May 05, 2021, 10:13:56 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
News:
 
   Forum Home   Search Login Register OBiTALK  
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
Author Topic: Google Voice is now Officially Supported on OBi VoIP devices  (Read 43543 times)
Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #40 on: September 20, 2014, 07:21:01 pm »

For CNAM.... Google should just integrate their Google Caller ID that's in the Android Dialer with G-Voice.

If that's something you'd like to see then use the Feedback Tool in the G-Voice app / site.

The more who request this the more likely they will add it. Wink
« Last Edit: September 20, 2014, 07:34:36 pm by Crow550 » Logged
SteveInWA
Hero Member & Beta Tester
*****
Posts: 6272



« Reply #41 on: September 20, 2014, 07:38:44 pm »

Your endless posts lobbying for features here and on the GV forum are getting tiresome.  This isn't a petition drive, and Google won't be influenced by a talent show voting game.  Features get developed based on many factors, including technical feasibility, business justification, and cost; user interest is just one factor.  Believe me, a lot of engineers and product managers smarter than you are evaluating which features to include or not include in their products.

Telling people to spam Google with requests isn't going to win you any friends over there.
Logged

Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2014, 08:19:18 pm »

Well I'll take the word of the Engineers / Reps who have thanked me and told me and others to submit feedback or as you call "spamming".

I was told by an Engineer that I assume works at Google?
Quote
"That the more feedback the team gets regarding a feature the better"
: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/z6pHQNc98wM

I also have been thanked for my constant feedback too: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/IN4FB1VBiFw

They encourage anyone interested in a feature like auto switching for voip and cell calling based on network speed. To use the Feedback tool:
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/9LaXNKu4AMc

They seem to appreciate my suggestions as I have been told:
Quote
"It's great hearing ways that the product could be improved."
:
https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/56NYLnfVYKM

I as well as everyone else was told:
Quote
"Thanks for the suggestion, I will be sure to pass it on to Google as well for consideration. A great way for people to show interest in a particular feature is to use the feedback option in Hangouts so that way Google can track and see how much interest a new feature may have with users. Google is a data driven company so it really helps to support a great idea with user interest data."

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/23mywZhKCUU

Quote
"Feedback! Feedback! Feedback! YEA!"

You know these "smarter than me engineers". They did forget to add group SMS messaging into the G-Voice to Hangouts integration: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/hangouts/author$3Ame/hangouts/Z3dRwsOQZZc

A feature that has been in the Google Voice site and app since 2010. A feature that has been added to Hangouts unofficially with XVoicePlus or Cyanogenmod for quite sometime.

Yeah they are still adding features in but that's a big omission when adding G-Voice SMS support. The MMS support is cool but group messaging is important to many.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 12:18:20 am by Crow550 » Logged
ramjet73
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 24



« Reply #43 on: September 20, 2014, 09:39:12 pm »

Well I'll take the word of the Engineers who have thanked me and told me and others to submit feedback or as you call "spamming".
There is a big difference between the representatives that monitor the forum and are paid to be polite to the users that participate versus the engineers that are actually writing code and working long hours to get new features implemented. What makes you think that the people giving you positive feedback are engineers?
Oh and another thing. For these "smarter than me engineers". They forgot to add group SMS messaging into the G-Voice to Hangouts integration:
You really think that Google "forgot" to add group messaging to Hangouts any more than they "forgot" to add MMS to Google Voice. If you give them that little credit I don't know why you are spending time making suggestions on their forums unless you think that is the only way they will "remember".
Logged
Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #44 on: September 21, 2014, 12:10:33 am »

Well I'll take the word of the Engineers who have thanked me and told me and others to submit feedback or as you call "spamming".
There is a big difference between the representatives that monitor the forum and are paid to be polite to the users that participate versus the engineers that are actually writing code and working long hours to get new features implemented. What makes you think that the people giving you positive feedback are engineers?
Oh and another thing. For these "smarter than me engineers". They forgot to add group SMS messaging into the G-Voice to Hangouts integration:
You really think that Google "forgot" to add group messaging to Hangouts any more than they "forgot" to add MMS to Google Voice. If you give them that little credit I don't know why you are spending time making suggestions on their forums unless you think that is the only way they will "remember".

Well I assume some are Engineers. I could be wrong. Sorry if I am.... I will clean up my post to reflect this.

I just wanted to point out that from what people who are either reps or engineers in the Forums have told me and others that using the Feedback Tool to submit feature requests for example the G-CallerID being integrated into G-Voice would not be a form of spamming from what I gathered from the feedback from the reps / engineers in the Forums.

