure without having to be disturbed by my odd schedule.

Similarly, I leave my own cell phone on, for emergencies, when sleeping in the day. The side effect is that I have to tell people not to call me until a certain hour.

Now this service supposedly makes the phone ring once, which makes it useless in my case, but if there were no rings at all, it would be a great way for time-shifted people to stay in touch with their ordinary-waking-hour friends, and vice versa.

No pound needed.

[fm6]

There's already a way to leave somebody voice mail without actually calling them: call your own voice mail. They all have a "send voice mail" option. Don't know if this works across providers. Probably.

Re:No pound needed.

[prestomation]

I am pretty certain that this method does not work across providers

Re:No pound needed.

[interiot]

Well, SlyDial has figured out a way to do it across providers (some sort of fancy PBX setup?), so it should be possible for mainstream providers to do the same thing. But I agree that they probably don't.

Re:No pound needed.

[ivan256]

I'm sure they call the provider's "check your voicemail remotely" number.

For example, with Sprint, you can dial the area-code, and exchange followed by 6245 (mail), and then proceed to enter a mailbox number to check (with password) or send (without password) a message to.

Other providers have a similar number.

So instead telling people this, these guys are having you listen to an advertisement and dialing the number for you.

Re:No pound needed.

[fm6]

Yeah, you're right. I just got a voicemail from somebody I know is on a different provider. No "to respond with a voicemail prompt", which I have gotten with other callers.

Re:No pound needed.

[linzeal]

Mod parent up, this is all this is.

Re:No pound needed.

[interiot]

Looks like you're right:

Q: Can I use slydial to connect to the voicemail of a landline phone number?
A: No. slydial only works to connect to the voicemail of a U.S. mobile phone user.

Which is weird, since landlines that have provider electronic voicemail, those have remote numbers too, no?

Anyway, there are some publicly-posted lists of these numbers. [1] [2]

Did we Slashdot their phone number?

[Dekortage]

I've tried dialing the number and just get a fast-busy signal.

Re:person on the other end may still be pay roamin

[Anonymous Coward]

I know those words, but that sentence makes no sense.

i live in times square

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't think you could live in Times Square since it was Disneyfied

I have a problem with how it's marketed, though

[Moraelin]

Well, I can sorta see your point, but I seriously have a problem with it being marketed as "a way to avoid actually communicating with all those difficult, boring people in your life." If I wanted to essentially tell mom that she's boring and I don't want to talk to her, well, I could do that by more old fashioned ways. Or just not call in the first place.

Our Telco

[__aamisb9940]

...telus, has had a voice-mail only system for years. I guess it's a bit different than TFA - but basically, it's like a deposit-only account. You call the number, and leave a message - that's it. The person for whom the message is destined must call the same number, authenticate, and check for messages - and/or leave one.

a telemarketers dream

[flahwho]

I bet this will be used by those annoying telesales outfits as a way to get messages to every cell phone on their list. Be prepared to be annoyed!

DOES NOT WORK

[Anonymous Coward]

I just tried it with two cell phones (both on T-mobile). Yes, it did go "straight to voicemail", but it showed up on the phone as a call coming in which I could answer.

Looks like they should have stayed in Beta!

Sounds like my daughter...

[Illbay]

..."Dad, I wish I could just access your bank account without having to actually call you to ask for money..."

Re:Sounds like my daughter...

[ivan256]

... "Sorry honey, but you're cut off. You'll hate me now, but in a couple years you'll realize it was for your own good." ... Then go play golf for a few years with the money you save until she comes to her senses.

Best part: Now you can break the news over voicemail.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[roaddemon]

Yeah. Visual voicemail is great for quick mass deletes. "Hey honey, there are five messages from you. I'm deleting them all, let me know if you said anything important"

U.S. is so late

[edsousa]

This feature has been implemented here in Portugal for years, but no one uses it. In fact, almost no one uses voicemail. You know, we don't pay for received SMS.
Here we just have to dial 66xxxxxxx were xx's is the cellphone number to get *that* advanced feature Slydial.

