Alternately, Mr Troll, Apple has usually (USUALLY) come out with products that do as advertised with the minimal amount of fuss and agony. Most Apple-purchasers do not buy for the brand as that would just be silly.
Sorry. DNS is not a content-definition system. It is a system for translating IP addresses to human-readable (usually) names and the reverse. It is not for balkanizing the Internet into "districts".
It sets an ugly precedent for further dividing content into groups easily blockable by groups in control (governments, corporations, etc). Would you like to wake up some day to find that negative discussions regarding your government are deemed inappropriate, and subjugated to a TLD (by US law perhaps?) and then blocked by a majority of access providers?
Finally, uou nor anyone else are fit to define what content is available or grouped for everyone else. You are responsible for your OWN content viewing, and those you are legally considered guardian of, no one else.
Comcast and Bright House both have deeper pockets than Vonage, however, do you think they would be able to withstand Verizon's lawyers? Assuming the patents involved are infringed upon in a way the jury assumed in the Vonage case...
You realize, of course, if Vonage is unsuccessful in having a stay granted and cannot develop a technical work around and thus departs from the marketplace, Verizon will become emboldened to press lawsuits against other voice providers using VoIP-to-PSTN gateway technologies? Goodbye Packet8, goodbye Broadvoice, goodbye VoicePulse...
It would seem the only solution in the end is to entirely bypass the legacy PSTN system and encourage the people you call to switch to a VoIP solution so no calls are terminated by Verizon.
You just used "factual" and "opinion" in the same sentence to reference the same post. Facts don't have bias (other the often touted joke "reality has a libery bias"); opinions do. That's a really important difference you seem to have missed.
Aaaaand you've completely missed the point. Are you attempting to make a comparison between Lawn Guyland and the three northern territories of Canada???
You would expect Long Island to have inexpensive, high speed access available, but perhaps not some fishing village within spitting distance of the Arctic Circle.
Debating is not whining, and coming up with an alternate solution is not a requirement for debating a subject. Sometimes doing something (anything) about a problem is worse than doing nothing at the time. Random "solutions" brought on by cries of "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!!!" are often worse than the existing problem.
Wait.. you blast someone for their opinion based on a video game, and you use a MOVIE as your reference? I really hope this is either a troll or thick sarcasm, because otherwise, you've just shot yourself in both feet.
The telecoms in question (Verizon, SBC/AT&T and BellSouth) handed records over whereas Qwest did not. Assuming there was bullying, it wasn't enough to convince Qwest's previous CEO in the past and current CEO. More likely the other three RBOCs handed over the records with no questions asked.
IP addresses change; renumbering is a fact of life on the Internet, even if you should have your own portable spaced assigned by your regional IP block authority.
Right. Magic box just work when Grog press 911! Grog get helpy service good!
Just because you don't want to understand the technical limitations behind addressing a location-specific service to a non-location-specific service doesn't mean you can just wave your hands around and say "Make it so".
Sorry, but if you're a responsible network administrator and do capacity planning and keep tabs on your network, this just doesn't happen. Incremental upgrades can be made ahead of a dangerous line, just as with any network upgrade. These issues should be presented prior to any organization's rollout of ANY service, not just VoIP. To not perform such duties of a responsible network engineer is gross negligence.
In the event that such your PHB's ignore your capacity planning and advice, time to put that resume out for a more suitable employer, one not headed down the path to doom. You'll thank yourself in the long run.
Umm.. I work at an ITSP that provides Linksys PAP2 boxes to customers; you *do* know that this box is actually just a rebadged SPA-2000, right?:)
We get them unlocked from Linksys because we are an ITSP. We sell them to customers (and give them the admin password) if they want, but most just don't care and don't want to buy them. It all comes down to choosing the right ITSP.
Not informative, more like misleading, whoever marked this. VoIP most certainly *is* Voice over IP. Your voice is quantized into 20ms long (typically) bits that are encoded using a variety of available codecs, then transported OVER IP. You are confusing the functions of an ITSP (Internet Telephony Service Provider) with VoIP itself.
So? So were most cablemodems until recently. VoIP is a new technology to the consumer market, it will take a while for one or two standards to settle, and when they do, just like most things like DVD formats and Cable modem protocols and such, firmware gets upgraded and no one cares. Besides, so their proprietary, what di you want to do, take your hardware and move to some other linux-native VoIP provider? Wait...there aren't any.
No excuse, sorry. There exist OPEN standards, PUBLISHED standards out there that are supported by hundreds of hardware and software solutions.
As for "Linux-native" VoIP provider, that makes no sense. Who cares? There are hardware and software solutions available for Linux and utilize existing open and published standards. Do some research on Google to find them.
Who cares what protocol you speak from your headset unit to the 'Net, once it gets to the 'Net it's IP. When it gets to the phone system, it's converted to proprietary digital forms that Sprint or AT&T use, and when it reaches another VoIP carrier, it might convert to another protocol. It doesn't matter though, the frmat is meaningless to the data.