Like I quoted in my last post:
Quote
"Thanks for the suggestion, I will be sure to pass it on to Google as well for consideration. A great way for people to show interest in a particular feature is to use the feedback option in Hangouts so that way Google can track and see how much interest a new feature may have with users. Google is a data driven company so it really helps to support a great idea with user interest data."

I guess you misread what I posted but they added MMS support with G-Voice in Hangouts. It's group SMS chat through G-Voice they forgot to add.

As for the G-voice / Hangouts Forums. I will try to keep within one or two threads over there on bugs / missing features and ideas. Instead of making a new thread each time.

They seemed to welcome it.... I was just pointing out what I was informed in those forums to show my reasonings for telling people to use the Feedback Tool to request that. It was never my intention to spam or lobby everyone.

Sorry if it came across like that. I didn't mean to come across pushy. I was just trying to help from what I was told in the Forums that if there was a feature people wanted them to look into to use the Feedback tool.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 12:16:29 am by Crow550 » Logged
ramjet73
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 24



« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2014, 12:25:51 am »

I just wanted to point out that from what people who are either reps or engineers in the Forums have told me and others that using the Feedback Tool to submit feature requests for example the G-CallerID being integrated into G-Voice would not be a form of spamming from what I gathered from the feedback from the reps / engineers in the Forums.
Could you explain what you mean by "G-CallerID"? I'm already getting CID on most of my inbound calls from GV and CNAM is something that Google could offer but there would be a cost associated with it that Google would either need to absorb or pass back to users who might complain about the service no longer being free.

Are you aware of how CNAM works for ITSP's that already offer it? Could you explain in a little more detail how you see Google implementing it and recovering their costs?
Logged
Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2014, 12:38:31 am »

Sure. Android currently has a CallerID system that was introduced in 4.4. More info here: https://support.google.com/nexus/answer/3459196?hl=en
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 12:46:19 am by Crow550 » Logged
ramjet73
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 24



« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2014, 01:14:55 am »

Sure. Android currently has CallerID system they introduced in 4.4. More info here: https://support.google.com/nexus/answer/3459196?hl=en
That is neither CID or CNAM as defined by the telephony standards. What that represents is a form of private address book that Google will use to match the phone number (CID) with the contacts it has available in its own databases versus doing a lookup for that number in the official CNAM database that is maintained by all the service providers. The official CNAM database normally has a charge associated with adding/updating the name for a given number and that can only be done by the service provider that "owns" that number. There is also a charge for each access to the database when looking up an incoming number (CID).

If it's a Sprint number you maintain it through Sprint, Verizon through Verizon, etc. So Google could probably update the public database for numbers it assigns or ports into GV and do lookups for incoming calls from other providers and that would be CNAM but that's not what you are suggesting. With "G-CallerID" as you call it the names may or not match what is stored in the public CNAM database for that number, which would also be the case when you keep a private directory on your phone or at an ITSP, and that may or may not be a problem depending on which name you want to receive for inbound calls but it's definitely not CNAM.

If you are going to make suggestions to Google and/or discuss them in public forums it's always a good idea to get a clear understanding of what the terms you are using mean. Since Obihai's use of Google Voice is more like an ITSP than an Android phone app CNAM would be more appropriate and I don't think Google will allow access to its contact databases by third parties anyway. Technically Google could offer CNAM services but that may or may not fit with their technology and/or business plans.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2014, 10:39:21 am by ramjet73 » Logged
genesishep
Newbie
*
Posts: 4



« Reply #48 on: October 01, 2014, 11:14:22 am »

Your endless posts lobbying for features here and on the GV forum are getting tiresome.  This isn't a petition drive, and Google won't be influenced by a talent show voting game.  Features get developed based on many factors, including technical feasibility, business justification, and cost; user interest is just one factor.  Believe me, a lot of engineers and product managers smarter than you are evaluating which features to include or not include in their products.

Telling people to spam Google with requests isn't going to win you any friends over there.

I saw nothing in his post that comes close to a call to spam the GV Forum. What I saw was an idea and the very true statement that if others would like that feature the best way to let Google know about it is to provide feedback in the appropriate GV forums. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable is for self proclaimed forum police to target/harass someone into apologizing for doing nothing more than offering a suggestion and a means to express it.

Google and those moderating the GV Forums ASK for feedback from their users. Period. They do so because plenty of those "oh so smarter than you" engineers DO forget to add very simple things. Over the years I have been friends with many engineers and programmers who are absolutely terrible at relating to everyday people in normal social situations. In many ways they would rather interact with technology than other human beings. Are all who work in the tech world this way? Of course not, but plenty are. Feedback is absolutely necessary for that reason alone. Sometimes the technologically inclined forget how to communicate with the rest of the world. Feedback from Mr. Average Joe is exactly what keeps things in line.  And yes, 1,000 requests do weigh more heavily than one.