U.S.A.: the most advanced world in the world? ROFTLOL

Re:U.S. is so late

[edsousa]

And I forgot: the same price if you were calling to the person itself and works with all and between the 3 networks and virtual networks running on top of them.

What I'd prefer: messages straight to email

[timothy]

As the recipient, I hate voice mail. I ask people not to leave voicemail. Voicemail sucks. If I could pick up the phone I would; since I can't, I'll call you back when I *can.*

I know this is annoying to callers; I know that leaving a message is now a pretty normal thing, and consequently people are expected to listen to messages regularly, etc. That is, if someone's phone greeting is "Please leave a message at the tone!", then leaving a message it would seem should reach them. So I try to at least have an honest voice message which requests that callers *not* leave a message. But Yes, there are times when leaving a message is the only rational thing on the part of the caller ("My battery is dying, my camel is dragging me out of reception range, I am trapped in the desert, please come get me.") and that's just an annoyance of life. I am not insensitive to this, just don't have a good solution.

HOWEVER: Usually, I'm more likely to (quickly) check email than voice mail, because most voice messages are rambly time wasters; if I have to listen to voice messages, what I'd like is an MP3 or similar sound file, sent as an email with associated caller info, rather than the voice-mail blob of goo, in which people leave long, wandering missives, often without well identifying themselves. Even better, email with accompanying text derived from speech recognition. Even if it's crazily rough-edged, this would be useful.

timothy

Here comes voicemail spam

[dontmakemethink]

The post above says their number is busy, probably from a few million auto-dialers advertising every possible means of maintaining an erection...

Frivolous

[Anonymous Coward]

You can already do this by calling your voicemail, creating a new message, and sending it to the recipient.

Next thing you know...

[Anonymous Coward]

Next thing you know, you'll be able to place convincing thoughts and commands directly into the minds of others...kinda like telling them that these aren't the robots they're looking for... just with a simple wave of your hand.

Now just imagine the powerful marketing value of that!

This is why I never turn on my voicemail.

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why I never turn on my voicemail.

Alternative Voicemail Providers

[AusIV]

What if you don't use your cellular service provider's voice mail service? I use Google's Grand Central for my voice mail needs. I have my cell forward people to my grand central number when I'm unable to take a call. I have Grand Central go straight to voice mail, and send me a text message when I get a message. I find this offers a number of benefits over the service offered by my cellular provider.

So if someone used this service to send a message to my voice mail, would it go through to my cell phone's voice mail, or would it use the forwarding number from my phone? If it's the former, I could end up with messages in the wrong inbox, and I'd never be aware of them.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[otacon]

Yeah, I frequently let my voicemail box get full then fly through and delete before the person can get one word out. Unless, like you said, I missed something I knew was important.

Big farking deal.

[Anonymous Coward]

All you need to know is the carrier they are on. And the VM number.

Maybe the "market". for example, the great lakes market for AT&T. You can just dial 3176649900. then dial the 10 digit number. for example 586-867-5309. Bingo, directly to VM!

If you are on an iphone. *#61#.

Technology marches backwards, it seems

[HumanSockPuppet]

There's already a "way to avoid actually communicating with all those difficult, boring people in your life": don't talk to them.

Human interaction already eroded

[fiannaFailMan]

"Erodes and cheapens genuine human interaction?" Caller ID has already taken care of that. The days are gone when you call someone secure in the knowledge that they're either going to pick up or can't hear the phone ringing.

Different preference

[Nightspirit]

It seems most people don't like checking their voicemail, but I take it a step further. I don't answer the phone unless the person leaves a voicemail (with the exception of family). I figure if the issue isn't important enough to leave a message, it isn't important enough for me to answer the phone.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[animusCollards]

The best was at my old job where I managed the phone switch. I just set my voicemail queue depth to zero. When people called they'd get my recorded message telling them to send me an email.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[TheLostSamurai]

What country are you from? There seems to be a bit of a cultural divide with voice mail. One of my good friends is from Italy and he never checks his voice mail. The way he explained it to me is that it is very rude not to answer the phone when someone calls, even if you just answer to tell them to fuck off. And if you are unable to answer, you always call them back. He says his family to this day has never owned an answering machine for this reason.

