You're thinking about the problem in far to conventional way - change the question - what you need is a number that friends, family, colleagues, business, etc can reach you. Your cell phone is just one of many systems designed to carry voice.
A great example of reversing this problem is the former "Grand Central" now "Google Voice". (Note: I have it under good authority that if you are on the waiting list an additional one million new subscribers will be added as soon as July)
There are dozens of other one number systems - Google Voice is just free.
Now you have a single number of which your cell phone is just one of many ways to answer or place calls.
PS - For those of you keeping up with the Skype/SIP discussion - Skype has agreed to begin providing interconnection to commercial SIP providers. They have been testing this for about a year and I can attest that the system works very good. I've been able to place calls to and from my Skype account from any phone including my Cell.
Seems pretty meanless - I wonder how many bank tellers kiss co-workers? or perhaps actors - I think most of them sleep with each other - does that mean that 47% sleep on the job?
Hmmmmph - who got paid to do a study like this - I suspect someone in accounting was sleeping on the job......
Interesting to note that in Japan where ISP's provide 100 Mbps symmetrical service that by capping the overall transfer of data to 90 Gb a consumer would be limited to just over 2 hours of connectivity.
Typical patent bunk - both ILink and GoSolo were using Nuance Voice technology back in 1998 to recognize callers based on their voice then routing the call based on user defined policies for who the caller is. - this Patent does not identify this as prior art. It's worthless
Great yet another false patent application - the market is flooded with these type of claims - we used Java compilers for web based services for a Bell South project back in the mid 90's - and we shared the methods with the open source community. This is well documented and we did not attempt to "Patent" what should have been considered normal and intuitive use of technology.
Seems like watching a child discover new things;)
One primary reason Cisco may not be able to just "Sell" the iphone trademark is that Cisco doesn't own it - research shows at least two prior iPhone products before Cisco's use of the name - one was in production from the same company that received the original VoIP Patent award - iLink.
This was a Marriott company based in Salt Lake during the late 90's - one of the founding members was a young Ukrainian named "Alex Radulivic" who was eventually awarded a limited patent on the first development of VoIP.
One of the products in production from iLink was the iPhone - an integrated computer/phone product - it was just too early to market. I'm pretty sure the trademark was not renewed - and is now public domain.
This country is loaded with solutions - from database systems that actually work, to communications that would empower first responders to actually be able to communicate with each other during an emergency.
Doing business with Uncle Sam however is a challenge than no successful small business has every found a solution for - the red tape and big dogs that feed off the inability of the government to actually make a good decision make the process unworkable.
Until the political system actually empowers GSA to bypass its own red tape the system will remain broke - and these great solutions will continue to only benefit the private sector.
Great observation - about the posts - and the reason that
the Vonage IPO will be successful has nothing to do with how it performs as a
technology or company.
Financial markets depend on the kind of rhetoric and hype
you see in this series of posts - just a lot of buzz and most investors are
only looking for movement to generate profits.
Public markets don't care about customer service,
technology, and I might even add value - profits are focused on such short term
movements that long term value is only something that generates interest for
the smaller investor - generally the one that loses in the game. (some of us however have done far better than
the pros - for example when my broker made a recommendation that I buy Lucent
back in early 2001 - that was my trigger to sell everything and let the bubble
burst,;) ).
Just watch - and even invest up front if you're interested
there will be short term profits to take here - unlike Google or Microsoft both
continuing to generate real cash revenues.
P.S. - I've also tried Vonage - not bad - however with the
use of an old PC, Asterisk and a connection to e164.org I make calls all day for a
fraction of the cost of Vonage.
The list of competitors grows every day - and the prices
fall every day.
Slashdot Mirror
You're thinking about the problem in far to conventional way - change the question - what you need is a number that friends, family, colleagues, business, etc can reach you. Your cell phone is just one of many systems designed to carry voice. A great example of reversing this problem is the former "Grand Central" now "Google Voice". (Note: I have it under good authority that if you are on the waiting list an additional one million new subscribers will be added as soon as July) There are dozens of other one number systems - Google Voice is just free. Now you have a single number of which your cell phone is just one of many ways to answer or place calls. PS - For those of you keeping up with the Skype/SIP discussion - Skype has agreed to begin providing interconnection to commercial SIP providers. They have been testing this for about a year and I can attest that the system works very good. I've been able to place calls to and from my Skype account from any phone including my Cell.
Well I'm glad that I'm not the only one that recognizes that John's a raving fool - why do we even care what he thinks?
Seems pretty meanless - I wonder how many bank tellers kiss co-workers? or perhaps actors - I think most of them sleep with each other - does that mean that 47% sleep on the job? Hmmmmph - who got paid to do a study like this - I suspect someone in accounting was sleeping on the job......
Interesting to note that in Japan where ISP's provide 100 Mbps symmetrical service that by capping the overall transfer of data to 90 Gb a consumer would be limited to just over 2 hours of connectivity.
Typical patent bunk - both ILink and GoSolo were using Nuance Voice technology back in 1998 to recognize callers based on their voice then routing the call based on user defined policies for who the caller is. - this Patent does not identify this as prior art. It's worthless
Great yet another false patent application - the market is flooded with these type of claims - we used Java compilers for web based services for a Bell South project back in the mid 90's - and we shared the methods with the open source community. This is well documented and we did not attempt to "Patent" what should have been considered normal and intuitive use of technology. Seems like watching a child discover new things ;)
One primary reason Cisco may not be able to just "Sell" the iphone trademark is that Cisco doesn't own it - research shows at least two prior iPhone products before Cisco's use of the name - one was in production from the same company that received the original VoIP Patent award - iLink. This was a Marriott company based in Salt Lake during the late 90's - one of the founding members was a young Ukrainian named "Alex Radulivic" who was eventually awarded a limited patent on the first development of VoIP. One of the products in production from iLink was the iPhone - an integrated computer/phone product - it was just too early to market. I'm pretty sure the trademark was not renewed - and is now public domain.
This country is loaded with solutions - from database systems that actually work, to communications that would empower first responders to actually be able to communicate with each other during an emergency. Doing business with Uncle Sam however is a challenge than no successful small business has every found a solution for - the red tape and big dogs that feed off the inability of the government to actually make a good decision make the process unworkable. Until the political system actually empowers GSA to bypass its own red tape the system will remain broke - and these great solutions will continue to only benefit the private sector.
Great observation - about the posts - and the reason that the Vonage IPO will be successful has nothing to do with how it performs as a technology or company.
Financial markets depend on the kind of rhetoric and hype you see in this series of posts - just a lot of buzz and most investors are only looking for movement to generate profits.
Public markets don't care about customer service, technology, and I might even add value - profits are focused on such short term movements that long term value is only something that generates interest for the smaller investor - generally the one that loses in the game. (some of us however have done far better than the pros - for example when my broker made a recommendation that I buy Lucent back in early 2001 - that was my trigger to sell everything and let the bubble burst, ;) ).
Just watch - and even invest up front if you're interested there will be short term profits to take here - unlike Google or Microsoft both continuing to generate real cash revenues.
P.S. - I've also tried Vonage - not bad - however with the use of an old PC, Asterisk and a connection to e164.org I make calls all day for a fraction of the cost of Vonage.
The list of competitors grows every day - and the prices fall every day.