To Crow550, you did nothing wrong and had nothing to apologize for. Don't allow self proclaimed forum police to brow beat you into apologizing for nothing. No matter how many forum posts they have under their little username. It means nothing and does not grant them a pass when they are overtly rude to others. Those who insist upon acting like that do so because they either have very little control over other things in their real life or the opposite, more control over others than they should ever have and feel that control should extend everywhere. It doesn't.

« Last Edit: October 01, 2014, 11:17:17 am by genesishep » Logged

Long time lurker with very little to say. Despite my "Newbie" status, I am anything but. Smiley
ramjet73
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 24



« Reply #49 on: October 01, 2014, 11:58:59 am »

I saw nothing in his post that comes close to a call to spam the GV Forum. What I saw was an idea and the very true statement that if others would like that feature the best way to let Google know about it is to provide feedback in the appropriate GV forums. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable is for self proclaimed forum police to target/harass someone into apologizing for doing nothing more than offering a suggestion and a means to express it.
IMO the real problem is asking other users to support a campaign for an enhancement that isn't well thought out. It's one thing to throw something out on your own and another thing to ask other people to jump into the pool with you.

Do you know what he meant by "For CNAM.... Google should just integrate their Google Caller ID that's in the Android Dialer with G-Voice"? If so, please explain. I'm still not clear if his statement refers to "CNAM" for Obihai devices configured for Google Voice, all inbound and/or outbound calls from/to any Google Voice connected device (which would override the official CNAM databases) or something entirely different.

Bottom line, if you are going to ask other users to join you in requesting enhancements, make sure they are well researched and clearly explained.
« Last Edit: October 01, 2014, 12:01:08 pm by ramjet73 » Logged
SteveInWA
Hero Member & Beta Tester
*****
Posts: 6272



« Reply #50 on: October 01, 2014, 04:18:30 pm »

I saw nothing in his post that comes close to a call to spam the GV Forum. What I saw was an idea and the very true statement that if others would like that feature the best way to let Google know about it is to provide feedback in the appropriate GV forums. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable is for self proclaimed forum police to target/harass someone into apologizing for doing nothing more than offering a suggestion and a means to express it.
IMO the real problem is asking other users to support a campaign for an enhancement that isn't well thought out. It's one thing to throw something out on your own and another thing to ask other people to jump into the pool with you.

Do you know what he meant by "For CNAM.... Google should just integrate their Google Caller ID that's in the Android Dialer with G-Voice"? If so, please explain. I'm still not clear if his statement refers to "CNAM" for Obihai devices configured for Google Voice, all inbound and/or outbound calls from/to any Google Voice connected device (which would override the official CNAM databases) or something entirely different.

Bottom line, if you are going to ask other users to join you in requesting enhancements, make sure they are well researched and clearly explained.

Exactly.  Perfectly articulated.  Right on.
Logged

genesishep
Newbie
*
Posts: 4



« Reply #51 on: October 02, 2014, 01:41:52 pm »

I saw nothing in his post that comes close to a call to spam the GV Forum. What I saw was an idea and the very true statement that if others would like that feature the best way to let Google know about it is to provide feedback in the appropriate GV forums. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. What doesn't sound reasonable is for self proclaimed forum police to target/harass someone into apologizing for doing nothing more than offering a suggestion and a means to express it.
IMO the real problem is asking other users to support a campaign for an enhancement that isn't well thought out. It's one thing to throw something out on your own and another thing to ask other people to jump into the pool with you.

Do you know what he meant by "For CNAM.... Google should just integrate their Google Caller ID that's in the Android Dialer with G-Voice"? If so, please explain. I'm still not clear if his statement refers to "CNAM" for Obihai devices configured for Google Voice, all inbound and/or outbound calls from/to any Google Voice connected device (which would override the official CNAM databases) or something entirely different.

Bottom line, if you are going to ask other users to join you in requesting enhancements, make sure they are well researched and clearly explained.

Again, nothing wrong with asking or presenting an idea on a discussion forum at ANY stage in its development. If the issue was a need to clarify their position/point/idea fine, ask for clarification. Don't attempt to dissuade, or brow beat someone for posting a topic of discussion in a DISCUSSION FORUM. Kind of defeats the purpose of a forum at all doesn't it? Where is it written that requests must be formatted and submitted in a certain manner? I've seen many discussion forums foster ideas where an original poster will suggest something and another poster will suggest an alternative idea that builds on the original. That is how communities should function, in this case, it didn't.