Although, my friend and his family may just be odd.

You never check your voice mail?

[jeepien]

If you never check your voice mail, and yet leave the service enabled, people can justifiably call you an idiot when they leave you a message and you don't reply. If you have a voice mail service that you never check, either turn it the hell off (so callers hear only ringing) or set it to announce-only and tell them NOT to leave a message. Better yet, set your outgoing message to tell them how they CAN reach you. The way you're doing it is really inconsiderate, since it's no trouble for you, but it inconveniences others by wasting their time unnecessarily. Your time is NOT more valuable than theirs. Umm, do you drive a Hummer, by any chance?

Restrictions, beta, or Slashdotted?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hm, it accepts my call for a split second then disconnects me. My Caller ID is turned on (as is required) and I am trying the right number, but still no luck. I got through once on another phone though (after a couple tries). Is there a bug? Is there something wrong with my phone? Or is this such a monumentally great idea that a phone service has been Slashdotted?

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

yep, i do too, never check it unless i know there's something i need to hear there.

The Catbird Seat

[onkelonkel]

If you haven't read James Thurber's great short story "The Catbird Seat", you should do so now. I won't spoil it for you, except to say something like your idea is in the story.

Re:The Catbird Seat

[onkelonkel]

link - http://cathy.likeafire.net/?page_id=92

Re:The Catbird Seat

[gnick]

Thanks for the link. I'd not read that before and it was a nice short distraction.

Although now I can't help scheming...

Re:The Catbird Seat

[jahudabudy]

Wonderful story! Thanks for the link.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[worldthreat]

I actually have the same approach.. I have too many people in my life that leave the stupidest voice mails (trying to be funny, info i don't need, just saying hi).... my time is too important to listen to automated operators followed by useless information. On another note, this service would be great for harassment and prank phone calls!

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Many of us do.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Rob the Bold]

Well I don't plan on calling you so I won't have that problem. I don't know anyone who doesn't check their voicemail. I don't always do it right away, but I always get around to it sooner or later. How on earth do you know if you missed an important call if you don't check the message?

"Important" is in the ear of the beholder, I suppose. I never check my voicemail unless my wife sees the message waiting symbol on my phone and asks why I haven't checked my messages. My own fault: I haven't gone through and deleted everything before leaving my phone sitting out. If it's really important, they'll call back -- either that or their problem will go away on its own.

Re:Can't be disturbed.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Your wife is in the driveway."

sounds great....

[ssintercept]

an easy way to dump that tranny you picked last week end w/o the drama.

So True!

[Skip666Kent]

My wife loves to gab and 'live' on the phone with endless pauses between bits of conversation, and when I'm in the car driving it's dangerous. It's always frustrated me that I can simply 'voice mail' a message to her. "Honey, I'm on my way home and I'm going to stop and get some milk. If you want anything else, give me a buzz, otherwise I'll see you in forty minutes."

Send, Done and Thankyou.

Because I don't currently have that option, I end up not often as not not calling at all.

Give me the damn option to communicate however the hell I want, and let ME bear the fsck'ing responsibility myself if my communications with others 'erode' in any way, shape or form.

Did John Katz write this article?

Re:So True!

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, why not explain to your wife your concerns?

I had the same issue, and by simply explaining that I hate talking on the phone while driving etc, she's learnt to keep it short!

Well OK, I had to fake a couple near-misses first, ")(*!@, oh shit, I almost ran over that pedestrian while listening to your story about your coworker." and "*screech*, woah, that pole looked like it would HURT!". But my point stands, I think :)

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

If you text message me, and you don't write with proper grammar, you're not getting a response. In fact, when you get around to calling, I'll ask you to learn English. My siter in law has learned to send coherent email messages this way. She might be the only literate 19 year old left in the state; most of her peers are incapable of writing, much less speaking clearly.

