Slashdot Log In
GrandCentral Reborn As Google Voice
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Thu Mar 12, 2009 08:39 AM
from the probably-should-try-that-out-again dept.
from the probably-should-try-that-out-again dept.
Some anonymous person wrote in to say that Google has relaunched and rebranded GrandCentral as "Google Voice." The article says it will "revolutionize telephones. It unifies your phone numbers, transcribes your voice mail, blocks telemarketers and elevates text messages to first-class communication citizens." Sadly, the voicemail didn't integrate very nicely w/ my phone back in the day, so I guess I should give it a shot.
Related Stories
Submission: GrandCentral reborn as Google Voice by Anonymous Coward
[+]
Google Voice Grabs 1 Million Phone Numbers 198 comments
alphadogg writes "Google has reserved 1 million phone numbers with Level 3, signaling that it may finally be ready to roll out its long-anticipated Google Voice service. The free service, announced in March, lets users unify their phone numbers, allowing them to have a single number through Google Voice that rings a call through to all their phones. Sources could not say when the 1 million numbers may be assigned. Level 3 has been supplying Google with phone numbers since the introduction of Google Voice, so the 1 million numbers are an indication Google is close to adding a significant number of users. A public launch has been anticipated since Google said in March the service would be 'open to new users soon.' One early user said: 'I've only been using Google Voice for a few months, but it's completely changed the way I use voicemail and communicate... When it goes public, I think the rush to grab Google Voice numbers is going to be stunning. I know some of my friends check the Google Voice page almost every day to see when they can grab a number and get started using it.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Can't wait (Score:5, Informative)
https://services.google.com/fb/forms/googlevoiceinvite/
Re:Can't wait (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know, I'm becoming more and more wary about all the personal information Google is acquiring, and this is another area where Google is able to collect and store such information. Gmail, Calendar, Blogger, Desktop and now essentially, Phone Manager. The way things are going, soon Google will will be able to set your alarm clock for you without your direct input. They'll just know what time you need to wake up and voila.
Parent
Re:Can't wait (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Can't wait (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Can't wait (Score:5, Informative)
Probably more reliable too - SMS is like email - there's no guarantee in how long it'll take to get to the destination (or if it even gets there at all). The day you need your SMS-alarm to wake you up, is probably the day the SMS network gets slightly overloaded. (I've seen SMS' take days to arrive, and have heard of the oddball SMS duplication - where the same SMS was stuck in the system, and the recipient kept getting it twice an hour for 3 days straight).
Parent
Re:Can't wait (Score:5, Insightful)
I totally agree, but I'm also looking forward to this. it's a hate-love-relationship. I really hate and abhor the fact, that there's a company out there gathering such immense amounts of data on everyone - for the company's gain, not the public's. On the flip side, I'm truly envious of the quantity, quality and accuracy of their statistical data. I love that this data will enable them all kinds of awesomely cool stuff. I hate that they're essentially using that information to exploit their users.
it starts off nice and clean with direct and targetted advertising, which by itself might actually be helpful and not bore people with ads that don't have any relevancy to them. But if we project and exaggerate their prowess, we get to a stage where google can directly and on a massive scale, manipulate markets and behaviour.
this, I'm not looking forward to.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I get to say "nope, you can't have that" if someone asks rather than getting a letter saying "Oh by the by, someone came by with a Subpoena and we gave them all your voicemails/text messages for the past 3 years...".
As much as I think you are being overly paranoid (who with the power of subpoena cares about your voice mail - and if they do, they can just as well take your Asterisk box anyway) - but GrandCentral voicemail is extremely easy to hack into by ANYONE. All you need to know is the GC number and the person's actual number and you can listen to their voicemail anytime. I really hope that this is one of the first things they fix as they migrate to "Google Voice".
-Em
I was hoping (Score:4, Insightful)
Pleasing Apple (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Pleasing Apple (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe Google gave [up the term "GrandCentral"] for undisclosed cash to Apple since they are using the same term for a new type of multicore support in Snow Leopard
I think this has more to do with branding. Google likes to put their name in products they take over. "GrandCentral" doesn't sound like a Google product. "Google Voice" does (and tells you roughly what it's all about). When Google bought Keyhole [wikipedia.org], they re-branded the product "Google Earth".
In fact take a look at this list of Google acquisitions [wikipedia.org]. Most of them were re-branded by Google, and most of the new names contain "Google" in them (with limited exceptions, like AdSense, which has a strong brand of its own).
For something like YouTube, they didn't change the name since it already had a strong brand and following. But GrandCentral? It didn't have a huge following or mindshare. So rebranding it just makes sense. I doubt Apple had anything to do with it.
Parent
Voicemail... (Score:5, Funny)
"Im sorry, I can't take your call right now, but if you leave your name, phone number and message, I will get back to you as soon as I am out of Beta...."
Re:Voicemail... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Free features (Score:5, Informative)
Last I heard all their features were free, but I kinda felt bad because I knew the ones I liked could disappear at any time because that was what they said the plan was after they left beta.
All features would be free during the beta, and then they said the "core" ones would be free after that with the rest being paid.
