Slashdot Mirror


AT&T To Allow VoIP On iPhone

Toe, The writes "On Tuesday, AT&T announced it will allow Apple to enable Voice over Internet Protocol applications, such as Skype, to run on its 3G wireless data network. Apple stated, 'We will be amending our developer agreements to get VoIP apps on the App Store and in customers' hands as soon as possible.' And Skype, while happy over the move, also stated, 'the positive actions of one company are no substitute for a government policy that protects openness and benefits consumers.'"

19 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. But if you can't wait... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just jailbreak your phone and use Voipover3G

    It's super easy and it has saved me lots of overage $$$$

    1. Re:But if you can't wait... by socsoc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't really see how $24.99 per month is a better deal than $20 over four months

  2. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by base3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    More like how important it is to AT&T not to have network neutrality codified into regulation. This move is only to mollify the FCC and get them off their backs so they can still double-dip by charging companies running popular sites for "preferential" (read non-degraded) access to AT&T subscribers.

    --
    One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  3. AT&T sets developer guidelines? by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They're revising the guidelines now AT&T's approved it. Does that mean that every iPhone developer in the world is limited by the guidelines set by one American network?

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  4. Some prefunctory rebuttals: by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 4, Informative

    1. No, this doesn't have anything to do with Google voice, as Google Voice isn't VOIP. 2. No, won't hurt the voice network, as the voice network and the 3G data network are not the same. If anything it will help the 2G voice network by offloading some traffic to the data network, which has more capacity and is receiving the preferred 850mhz spectrum. 3. This was inevitable as AT&T is switching to LTE, which will easily support VOIP; you cellular calls in general will probably be handled by VOIP. It's too early to think of anything else, but these are the most often misunderstood aspects of the announcement.

  5. Wait Just a Minute by sonicmerlin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is there any doubt AT&T is doing this in a feeble attempt to argue to the FCC that net neutrality laws aren`t needed? I have none.

    1. Re:Wait Just a Minute by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's absolutely no doubt that this is what AT&T is trying to do. This is par for the course for nearly any industry. As soon as the government starts looking into corporate practices and begins putting together something that will regulate an industry, that industry suddenly perks up, changes their behavior a little bit and says "No, see, we can self-regulate. No need to tell us what to do. The market is working." When in fact, if the market were working, the government wouldn't need to begin investigating those practices in the first place.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
  6. Who cares about VoIP by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm waiting for AT&T to allow regular calls on iPhone!

    --
    I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
    1. Re:Who cares about VoIP by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can make regular calls! If by regular, you mean "when everyone else is asleep, as long as there is nobody else making a call through your local cell."

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  7. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 4, Informative

    I suspect it has less to do with ATT heading off the FCC, and more to do with the recent announcement by Verizon stating they will be carrying a number of Android based phones, and explicitly stated they would permit voip over their data network (and I believe they mentioned Google Voice and Skype by name in that release).

    --
    I came, I conquered, I coredumped
  8. Re:About time. by aicrules · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not understand

  9. Google Voice is NOT VOIP by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Informative

    At this point, it has been said so many times that you pretty much have to be a complete idiot not to have grasped that GOOGLE VOICE IS NOT VOIP. It's more like a switchboard, routing calls.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  10. Oh sure, for just one.. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you have 60 women friends in 60 countries, it saves money.

    1. Re:Oh sure, for just one.. by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Funny

      You obviously have no idea how women correlate to money =)

  11. AT&T wants to hold onto the big cash by Michael+G.+Kaplan · · Score: 5, Informative

    More like how important it is to AT&T not to have network neutrality codified into regulation. This move is only to mollify the FCC and get them off their backs so they can still double-dip by charging companies running popular sites for "preferential" (read non-degraded) access to AT&T subscribers.

    AT&T is trying to mollify the FCC so that they can maintain multiple other abusive practices that would be eliminated if the same network neutrality standard that is applied to wired connections is applied to the cell phone networks. The wireless providers don't want to become mindless providers of bandwidth.

    -They want to be able to charge $0.20 for each text message.

    -They want to force you to purchase a phone from them. They will justify their high rates by explaining that they are subsidizing your phone but even after you've paid off your phone after 1-2 years they will still force you to pay the same inflated rate. If you leave the network you can't take your phone with you because the phone YOU paid for is locked to their network.

    -They want to be able to force you to purchase a data plan with certain WiFi phones.

    -They want to continue to cripple phones that offer highly desired features unless they can charge for them (e.g. gps chips are common in cell phones but users are not allowed access to the information unless you give the wireless provider cash).

    The list goes on and on. I hope that the American public and the FCC isn't fooled by this bone that AT&T tossed our way.

  12. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or the fact that the capitalist economy does indeed self regulate.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  13. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by Carewolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Or the fact that the capitalist economy does indeed self regulate.

    .. when threatened with government intervention.

  14. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by Sandbags · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google voice is not VoIP, it is a VRU.

    It handles hunt groups, caller ID data manipulation, DTMF code transforms, voice response, and DTMF tone response. It's a glorified call router (actually, its a higly SIMPLIFIED call router, barely using a fraction of the functions of a true VRU), but by itself it is NOT a VoIP service.

    Yes, it CAN route a call to and from an existing VoIP service, like Gizmo, but it does not place calls via SIP itself directly, it only initiates and received calls from other existing SIP extensions and numbers, and can not be substituted in place of Gizmo. It uses your Gizmo number and requires a gizmo client.

    The Google Voice App is simply an IP based system for communicating to the VRU to cause it to initiate calls, and to manage voicemail, account settings, and contacts. That's it.

    --
    There is no contest in life for which the unprepared have the advantage.
  15. Re:Bad deal for AT&T by Dotren · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think expanding network neutrality arguments to cell networks is a little over-reaching.

    Which is exactly what AT&T and the other wireless providers want you to think. Hell, even the ISPs want you to think that for your cable/DSL.

    Admittedly, I don't know the specifics completely nor do I know for sure if it extended to cellular providers, but sometime during the 90s the ISPs were provided money in some form or fashion to build up their infrastructure to support the growing userbase. They took the money but didn't use it the way they were supposed to. I'd be willing to bet most of these companies have the money now but they won't use it to do the upgrading needed.

    Why should they? With heavily limited competition, they could give customers horrible service while increasing their rates and most would still use their service because there aren't any viable alternatives. Upgrading infrastructure and capacity does nothing to increase their profits as they've discovered they can simply oversell their existing capacity legally with the magic words "speeds up to". Profits go up with no extra cost to expand which makes their actual customers, the shareholders, happy.