Call Someone Without Talking to Them...

[Huwawa]

Isn't that TTY?

Vonage voice to text

[flyingfsck]

Vonage can send you voicemail by email - either as a sound clip, or a voice to text conversion.

seinfeld

[pak9rabid]

This sounds like something Seinfeld would be interested in.

Voicemail is a chore

[busydoingnothing]

No real friend leaves voicemails because they know how much of a chore it is. It seems like something so minor, but it's a pain in the ass to call my voicemail and sit there listening to someone rattling off about nothing in particular. I'd rather someone text me after they attempt to call me and ask for a call back or something. Texts are far less intrusive.

Pavlov's Dog

[SilverJets]

This, by helping people take control of whether and when to talk with their friends, family, and coworkers, just makes me think that most people react to a ringing phone without thinking about it. If you don't want to talk to people ignore the phone, it really is not that hard. Some times to live dangerously I leave the house without my cell phone!

Re:Pavlov's Dog

[gurps_npc]

You miss the point of the article entirely.

The service we are discussign helps people that have to do the CALLING but don't want to speak live. It is not something that the people that recieve the call do.

In other words, it pretty much seems like you are the TARGET MARKET for this product, you just didn't think it through.

Re:Pavlov's Dog

[SilverJets]

Ummm no I am not the target market. I'd rather not call the person if I don't want to talk to them than ninja a message into their voice mail.

It's not hard. If you don't want to talk to someone, either making the phone call or receiving the phone call, don't talk to them. Why do we need silly technology to overcome social phobias?

Voicemail equivalent to isolatr.com?

[noidentity]

Give me a voicemail equivalent to isolatr.com. I use this service and am very pleased with the results, but for some reason have no friends to recommend it to.

Does this work atm?

[Anonymous Coward]

I just called someone using Slydial and they picked up.

What gives?

Re:Do not want.

[Anonymous Coward]

no such dumb claim is made on that journal, and you are not willyhill, but your use of I instead of L shows a clever understanding of how sans-serif fonts are displayed

Here's a point

[Anonymous Coward]

Sometimes I don't want to disturb my friend, just want to get the data to him/her and texting isn't feasible.
Like when my brother is at the opera and I want to tell him my latest brainstorm before I forget.
Or the license number of the creep that just sideswiped someone. (Better to be quickly recorded than try to rely on memory, 911 would yell at you since nobody's life was in danger, and the cops, well, let's just say 15 minutes of you're not important elevator music doesn't help.)

Yes, it's something I would use. Yes, it's something that total non-social creeps would use also. Along with scammers trying a new angle. The scum of the world will abuse anything that can be abused, no question about that.

Funny...I ignore vmail

[rjamestaylor]

This is hilarious. I purposefully ignore vmail. It's too time consuming. If I'm interested in the caller (via callerid), I'll return the call. Otherwise, I ignore it. It's crap to me. I don't care how noble you think the cause to be -- it's crap.

issues

[Faux_Pseudo]

I work at a cell phone company. I can't wait for this to cause problems in my life.
Cust: My service sucks, my calls are going to voicemail and I never get them
Rep: I understand.... maybe no one likes you and they are doing it willfully?

Almost need this tagged with whatcouldpossiblygowrong

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I *never* check voice mail...

[mujadaddy]

...I *always* check my callerID to see who called, then I call them back. I dial into my voicemail and delete all the messages without listening to them about once a week. This service is not for me and not for people who want to get in touch with me.

VoiceMail SPAM???

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't this cause voice mail spam??? I just use this service, and now I can just speed dial all the phone numbers and leave them I nice advertising voice-mail. Excellent!

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

He's probably a deadbeat and doesn't like to hear from the bill collectors ;)

No cookie for Slydial

[Anonymous Coward]

I called my cell from my land line. My cell phone rang with correct callerid ... ? Fail. Too bad, I was intrigued.

