Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GrandCentral Reborn As Google Voice

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the probably-should-try-that-out-again dept.

Some anonymous person wrote in to say that Google has relaunched and rebranded GrandCentral as "Google Voice." The article says it will "revolutionize telephones. It unifies your phone numbers, transcribes your voice mail, blocks telemarketers and elevates text messages to first-class communication citizens." Sadly, the voicemail didn't integrate very nicely w/ my phone back in the day, so I guess I should give it a shot.

27 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Can't wait by oodaloop · · Score: 5, Informative

    I signed up to be notified when it's available to new users.

    https://services.google.com/fb/forms/googlevoiceinvite/

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    1. Re:Can't wait by SputnikPanic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't know, I'm becoming more and more wary about all the personal information Google is acquiring, and this is another area where Google is able to collect and store such information. Gmail, Calendar, Blogger, Desktop and now essentially, Phone Manager. The way things are going, soon Google will will be able to set your alarm clock for you without your direct input. They'll just know what time you need to wake up and voila.

    2. Re:Can't wait by ultrafunkula · · Score: 4, Funny

      I use Google calendar to send me an SMS reminder each morning. I've set my phone up to play an alarm call for these SMS messages from Google - voila, a Google alarm clock. I just need to work out how to schedule the coffee maker and toaster and I'm all set...

    3. Re:Can't wait by Sparhawk2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While that's cool I find the "alarm" function on my phone a bit easier...

    4. Re:Can't wait by tlhIngan · · Score: 4, Informative

      While that's cool I find the "alarm" function on my phone a bit easier...

      Probably more reliable too - SMS is like email - there's no guarantee in how long it'll take to get to the destination (or if it even gets there at all). The day you need your SMS-alarm to wake you up, is probably the day the SMS network gets slightly overloaded. (I've seen SMS' take days to arrive, and have heard of the oddball SMS duplication - where the same SMS was stuck in the system, and the recipient kept getting it twice an hour for 3 days straight).

    5. Re:Can't wait by eltaco · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know, I'm becoming more and more wary about all the personal information Google is acquiring, and this is another area where Google is able to collect and store such information. Gmail, Calendar, Blogger, Desktop and now essentially, Phone Manager. The way things are going, soon Google will will be able to set your alarm clock for you without your direct input. They'll just know what time you need to wake up and voila.

      I totally agree, but I'm also looking forward to this. it's a hate-love-relationship. I really hate and abhor the fact, that there's a company out there gathering such immense amounts of data on everyone - for the company's gain, not the public's. On the flip side, I'm truly envious of the quantity, quality and accuracy of their statistical data. I love that this data will enable them all kinds of awesomely cool stuff. I hate that they're essentially using that information to exploit their users.
      it starts off nice and clean with direct and targetted advertising, which by itself might actually be helpful and not bore people with ads that don't have any relevancy to them. But if we project and exaggerate their prowess, we get to a stage where google can directly and on a massive scale, manipulate markets and behaviour.

      this, I'm not looking forward to.

      --
      It's not about fate, it's about character.
      there be no shelter here, the frontline is everywhere!
  2. I was hoping by kcbanner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It would be a voice synth or something, that was really high quality. I was disapointed.

    --
    Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
  3. Pleasing Apple by MacColossus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Maybe Google gave it up for undisclosed cash to Apple since they are using the same term for a new type of multicore support in Snow Leopard. Eric Schmidt sits on Apple's board. Crazier things have happened.

    1. Re:Pleasing Apple by JustinOpinion · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe Google gave [up the term "GrandCentral"] for undisclosed cash to Apple since they are using the same term for a new type of multicore support in Snow Leopard

      I think this has more to do with branding. Google likes to put their name in products they take over. "GrandCentral" doesn't sound like a Google product. "Google Voice" does (and tells you roughly what it's all about). When Google bought Keyhole, they re-branded the product "Google Earth".

      In fact take a look at this list of Google acquisitions. Most of them were re-branded by Google, and most of the new names contain "Google" in them (with limited exceptions, like AdSense, which has a strong brand of its own).

      For something like YouTube, they didn't change the name since it already had a strong brand and following. But GrandCentral? It didn't have a huge following or mindshare. So rebranding it just makes sense. I doubt Apple had anything to do with it.

  4. Voicemail... by D-Cypell · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Im sorry, I can't take your call right now, but if you leave your name, phone number and message, I will get back to you as soon as I am out of Beta...."

