Importing Google Contacts to Obi202
frankpc:
Do you have to subscribe to OBiEXTRAs to import your Google Contacts with the obi202 for CID Name support?
Thank you.
frankpc:
Thanks.
I have tried it and it didn't work. So I am looking for a reason why. When I imported the contacts, I was told the process was successful. However, when I tried it, no name was returned.
Perhaps I didn't wait long enough. Or perhaps my Google Contacts format is wrong. However, this morning, before I switched from my Google Fiber Phone module, to the Obi202, Google Contacts worked fine.
So, I am just trying to determine how it is supposed to work. Right now, I am at a loss as to what to try next. Although, perhaps subscribing, even for a test, might be wise.
Thanks again!
Frank
SteveInWA:
I funnel my inbound calls through Callcentric, to get their CNAM. In my particular case, I care more about CNAM for non-contacts, so it was a better option for me.
I should clarify my last post. I was able to download the contacts. I didn't try to use the feature on an inbound call ::) because of my Callcentric setup.
I just now tested it. I added one of my test phone numbers to my Google Contacts and gave it a distinctive name. I clicked the "Import your Google Contacts" button under OBiEXTRAs settings, and I gave it permission do to so. I rebooted the OBi. I turned off my forwarding to Callcentric, and turned on forwarding to Chat, so I could test a direct call via GV. The CNAM did not appear (I got the typical "OUT OF AREA" substitute). I then imported the same Google Contacts list into my OBi IP phone, and it DID work. So, you do need to subscribe to OBiEXTRAs for it to work on an OBi ATA.
Let us know if you experience the same, or different results.
frankpc:
Interesting. I appreciate your explanation of that. Your test does seem to demonstrate the difference between the Obi phone and Obi ATA. I did not reboot my Obi. I can't test now because I would be shot. But I will tomorrow.
I also care more about CNAM for non-contacts, which are calls I either want to block or are people I may not want to block but don't have in my phonebook. My PC announces known callers on our 'intercom' system and it also blocks calls by name or number that are in my list.
Obviously, 'self-provision' of service is totally new to me. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems reasonable to subscribe to OBiEXTRAs just to get the CID CNAM ability and the ability to upload contacts. And then to sign up with Anveo for 911. While I originally thought Callcentric was free, other than the cost of 911, it appears that it is only free to call other Callcentric users. Albeit their rates are very low.
It seems ObiHai makes it very convenient to use their OBiEXTRAs and Anveo.
In the morning, I'll do the reboot and see if that makes any difference.
Again, I appreciate your time and expertise Steve
Frank
SteveInWA:
We're all learning as we go, given the lack of product documentation regarding OBiEXTRAs.
There are advantages and disadvantages to the OBi/GV contacts integration vs. using Callcentric.
The OBi/GV method will (in theory, if the darn thing works when you pay for the subscription) let you define any name or words you wish for the CNAM of a known contact.It can't provide CNAM for callers not already in Contacts.The "detour through Callcentric" method will provide some (often useless) CNAM information for most calling numbers.Many calls from mobile phone numbers will just say "WIRELESS CALLER" or the name of the state or city. This is a limitation of the CNAM system and the information provided by, or not provided by, the carriers that control those numbers. For example, Sprint and T-Mobile generally feed their customers' names into the LIDBs for CNAM, but I don't know if VZW and AT&T do so. Prepaid mobile phone numbers typically don't have CNAM information.Most of use who use Callcentric for CNAM use one of CC's free NY State phone numbers for this purpose. Since they are inbound calls, there's no charge from CC. This might change this year, as the FCC is pushing carriers to stop charging each other for interconnection fees (CC may stop giving away service on these numbers).
IMO, CNAM is becoming less useful, as more and more customers are dropping traditional POTS telephone service, which historically had the highest percentage of well-maintained and accurate CNAM, thanks to the POTS carriers. Some VoIP carriers will feed their customers' names into the system, and others don't.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page