IPKall alternative
restamp:
Quote from: SteveInWA on January 26, 2016, 04:27:05 pm
In general: working, paid telephone numbers, located in rate centers within the 48 contiguous US States, from any of the major, traditional landline carriers (e.g. AT&T, Verizon, Frontier) or cable companies (Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, etc.), or any of the true mobile carriers (not the freebie VoIP hybrids) should be fine.
Except they aren't: Last week, I was unable to register a long term working paid telephone number located in a rate center within the contiguous US, from a major traditional landline carrier (AT&T). Moreover, GV initially appeared to accept this number and then did not say why the number wouldn't work, or even that it didn't work, only that "there has been a problem". This made it appear as if the problem was with the GV number I had selected, or was perhaps an internal error, as opposed to a rejection of the registering number.
Look, GV has been good to me and I appreciate the fact that it's free, but the implementation of this change has been botched: When Google rejects a registering number, they should explain what they are doing, not issue a screwy error message that hides the underlying problem and confuses the user. This change has not been made to Google's usual clear and well-documented programming standards, and it needs to be re-addressed.
And, Steve, you would be doing everyone a favor if you would reflect these concerns back to the people who can address them at Google. I would expect them, in addition to wanting to put the kibosh on GV abuse, to also want to address the perceived shortcomings in their product.
SteveInWA:
Quote from: restamp on January 26, 2016, 09:28:27 pm
Quote from: SteveInWA on January 26, 2016, 04:27:05 pm
In general: working, paid telephone numbers, located in rate centers within the 48 contiguous US States, from any of the major, traditional landline carriers (e.g. AT&T, Verizon, Frontier) or cable companies (Comcast, Cox, Time Warner, etc.), or any of the true mobile carriers (not the freebie VoIP hybrids) should be fine.
Except they aren't: Last week, I was unable to register a long term working paid telephone number located in a rate center within the contiguous US, from a major traditional landline carrier (AT&T). Moreover, GV initially appeared to accept this number and then did not say why the number wouldn't work, or even that it didn't work, only that "there has been a problem". This made it appear as if the problem was with the GV number I had selected, or was perhaps an internal error, as opposed to a rejection of the registering number.
Look, GV has been good to me and I appreciate the fact that it's free, but the implementation of this change has been botched: When Google rejects a registering number, they should explain what they are doing, not issue a screwy error message that hides the underlying problem and confuses the user. This change has not been made to Google's usual clear and well-documented programming standards, and it needs to be re-addressed.
And, Steve, you would be doing everyone a favor if you would reflect these concerns back to the people who can address them at Google. I would expect them, in addition to wanting to put the kibosh on GV abuse, to also want to address the perceived shortcomings in their product.
Unfortunately, they are not going to provide users with any more-specific error messages. This is intentional, again, to limit the possibility of reverse-engineering the process and creating workarounds.
If you submitted an AT&T land line number that was rejected, then it is likely due to that number having been used too many times in the past, to obtain a Google Voice number, either by you, or by the previous user of that number.
RFC3261:
Quote from: WoodyGee on January 26, 2016, 08:08:36 pm
I am an individual and I use GV as an individual who manages a sole proprietorship.
That is called a business owner. That your business is you and yourself does not change that it is (per the usual regs (i.e. IRS)) a business.
Now I have no (personal) objection to anyone (including businesses) from using a free service if they choose, but those that choose to do so are going to have to accept and experience the (often) arbitrary rules and changes that happen when the contract is pretty much one-sided.
If you want more, and want to have a say, you need a contract (which, as a business owner, I am sure you understand). There are plenty of VoIP providers with different levels of service at different prices. One might meet your requirements if GV does not.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page