Doesn't work for T-Mobile

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried this with my own phone. Cell phone rings as I'm hearing my ogm, but if I pick up, no one is there.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[dubl-u]

I actually have the same approach.. I have too many people in my life that leave the stupidest voice mails (trying to be funny, info i don't need, just saying hi)....

Interesting! Given the number of replies, this seems like a common situation.

I guess this must partly be a volume thing. In both my work and personal lives, the primary means of remote communication is email. So the number of voicemails I get is pretty small. The ones I do get tend to be relatively important. But living in San Francisco and doing computer work I guess I must be at the email-heavy end of things.

One thing I love about email is the ability to skim and then dash off a quick reply, so I can be polite but not waste much time. If I had to deal with my volume of email as voicemail instead, I guess I'd be similarly willing to delete most stuff unheard.

I wonder

[bitsiphon]

I bet it will be used by advertisers to batch targeted VM's to 10 million phones for only pennies/msg. This technology is useless for anything other than selling advertising.

Now if we could short-cut their greeting too

[jvarsoke]

My college had this back in the 1990s. We used it all the time. Leave a message on a professor's machine at 2am? No problem.

Now, if we could just give people a warning when they have 15seconds left for their message (and only give them 45sec total). Forwarding messages would be great too.

heck, the ASPEN system of the early 1990s had many great features that are just missing today.

Pinger.com does this already..sorta...and no ads

[elcid73]

This is a great idea. It's already pretty well successfully implemented with pinger.com. It works similarly, you dial pinger and immedately get prompted for a name from your contact list, and then talk and hang up. The recipient gets a text/SMS message with a number to dial that *immediately* lets them hear the message (they don't have to have pinger accounts) I've been using this for quite some time.

People here are posting about interacting with people, but come on, really how about respecting their time? When my wife is home with the baby, I'd rather send a text or VM without ringing the phone...who knows if she remembered to turn the ringer off. But the real point is "near time communication" as opposed to real-time. I don't like getting phone calls while I'm driving or at work. It's much easier to look at my phone and see a SMS/VM and respond to it when I'm comfortable, and able to give the caller my full attention.

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

We have had this for a while in Canada, from your own voicemail you simply enter the person's number and leave a message. It works on most home phone's as well...

It's actually a terrible feature, telemarketers love exploiting this one...

Cheapens and Erodes Human Interaction?

[VoidCrow]

Ah, human interaction often cheapens and erodes human interaction. For supporting evidence, check replies on Youtube et al. Occasional gems of clarity mired in the cess of 'Ur ghey!!!', 'Amerika pwns all you towelheads', 'Nuke the west!', and the rest of the incomprehension, pointless noise and misdirected rage. It's pretty depressing, particularly when someone's trying to put an interesting point across.

I welcome it

[PhotoGuy]

I'm not sure there's a whole business in it, but I like the idea.

Most land-line telco subscribers get their voicemail through their telco. And most telco's have a voicemail access number that also always to to *leave* voicemail. (In fact, the voicemail access almost seems to be a hacked-on mis-use of the voicemail leaving system. You have to hit # or * to get to your voicemail first, making the leaving voicemail feature seem high priority.)

Anyhow, whenever I was snagged into doing a mass calling thingy for a group I belonged to, I would simply call the voicemail access number and leave messages about the event or whatever that we were supposed to call about. I didn't have to bother people during their supper, and they could check the info at their leisure. I often wished this feature were more universally available.

This company seems to be onto something, although I wish it also did it for land lines...

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah right! I always ignore that and just delete my voicemail. I wish my phone didn't have it but it's on the contract. If I ever renew it, it'll be gone. Most of the time it's just people hanging up anyway.

skip the ads

[Anonymous Coward]

push the octothorpe to skip the ad

Stealth Messaging

[PMuse]

Many voicemail systems (e.g. corporate ones) have long (upwards of 10 years) had the ability to send vmail without making a phone call. This is sometimes used to vmail several people with the same message. It is also used by PHBs and slackers to seem like they are in the office when they are not (the vmail appears to originate from the sender's office phone number).