    1. Re:Voicemail... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Thank you for leaving your message. Our content parsing algorithm has found that you were calling about 'were you Thursday night I saw you with her!' Would you like to hear some targeted advertisments for singles websites? We've automatically updated the contextual advertising database to reflect on the recipient's possible need for STD testing."

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  5. Free features by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Last I heard all their features were free, but I kinda felt bad because I knew the ones I liked could disappear at any time because that was what they said the plan was after they left beta.
    All features would be free during the beta, and then they said the "core" ones would be free after that with the rest being paid.

  6. Another so called "Revolution"? Yeah ok ... by Viol8 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't want a revolutionary new phone - the basic idea of the telephone was got pretty much spot on in the 19th century - talk into mic , listen from earpiece. What I want is a phone service thats reliable , cheap and works in an emergency. What I DO NOT want is a phone service that gives me a friggin "select from the following options" load of BS when I lift up the receiver! I have enough of that crap when phoning help desks. As for listening in when someone leaves a message - wooooo! Someone correct me but I believe you've been able to do that with steam powered cassette based answerphones since the 1970s.

    1. Re:Another so called "Revolution"? Yeah ok ... by LordKronos · · Score: 4, Informative

      Really? I didn't know that steam powered cassette based answerphones would let you listen in on a voicemail to your home line even though you were in the office. Like they always say...you learn something new every day.

      What I DO NOT want is a phone service that gives me a friggin "select from the following options" load of BS when I lift up the receiver

      Good news. If you had RTFA you would have read the part where it says this is optional.

  7. Wish they would use ANI instead of CID by LordKronos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since Caller ID has become virtually useless for identifying anyone other than friends and family (it is regularly blocked or spoofed), it would be nice if Google Voice gave you the option to view the ANI info (which is what is used internally by the phone systems for billing and E-911, and is generally considered unspoofable). I've been waiting for someone to do so for a long time.

    1. Re:Wish they would use ANI instead of CID by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ANI and VOIP don't play well together because the ANI (which is accurate) will point to the POP where the VOIP system connects to the POTS.... which may be very far from the VOIP user.

      But that ANI (is* accurate, in that it will lead you to the actual VOIP company that delivered the call to the POTS. From there, they have records that identify the actual source.

      So while ANI+VOIP isn't good for E911, it does work well for identifying telemarketers and suing their ass.

    2. Re:Wish they would use ANI instead of CID by lefiz · · Score: 5, Informative
      I'm not quite sure why this is modded as funny, since CallerID and ANI ("Automatic Number Identification") are actually two separate elements of a call as noted above. ANI is a built in signaling component of SS7 that generally cannot be modified by the calling party. See definition here.

      Still, although ANI may not be "spoofable," it can be manipulated or uninformative. For example, any call placed from any phone in my office carries a general company ANI even though the call could be originated from any of hundreds of phone numbers owned by the firm. We also have off-premise extensions (OPXs) that connect to the office PBX via SIP. Calls placed from those OPXs have the same ANI as calls made from the physical office, which would be deleterious if a call was placed to 911 from one of these phone. (We have implemented a safety workaround for this, but the point still stands.)

  8. Still can't port your existing number by MDMurphy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've had a GrandCentral account for years, never used it. First thing I did today was login and search the help for "port number". As it has said for the past few years:

    "Although you can't currently port your existing number to GrandCentral, we hope to offer this option in the near future. Check out our blog to stay up-to-date with GrandCentral news and learn about new features."

    If I have to give the people who call me a new number, it's not worth it. Maybe if I was moving and was getting a new number anyway ( though cell phones and Vonage don't require this ), then I'd use it.

    1. Re:Still can't port your existing number by DragonTHC · · Score: 3, Informative

      The whole point is to not have to give out your real number!

      I've been using grand central for about a year. I love it. It allows me to keep my cell number private.

      I also use the G1 Central app for android. It is the best solution out there.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
  9. GrandCentral is spam filtering for your phone by ShannaraFan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'll admit it - I still have a landline phone in my house. My satellite receivers require it, my DSL service requires the line, I feel better knowing it's there in case of an emergency, AND it keeps my teenagers from using up all of our shared cell minutes (the boy used 2700 minutes all by himself last month). In spite of these reasons, I was growing to hate that phone. We get maybe 2 legit calls on that phone a month, the rest are all telemarketers, a dozen a day sometimes, almost always between 6:00pm-9:00pm. It was driving me nuts.

    Along comes GrandCentral. Now, my home number is call-forwarded to GrandCentral. From there, I've whitelisted the numbers that are allowed to call us. Some of those numbers ring my cell, some ring my wife's, some ring both. Everything else goes to voicemail or is blocked as spam. Blocked callers hear a "number not in service" message. Voicemails are sent to us as emails.