Propretary digital formats? You mean, u-Law? Nice try. Even the larger nascent VoIP providers don't resort to such foolishness because they are able to leverage EXISTING solutions. What is important is to be able to transit between providers easily and seemlessly. Consumers have been asking for this from cellphone providers for YEARS (i.e., locked-in phones) and the FCC and courts have finally taken notice.
There are no pictures in Voice. If you want videoconferencing, use another service. But if you want good audio quality, use a service that utilizes all of your available bandwidth for audio (go figure, a specialized service works better than a general one).
VoIP has been somewhat generalized lately. Packet8 provides a videophone now to customers. Moving from a circuit-switched environment to a packet-switched environment allows all kinds of new things to be done that could not be easily accomplished before across the same infrastructure. SIP, one commonly used VoIP signalling protocol, even includes support for multiple data streams to be handled at once, voice, video, and even text and application data (for IM or whiteboarding, for instance). Don't be so limited in your view.
The Skinny/SCCP protocol has some support in Asterisk 0.7.x now. I haven't had a chance to test it myself as there is no way I'm paying that much for a portable phone with very limited coverage at the moment:)
I'm sorry, even if I wanted to, I can't. Your government has gone out of its way to prevent Americans from being hired inside your country. I'm afraid I don't have a link to one of the dozen articles written in various online trade rags, but if you do some digging I'm sure you'll find one.
Hi. Please stop spreading misinformation. Amateur radio operators are licensed users of bands within the wide swath of spectrum the power companies insist on using for this kind of setup. Do know what else exists in this range? Lots of HF and low end VHF services like police, fire, ambulance and rescue systems that likely will not be able to tolerate the amount of hash that BPL systems put out. Think about that next time an ambulance dispatch cannot reach any ambulances to rescue you from an accident when you are bleeding to death.
If the FSF's mission in life was to "have them see the benefits ov voluntarily sharing this code", then they would actively back the BSD and BSD-like licenses. The GPL is not about voluntary anything. It is about destroying the economy of paying-for-software. Companies like Apple, IBM and others have benefited from BSD-licensed code and have given back to the community without a specific clause stating that you MUST. So why would he say anything other than "we will make you obey"?
It has no such power. It is a document with no legal basis in reality. Until it is proven in a court of law (in a particular jurisdiction), it only has as much meaning as people want to attribute to it. We call this "wishful thinking" in enlightened circles.
Slashdot Mirror
How about.. don't bomb anyone, and.. don't enact hypocritical anti-trade legislation?
Wrong. Anything encoded in H.264 is playable, not "Apple-approved" media. Do some research before posting next time, please.
There are free H.264 encoders out there. Wikipedia is a good play to start searching.
Alternately, Mr Troll, Apple has usually (USUALLY) come out with products that do as advertised with the minimal amount of fuss and agony. Most Apple-purchasers do not buy for the brand as that would just be silly.
Sorry. DNS is not a content-definition system. It is a system for translating IP addresses to human-readable (usually) names and the reverse. It is not for balkanizing the Internet into "districts".
It sets an ugly precedent for further dividing content into groups easily blockable by groups in control (governments, corporations, etc). Would you like to wake up some day to find that negative discussions regarding your government are deemed inappropriate, and subjugated to a TLD (by US law perhaps?) and then blocked by a majority of access providers?
Finally, uou nor anyone else are fit to define what content is available or grouped for everyone else. You are responsible for your OWN content viewing, and those you are legally considered guardian of, no one else.
Comcast and Bright House both have deeper pockets than Vonage, however, do you think they would be able to withstand Verizon's lawyers? Assuming the patents involved are infringed upon in a way the jury assumed in the Vonage case...
You realize, of course, if Vonage is unsuccessful in having a stay granted and cannot develop a technical work around and thus departs from the marketplace, Verizon will become emboldened to press lawsuits against other voice providers using VoIP-to-PSTN gateway technologies? Goodbye Packet8, goodbye Broadvoice, goodbye VoicePulse...
It would seem the only solution in the end is to entirely bypass the legacy PSTN system and encourage the people you call to switch to a VoIP solution so no calls are terminated by Verizon.
You just used "factual" and "opinion" in the same sentence to reference the same post. Facts don't have bias (other the often touted joke "reality has a libery bias"); opinions do. That's a really important difference you seem to have missed.
Aaaaand you've completely missed the point. Are you attempting to make a comparison between Lawn Guyland and the three northern territories of Canada???
You would expect Long Island to have inexpensive, high speed access available, but perhaps not some fishing village within spitting distance of the Arctic Circle.
Debating is not whining, and coming up with an alternate solution is not a requirement for debating a subject. Sometimes doing something (anything) about a problem is worse than doing nothing at the time. Random "solutions" brought on by cries of "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!!!" are often worse than the existing problem.
Wait.. you blast someone for their opinion based on a video game, and you use a MOVIE as your reference? I really hope this is either a troll or thick sarcasm, because otherwise, you've just shot yourself in both feet.
Not Simpsons, Futurama. One of the "What If" episodes IIRC.