To send a stealth message, a person usually needs to know the vmail portal access phone number for the party he wants to vmail. Most external people don't know the vmail portal number, so they can't send stealth messages.

Enter Slydial. What Slydial has done is simply learn all the access phone numbers for big vmail systems (mobile carriers, etc.) and to build a more-or-less universal front end over the existing feature. Convenient? Maybe, but it isn't very novel and it's easy for the carriers to break frequently. I'm not sure this is a sustainable business. (Besides, is there demand? Even internal users rarely use the stealth send features.)

Why not dial the voicemail number direct?

[paulmac84]

I don't know about the US, but here in Ireland, if you want to go straight to someone's voicemail, you just prepend the digit 5 to the phone number, e.g. 087-1111111 becomes 087-51111111 and you're straight through to voicemail.

Kinda stupid if you ask me.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you don't really want to talk, use e-mail.

If you don't want to answer - don't answer.

It's not rocket science.

that's great, but

[Blufar]

Yea, you could tell people about Sprint if you knew it, but who does? And what about all the other carriers? I think it's easier to have this number on your phone and let them do the work for you.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

This is Slashdot, either

a> His phone is always connected or
b> He doesn't get many calls

This is a great way to make callback times...

[Anonymous Coward]

Slightly off-topic, but many business telephone systems will permit you to simply leave a message. Overworked? Underpaid (and aren't well all?)? Need to make your callback SLAs so that the PHB doesn't get grumpy? Not a problem! Call the person's voice mailbox, leave a message and callback number... and write "Left voicemail and callback number" in the ticket.

Works every time...

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a voicemail icon?

Nothing new, exists in Israel since.. ever.. ?

[Anonymous Coward]

In Israel this feature exists since the early days of the mobile carriers. I believe the support of it is required as part of the regulations.

A standard(global) prefix+number allows you to access the voicemail directly, the cost of it is same as accessing the voicemail through the usual means. It supports voicemails of all carriers and possible to use the feature using all carriers.

Always had this

[Muros]

Mobile networks in Europe (or at least here in Ireland) have had this as long as I can remember. You dial the network code, 5, then the number and get through to the persons voicemail, eg. Tel. number 085 1234567, you dial 085 51234567. I'm kinda surprised this is new over there.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[rantingkitten]

Hell yes, I ignore voicemail. I pretty much ignore my phone, too, though I have it on me all the time. If someone calls and I care what they have to say, I'd answer the damn thing. If I'm ignoring the call it's because I don't care, so why would I care enough to listen to a pedantic lecture about how many messages I have, and then someone yammering at me?

But I hate that stupid little voicemail icon, too, so when I see it, I usually play a game called "How fast can I delete the voicemail?" On my phone I don't think it's possible to break the two second barrier, but I'm trying.

Of course, then I have to go clear out the "New Voicemail Message" notification, and the "X Missed Calls" notification. Then I have a pristine phone once again until some other jackwit calls me.

Telemarketers will rape our vmail boxen now

[Anonymous Coward]

30 spam voicemails to get to the one that tells you your Grandma is in the hospital.

I used to do this 8 years ago

[welsh git]

I don't know how easy it is on most phones, but my phone was able to retrieve the 'diverted-to voicemail number'

It was a standard number, that was diverted to if my main number wasn't answered or was unavailable.

I used to give this number to most people for this very purpose.

Ok, so this is 'recipient' rather than 'caller' initiated, but hey.

Open to abuse?

[d_jedi]

I've received *SPAM* voicemail messages before (is there a term for that already? Maybe I should invent one..).

Bloody bastards making me waste my precious wireless minutes to hock their shitty wares.. I would seriously kill the fucker responsible..

Still rings the number!

[SAFH]

... and sends through your caller ID info.

Tested on Sprint and AT&T Wireless/SBC/Cingular/AT&T.

Wow, you really don't listen to Voicemail?