Another so called "Revolution"? Yeah ok ... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't want a revolutionary new phone - the basic idea of the telephone was got pretty much spot on in the 19th century - talk into mic , listen from earpiece. What I want is a phone service thats reliable , cheap and works in an emergency. What I DO NOT want is a phone service that gives me a friggin "select from the following options" load of BS when I lift up the receiver! I have enough of that crap when phoning help desks. As for listening in when someone leaves a message - wooooo! Someone correct me but I believe you've been able to do that with steam powered cassette based answerphones since the 1970s.
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree with you on the "select from the following options" comment, the real benefit for me with GrandCentral is the phone aggregation feature. I don't have to keep telling my family and friends a new phone number, and I can have calls ring at any and all of my various phones (home, work, cell, skype). Is that "revolutionary"? I suppose so.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The phone number aggregation thing is not exactly new. If you have a Vonage account, you can already do that. Vonage calls this feature 'SimulRing'. When someone calls your Vonage phone, it will simultaneously ring up to 5 phone numbers of your choosing (home, work, cell, etc.).
What I want to know is, is GrandCentral/Google Voice better?
GrandCentral doesn't require you to subscribe to a VoiP service, and it's free. I have DSL, which requires a landline. It's not cost effective for me to switch to a cell/V
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dude, are you NOT READING AT ALL?
You, the person who is being rang, needs to pick up the phone, and press "1" to accept the call on the specific phone. Your voicemail isn't going to push "1", so your voicemail wont get the call. Simple. If you, the person receiving the call, does not push "1", GrandCentral/Google will handle the call as if it was never picked up.
Re:Another so called "Revolution"? Yeah ok ... (Score:5, Informative)
Really? I didn't know that steam powered cassette based answerphones would let you listen in on a voicemail to your home line even though you were in the office. Like they always say...you learn something new every day.
Good news. If you had RTFA you would have read the part where it says this is optional.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. All you need is a walkie-talkie next to the answering machine, and a robot to push the button whenever the machine starts recording.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget that your walkie talkie needs one hell of a range. And of course, you need to be comfortable with letting any random person listen in on your voicemail.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Well, then explain how the article said
yet you didn't seem to know it said that. And as that article indicated that this feature existed (in mandatory form, as suggested by that quote) on the old GrandCentral service, then you wouldn't have needed to be "clairevoyant" to know...you'd just need to be fa
Re: (Score:2)
What I DO NOT want is a phone service that gives me a friggin "select from the following options" load of BS when I lift up the receiver! I have enough of that crap when phoning help desks.
According to the article, they've made it an option to turn that off:
Google Voice eliminates some of the annoyances of its predecessor. You can, if you wish, turn off that "press 1, press 2" option, so when the phone rings, you can just pick it up and start talking.
Wish they would use ANI instead of CID (Score:5, Interesting)
Since Caller ID has become virtually useless for identifying anyone other than friends and family (it is regularly blocked or spoofed), it would be nice if Google Voice gave you the option to view the ANI info (which is what is used internally by the phone systems for billing and E-911, and is generally considered unspoofable). I've been waiting for someone to do so for a long time.
Re:Wish they would use ANI instead of CID (Score:5, Informative)
Still, although ANI may not be "spoofable," it can be manipulated or uninformative. For example, any call placed from any phone in my office carries a general company ANI even though the call could be originated from any of hundreds of phone numbers owned by the firm. We also have off-premise extensions (OPXs) that connect to the office PBX via SIP. Calls placed from those OPXs have the same ANI as calls made from the physical office, which would be deleterious if a call was placed to 911 from one of these phone. (We have implemented a safety workaround for this, but the point still stands.)
Parent
Re:Wish they would use ANI instead of CID (Score:5, Insightful)
ANI and VOIP don't play well together because the ANI (which is accurate) will point to the POP where the VOIP system connects to the POTS.... which may be very far from the VOIP user.
But that ANI (is* accurate, in that it will lead you to the actual VOIP company that delivered the call to the POTS. From there, they have records that identify the actual source.
So while ANI+VOIP isn't good for E911, it does work well for identifying telemarketers and suing their ass.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As a current GrandCentral user... (Score:2, Interesting)
I think I'd better keep an empty bladder for the next couple of days, so I don't pee my pants with excitement when I get the upgrade notice.
Aw man, if I had an Android phone syncing my Gmail/Google Voice contacts, too... darn you, AT&T! Hurry up with that!
Incongruous (Score:2)
What's the deal with this statement in the summary?
"Sadly, the voicemail didn't integrate very nicely w/ my phone back in the day, so I guess I should give it a shot."
What's different between that and, "Sadly, Windows didn't work well for me in 2002, so I guess I should try Windows 7?" Or "Sadly, I hated my Nissan Altima from 2004, so my next purchase should be an Altima from 2009?"
I'm not saying your shouldn't try it out, but that sentence reads like a big fat non sequitur.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the deal with this statement in the summary?
"Sadly, the voicemail didn't integrate very nicely w/ my phone back in the day, so I guess I should give it a shot."