Bonus points for the obscure Red Dwarf reference, even if slightly wrong. :)
The telecoms in question (Verizon, SBC/AT&T and BellSouth) handed records over whereas Qwest did not. Assuming there was bullying, it wasn't enough to convince Qwest's previous CEO in the past and current CEO. More likely the other three RBOCs handed over the records with no questions asked.
IP addresses change; renumbering is a fact of life on the Internet, even if you should have your own portable spaced assigned by your regional IP block authority.
Right. Magic box just work when Grog press 911! Grog get helpy service good!
Just because you don't want to understand the technical limitations behind addressing a location-specific service to a non-location-specific service doesn't mean you can just wave your hands around and say "Make it so".
Sorry, but if you're a responsible network administrator and do capacity planning and keep tabs on your network, this just doesn't happen. Incremental upgrades can be made ahead of a dangerous line, just as with any network upgrade. These issues should be presented prior to any organization's rollout of ANY service, not just VoIP. To not perform such duties of a responsible network engineer is gross negligence.
In the event that such your PHB's ignore your capacity planning and advice, time to put that resume out for a more suitable employer, one not headed down the path to doom. You'll thank yourself in the long run.
Umm.. I work at an ITSP that provides Linksys PAP2 boxes to customers; you *do* know that this box is actually just a rebadged SPA-2000, right? :)
We get them unlocked from Linksys because we are an ITSP. We sell them to customers (and give them the admin password) if they want, but most just don't care and don't want to buy them. It all comes down to choosing the right ITSP.
Not informative, more like misleading, whoever marked this. VoIP most certainly *is* Voice over IP. Your voice is quantized into 20ms long (typically) bits that are encoded using a variety of available codecs, then transported OVER IP. You are confusing the functions of an ITSP (Internet Telephony Service Provider) with VoIP itself.
So? So were most cablemodems until recently. VoIP is a new technology to the consumer market, it will take a while for one or two standards to settle, and when they do, just like most things like DVD formats and Cable modem protocols and such, firmware gets upgraded and no one cares. Besides, so their proprietary, what di you want to do, take your hardware and move to some other linux-native VoIP provider? Wait...there aren't any.
No excuse, sorry. There exist OPEN standards, PUBLISHED standards out there that are supported by hundreds of hardware and software solutions.
As for "Linux-native" VoIP provider, that makes no sense. Who cares? There are hardware and software solutions available for Linux and utilize existing open and published standards. Do some research on Google to find them.
Who cares what protocol you speak from your headset unit to the 'Net, once it gets to the 'Net it's IP. When it gets to the phone system, it's converted to proprietary digital forms that Sprint or AT&T use, and when it reaches another VoIP carrier, it might convert to another protocol. It doesn't matter though, the frmat is meaningless to the data.
Propretary digital formats? You mean, u-Law? Nice try. Even the larger nascent VoIP providers don't resort to such foolishness because they are able to leverage EXISTING solutions. What is important is to be able to transit between providers easily and seemlessly. Consumers have been asking for this from cellphone providers for YEARS (i.e., locked-in phones) and the FCC and courts have finally taken notice.
There are no pictures in Voice. If you want videoconferencing, use another service. But if you want good audio quality, use a service that utilizes all of your available bandwidth for audio (go figure, a specialized service works better than a general one).
VoIP has been somewhat generalized lately. Packet8 provides a videophone now to customers. Moving from a circuit-switched environment to a packet-switched environment allows all kinds of new things to be done that could not be easily accomplished before across the same infrastructure. SIP, one commonly used VoIP signalling protocol, even includes support for multiple data streams to be handled at once, voice, video, and even text and application data (for IM or whiteboarding, for instance). Don't be so limited in your view.
The Skinny/SCCP protocol has some support in Asterisk 0.7.x now. I haven't had a chance to test it myself as there is no way I'm paying that much for a portable phone with very limited coverage at the moment :)
That's 1500 watts, except on the 30 meter band.
I'm sorry, even if I wanted to, I can't. Your government has gone out of its way to prevent Americans from being hired inside your country. I'm afraid I don't have a link to one of the dozen articles written in various online trade rags, but if you do some digging I'm sure you'll find one.
Hi. Please stop spreading misinformation. Amateur radio operators are licensed users of bands within the wide swath of spectrum the power companies insist on using for this kind of setup. Do know what else exists in this range? Lots of HF and low end VHF services like police, fire, ambulance and rescue systems that likely will not be able to tolerate the amount of hash that BPL systems put out. Think about that next time an ambulance dispatch cannot reach any ambulances to rescue you from an accident when you are bleeding to death.
If the FSF's mission in life was to "have them see the benefits ov voluntarily sharing this code", then they would actively back the BSD and BSD-like licenses. The GPL is not about voluntary anything. It is about destroying the economy of paying-for-software. Companies like Apple, IBM and others have benefited from BSD-licensed code and have given back to the community without a specific clause stating that you MUST. So why would he say anything other than "we will make you obey"?
It has no such power. It is a document with no legal basis in reality. Until it is proven in a court of law (in a particular jurisdiction), it only has as much meaning as people want to attribute to it. We call this "wishful thinking" in enlightened circles.