[Ignatius D'Lusional]

I can't believe how many anti-social assholes there are! If someone leaves a voicemail, they obviously have something to say... how could someone just ignore their voicemail and purposely delete them without listening to them? Man... how inconsiderate. These are the kind of people that deserve to be ignored every time they speak, because apparently nobody else has anything valuable to say... so what makes them any different?

Sprint to Sprint

[Ranger]

I used to be on Sprint. If you put two 1's in front of the full 10 digit phone number it'll go straight to voicemail. It only works from Sprint to Sprint. For example if their number is 917-555-1234 just dial 11-917-555-1234. I used to work in an call center that was outsourced to Sprint cellular. So if a customer asked us to call them back we'd get a lab phone and call them that way, so we wouldn't have to talk to them. I later found a backdoor phone number. It dials into the voicemail system and then you an leave a message on their voicemail. I don't remember what that number was, but most carriers actually outsource voicemail to the same company. That's why when you access your voicemail the controls and the automated voice all sound the same. I don't remember the company's name but it shouldn't be too hard to find.

So apparently this company has the backdoor number.

I bet this is how it works...

[Zebaulon]

I am fairly certain this does not use any "backdoor" or "special" access numbers in order to function...

If you have access to multiple lines (not including your cell phone), try this: Call your cell phone from one of the lines (be it another cell phone, your desk phone, etc.) As soon as the call starts ringing, place it on hold, and call your cell phone *again* from another line (be it another line on your PBX, another cell phone, etc.) If your cell phone has voice mail service, this second call should connect directly to the voice mail and play your greeting. (While the first call will continue to ring your phone.)

I'm pretty certain this is how the service works. It places one outbound call to the destination cell phone to "tie up" the line, places a second call which *should* immediately go to voice mail, and then drops the first call. Since most mobile phones do not ring immediately after the number is dialed, it is theoretically possible to pull this off if everything is timed correctly, and a little bit of luck plays in your favor. (My experience has been that GSM phones take several seconds to start ringing, and ringback does not start until the handset begins to ring, whereas CDMA will produce ringback immediately to the caller, but the actual handset may take several seconds to start ringing.)

I tried this service against several different phones/providers, sometimes it would cause the phone to ring briefly, and other times it would not.

I also called our PBX at the office with it, and basically saw a call come in on Line 1, followed by another call on Line 2 about half a second later. Which would seem to back up my theory.

on the other hand

[Anonymous Coward]

in Brazil we can just call our own number, and one of the voice mail options is to leave someone a message... you dial the number and leave a message, without calling the person

old news..

[crossmr]

I've been getting these kinds of voicemail on my home phone for at least 2 years. Apparently Gary from Century 21 hear I was selling my house and really wants to talk to me about it (I live in a high-rise apartment). I can't believe Canada had a feature for the US...

TraqMonkey

[RGRistroph]

When I have to do this, I use TraqMonkey -- http://www.traqmonkey.com/

It sends the message I leave to their email as an attachment

For some people, that gets the message to them faster; also, TraqMonkey has transcription available, so they can just read the text.

But I think the most common use for TraqMonkey is delivering reminders to yourself.

Another nail in literacy's coffin.

[chris_sawtell]

Sound just like email without the need to be able to decipher the glyphs. A certain sector of society will love this, the rest of us will find it to be a total pain.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

I never check my voicemail either. If it's important, they'll call back. Or I'll call them back if I see a number I recognize as important. Every 6 months or so I just go thru my voicemail and mass delete without listening to them.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[jez9999]

You really just ignore the messages until they get auto-deleted unless you think there's something especially good in there?

And you can never tell whether there is, you have to check them. I'm waiting for,

"Hi. I'm quite a tall, blonde intelligent women, about DD cup size. I tend to wear a knee-length skirt, boots, and tights when I'm out. I've been watching you coming into work every day, and think you're really hot. I managed to get your number and am asking you if you want to come for a drink with me. If so, please call me back."

It hasn't happened yet, but I'm sure it will.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[jez9999]

Serious question - how do you have that many people in your life that just want to call up and say hi? I have virtually no-one in my life that takes that much of an interest in me. Did you have these friends from school/college days, or what?