    Very slick, VERY convenient, and it's removed a serious annoyance. Bliss...

    1. Re:GrandCentral is spam filtering for your phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      " I was growing to hate that phone. We get maybe 2 legit calls on that phone a month, the rest are all telemarketers, a dozen a day sometimes, almost always between 6:00pm-9:00pm. It was driving me nuts.

      So why didn't you sign up with the Do Not Call Registry?

      Also, you can record the "sit" tones - the 3-tone "number not in service" tones that you hear - onto your answering machine, and the telemarketers predictive auto-dialer will hang up. As an added bonus, if someone calls you long-distance, they can still (on some systems) talk for free for a minute or two (any more than that and they'll get nailed for phone fraud, same as any other phone phreak).

  10. That is interesting by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are now listening in and converting Voice to Text. I suspect that they are using an AI to figure out the heurestics of converting voice to Text. At some point, that will be useful in a number of new areas. Not just better transcription, but will be EXTREMELY useful for selling products to the Feds. Want to know exactly what Abdula is saying to his Cousin Obama in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia? Of course, that will lead to new translators as well. It could convert nicely from Arabic to English.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  11. Where does the paycheck come from? by Contusion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How does google plan to make money off of this? TFA mentions that they'll be transcribing voicemail to text in near real-time. Will they also be sifting those voicemails for marketing keywords? If my buddy calls to brag about his new car, will I be seeing BMW ads next time I log into gmail?

    *Pulling the tinfoil hat even lower over the brow now* Will Google Talk also have the ability to monitor calls made through their service for marketing info?
    Yeah, it sounds like a great service, but what's the cost in privacy?

  12. Re:Paradox by Dolohov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was just thinking the same thing - Google is in many ways an engine of innovation, and they bring a lot of cash to bear on a problem. But as you suggest, the same was true of Microsoft in the late 80s and early 90s. The only real difference is attitude, and attitudes change.

    As someone who makes use of Google's services, I think this is great, but I can't help but wonder whether this is ultimately stifling advancement in the field. Google doesn't NEED to innovate in voice, it just WANTS to. In some ways, that results in a better product: they take risks a small software house dares not. But they're not as committed to innovating, and they drive a lot of people out of the market. Gmail is a great service, and Google continues to do new and interesting things. But I haven't seen a single new webmail service since Gmail went live, and that's a little worrisome.

    As a software developer, I used to worry that Microsoft might find my particular niche potentially profitable. Now I worry that Google might think it's cool.

  13. Re:Paradox by Drakonik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That reminds me of a quote from Sid Meier's Aplha Centauri by entrepreneur Nwabudike Morgan: "We are not a monopoly. Our product is simply so good that no one chooses to compete with us."

    I'm not terribly concerned about Google, to be honest. I know they have a lot of my personal data. But they provide high quality products/services and don't treat me like shit. They're reliable and friendly and trustworthy. Microsoft, on the other hand, has always been shifty in one way or another, and their products have always seemed only partially baked and ready.

    Benevolent dictators are okay when they're actually benevolent. So far, Google hasn't done anything to wrong me.

  14. Re:Video? by raju1kabir · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who wants video phones? There are really only two times that I use (or want to use) video calling:

    1. Very occasionally, for remote meetings with colleagues that I know well and like, mainly because it is amusing and allows us to connect after not working side-by-side for a long time.

    2. When dealing with tiny kids at a long distance.

    Other than that, it's awful. I hate it for ordinary business calls because I can't read email, munch on raisins, pick my nose, stare out the window, or whatever else I'd normally do. And I've never felt like I want to see my friends when calling them.

    Assuming I'm not too terribly odd in this regard, the market for video is probably limited.

    --
    "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  15. Yes I use it and it is great by boyfaceddog · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a home land line, a work land line (mandatory), a work cell, and a home cell. My wife has a cell and my daughter has a cell.

    I can, depending on the caller ID (and I'm talking about reliable ones from people I know -- like my boss) have GC ring all of my phones, just my phones, just me work phones, just my home phones, my daughter's phone, or just about any combination I want.

    Or no phone at all.

    I suggest it for anyone who deals with clients and wants their number to remain the same after they leave a job. Get a GC number and put it on your business cards. Link up your cell and your desk phone. Leave the job, keep the cards, your clients may not even know the difference.

    It has always been a good service.

    --
    Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.