Its not really so difficult to conduct ourselves civilly:

Option A: Agree with poster and join/support them.
Option B: Disagree with poster and don't join/support them.
Option C: Ask for clarification if you are unsure what they are asking (in a civil, non condescending manner would be nice)...once clarification is received see options A or B.
Option D: Discuss topic why for, why against.
Option E: Ignore post entirely as it isn't of any interest to you.

I take issue with the use of the word "spam" and the idea that it is wrong for someone to suggest providing feedback to a developer is either spamming or annoying to them. Google is just a company, their engineers are just people and they are not above hearing comments from the masses. Nor should they be. And if they are? Tough, don't ask for feedback if you don't really want it.

Further, my issue isn't in whether I support or understand his request, my issue is that there is no reason to be an arse or a bully in response. That sort of behavior stifles conversation as many, especially those who are less technically inclined, would rather not speak up or ask questions for fear that someone will be a rude towards them. Most of us were taught proper manners as we grew up but simply choose to ignore them in social media.

What happened above was completely uncalled for. I read the rest of the thread, I also perused Crow550's comments on these forums as SURELY he must have been a pest to get a reaction like that for one comment in a thread. I saw nothing to warrant SteveInWA's response...and it angered me to then see him offer an apology to someone who definitely didn't deserve one. Bully's get away with behavior because society doesn't call them on it.
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 01:46:49 pm by genesishep » Logged

Long time lurker with very little to say. Despite my "Newbie" status, I am anything but. Smiley
genesishep
Newbie
*
Posts: 4



« Reply #52 on: October 02, 2014, 01:45:23 pm »


Exactly.  Perfectly articulated.  Right on.

Completely not the point, and totally off IMO.
Logged

Long time lurker with very little to say. Despite my "Newbie" status, I am anything but. Smiley
SteveInWA
Hero Member & Beta Tester
*****
Posts: 6272



« Reply #53 on: October 02, 2014, 02:15:36 pm »

Find something else to crusade about.  It wasn't even your issue to begin with.
Logged

genesishep
Newbie
*
Posts: 4



« Reply #54 on: October 02, 2014, 02:39:40 pm »

Find something else to crusade about.  It wasn't even your issue to begin with.

Need the last word much?
Logged

Long time lurker with very little to say. Despite my "Newbie" status, I am anything but. Smiley
Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #55 on: October 02, 2014, 03:00:52 pm »

@Genesishep

Check your Messages. Wink


Find something else to crusade about.  It wasn't even your issue to begin with.

Need the last word much?

If that was the case then he would have responded in this thread: https://productforums.google.com/d/msg/hangouts/gsBzj2mwd2o/KqpH3etT5pEJ

@ramjet73 and @SteveInWA

Now if I'm still coming across as unclear on what I was asking then I will clarify the best I can:

All I was saying is Google seems to have their own CNAM lookup system for Android called Google Caller ID.

Since Google Voice does not do these lookups then simply put Google should merge the Google Caller ID into Google Voice itself. (Maybe this is not possible. If so then I am sorry for not knowing this. I did make a thread to ask for clarification on this: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/voice/author$3Ame/voice/ThVzUiDlQOo)

How it works in Android is when a number calls and it rings into the Dialer then the Dialer uses the G-Caller ID to do a lookup.
This currently only works with your cell number being ringed to the Dialer or your G-Voice number being forwarded to the cell number when of course ringing the Android Dialer.

This does not work with the Hangouts dialer (yet) or devices like the Obihai.

So all I was saying since I was told this was Okay to do by the Engineers is to ask everyone to go submit Feedback and request to Google to add in Google Caller ID functionally into Google Voice.

Does G-Voice on the Obi even displays the name and number of your contacts when they call? I know it does on Hangouts on PC or Mobile. I believe you need to add your contacts to the phone's address book itself.

So maybe Google will add this since they are "officially supported" along with some type of Caller ID lookup. Maybe this is something they haven't thought much about yet. So clearly if they receive a lot of user feedback on it then they will be inclined to add this feature.

Hope I'm clear now.

If the current Google Caller ID can't work for Phone devices they could still offer some form of CNAM support and there is nothing wrong asking others to submit Feedback for this feature with the Feedback Tool. That's what it's for! FEEDBACK!
« Last Edit: October 02, 2014, 03:36:40 pm by Crow550 » Logged
Crow550
Full Member
***
Posts: 114


« Reply #56 on: October 13, 2014, 01:40:20 am »

It should be added that Engineers do in fact chime in the forums time to time and do encourage people to submit Feedback on features they want to see.

As seen here: https://productforums.google.com/d/msg/hangouts/L_e3-LHQgWw/BEJ33sdGPGUJ
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC

Advertisement
Advertisement