Does not seem to work with AT&T

[Anonymous Coward]

I dialed my cell with it - my cell rang several times before it went to VM. The CID listed the number that I dialed from.

How are they doing it?

[forrie]

I'm curious how they're accomplishing this; what their network is, did they obtain permission from the mobile carriers for special access.

Ultimately, is there a way the consumer/hacker could accomplish this - perhaps via a VoIP service.

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that uncommon of a practice. Psychologists have given this personality type a medical term. I believe it is dickhead.

Your number IS disclosed

[fullgrownnut]

First of all, this service does NOT block your number. It shows a missed call (on the intended recipient's caller id) from the number that you dialed the Sly Dial service from, THEN it goes to their voice mail. To prove that this is the intended way that this service is supposed to work by Sly Dial, block your phone number before calling their service (dial *67 then 267-SLY-DIAL). Listen to the recording you get from them. It specifically says that you're blocking your number and that your intended party is to know who is Sly Dialing them. It instructs you to hang up, and then call back without blocking your number. The second point I want to make is... just like anything else, once this service becomes popular and known in the public eye, it won't be such a secret anymore, therefore causing people to think that they didn't get a missed call because they were in a dead spot or something, but that they have been "Sly Dialed." You'll get a call back from the person saying, "hey, did you Sly Dial me the other day???"... lol. But for now, I guess it's good for what it's worth in certain situations.

Voicemail

[jvkjvk]

I see a lot of posts about how people hate both listening to as well as leaving voice mail.

They used to be called answering machines. And while a lot of people liked them because you didn't have to have both parties be there synchronized to transmit/receive the information contained in the call, there were a portion who could not use them. My father was one of them. He just hated to leave messages on an answering machine. He has changed though, and now *sometimes* leaves messages on my voicemail.

Why do so many people hate voice mail now? How many are old enough to have not liked answering machines? That would provide a baseline or sorts.

My premise is that this percentage has increased. It seems so, given the rate of acceptance in the 80's or 90's. How many other factors have increased that baseline? Cases of just too much accessibility? Or too many machines? Fear of permanent records? Just rather talk to a human? Can't be bothered to check? Generally people who had an answering machine in the '70's at least listened to the messages, while now we have people who won't check their voice mail. Interesting.

I don't know. I am sometimes uncomfortable leaving a message because i may have a hard time formulating my thoughts on the fly in a coherent manner but I manage anyway. I listen to my voicemail because if people want to get a hold of me, I want to help them do so. Same reason I have an email address and don't jsut depent n irc or im. sry don't txt

lol

Wait, forum! Both realtime and virtual voicemail of discussion threads. I wonder what the continuum is in use today, and what classes of dimensions would be good to measure.

snail mail
answering machines
voice mail
forums
irc
skype/cell
fixed land line
telepresence
fleshmeets

Where does this fall on the continuum? Near real time contemplation on an archived "virtual flash mob" event.

If you're reading this (woe unto you!); A near-realtime, no longer flash mob experience of Logos about a topic of little consequence, mediated through the visual centers of your consciousness. And perhaps vocal if you at all vocalize words (even non-vocally, of course (sort of like parens for the mind-body interface) ) multi sensual information in reading, writing. Perhaps hearing or touch or colour to some people who have a patterned sense of say, numbers, that other people do not have. Five actually being green in a tangible sense, just like gravity or c3 blue. I wonder what would happen if everyone were able to access these types of sensorium, or different types based on inclination. I think that's where research on this should be headed.

What's the shape of the future?

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming...

Re:You can then be connected to the voicemail inbo

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because you and your group of friends doesn't answer their voicemail, doesn't mean responsible adults with responsibilities don't. Also, if you were to read above, this would have a *lot* of usage in the business world, were it actually exposed to the public. There is so much bureaucratic bullshit in this world that a very large sect of them would find this very useful, not having to actually speak to someone about unfair or just plain stupid requests/responses/excuses.