What's different between that and, "Sadly, Windows didn't work well for me in 2002, so I guess I should try Windows 7?" Or "Sadly, I hated my Nissan Altima from 2004, so my next purchase should be an Altima from 2009?"
I'm not saying your shouldn't try it out, but that sentence reads like a big fat non sequitur.
Actually, it would be more like, "I loved Windows 3.11, but it didn't connect to the Internet well. Maybe I'll give XP a shot."
It's not that he didn't like the system. One feature did not work well for him. That feature was a deal breaker. Now that a new version is out, he's hoping that one feature will work so he can benefit from the rest.
Still can't port your existing number (Score:4, Interesting)
I've had a GrandCentral account for years, never used it. First thing I did today was login and search the help for "port number". As it has said for the past few years:
"Although you can't currently port your existing number to GrandCentral, we hope to offer this option in the near future. Check out our blog to stay up-to-date with GrandCentral news and learn about new features."
If I have to give the people who call me a new number, it's not worth it. Maybe if I was moving and was getting a new number anyway ( though cell phones and Vonage don't require this ), then I'd use it.
Re:Still can't port your existing number (Score:4, Informative)
The whole point is to not have to give out your real number!
I've been using grand central for about a year. I love it. It allows me to keep my cell number private.
I also use the G1 Central app for android. It is the best solution out there.
Parent
Using it for a day (Score:2)
I quite literally used my invite to GC yesterday expecting to use it as is. I'm totally thrilled to see it becoming something even greater!
There is an app for Android called "G1 Central" -- it integrates well with the G1. Hopefully Google will release an even better app or, better yet, integrate Voice with the entire dialing, contacts, and voice mail system. I'm sure T-Mobile would love to have the load off!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Hey, G1 Central author here. Glad to hear you like the app; it's been a lot of fun to write. I'm looking forward to seeing what I can do with Google Voice once I get the option to upgrade.
P.S. - G1 Central is available under the Apache 2 license. http://svn.evancharlton.com/wsvn/G1Central [evancharlton.com]
Project page here: http://evancharlton.com/projects/g1central [evancharlton.com]
GrandCentral is spam filtering for your phone (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll admit it - I still have a landline phone in my house. My satellite receivers require it, my DSL service requires the line, I feel better knowing it's there in case of an emergency, AND it keeps my teenagers from using up all of our shared cell minutes (the boy used 2700 minutes all by himself last month). In spite of these reasons, I was growing to hate that phone. We get maybe 2 legit calls on that phone a month, the rest are all telemarketers, a dozen a day sometimes, almost always between 6:00pm-9:00pm. It was driving me nuts.
Along comes GrandCentral. Now, my home number is call-forwarded to GrandCentral. From there, I've whitelisted the numbers that are allowed to call us. Some of those numbers ring my cell, some ring my wife's, some ring both. Everything else goes to voicemail or is blocked as spam. Blocked callers hear a "number not in service" message. Voicemails are sent to us as emails.
Very slick, VERY convenient, and it's removed a serious annoyance. Bliss...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
" I was growing to hate that phone. We get maybe 2 legit calls on that phone a month, the rest are all telemarketers, a dozen a day sometimes, almost always between 6:00pm-9:00pm. It was driving me nuts.
So why didn't you sign up with the Do Not Call Registry?
Also, you can record the "sit" tones - the 3-tone "number not in service" tones that you hear - onto your answering machine, and the telemarketers predictive auto-dialer will hang up. As an added bonus, if someone calls you long-distance, they can stil
That is interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
Calling out the tinfoil hat brigade (Score:3, Insightful)
Where does the paycheck come from? (Score:5, Insightful)
*Pulling the tinfoil hat even lower over the brow now* Will Google Talk also have the ability to monitor calls made through their service for marketing info?
Yeah, it sounds like a great service, but what's the cost in privacy?
Could Latitude make this smarter? (Score:2)
I sit at work all day with one phone on my desk and one in my pocket. It'd drive my colleagues (and me) nuts if they were both to ring at the same time.
If this could use Latitude to see where my cellphone is, then I could set up certain behaviours, like:
* If my mobile is at home during working hours, chances are I forgot it - ring the desk phone.
* If it's at work during working hours, don't ring the desk phone.
Just when I thought it was awesome.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Google Voice Basics: Requirements
Print
To use Google Voice, you just need a touch-tone phone and a Flash-enabled browser
Oh well. It was -almost- really cool.
Yes I use it and it is great (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a home land line, a work land line (mandatory), a work cell, and a home cell. My wife has a cell and my daughter has a cell.
I can, depending on the caller ID (and I'm talking about reliable ones from people I know -- like my boss) have GC ring all of my phones, just my phones, just me work phones, just my home phones, my daughter's phone, or just about any combination I want.
Or no phone at all.
I suggest it for anyone who deals with clients and wants their number to remain the same after they leave a job. Get a GC number and put it on your business cards. Link up your cell and your desk phone. Leave the job, keep the cards, your clients may not even know the difference.
It has always been a good service.
Re: (Score:2)
Been doing this for many years, using a SIP client and my laptop. Someone also sells a USB device that includes software so you can quickly install on any Windows PC.
Re: (Score:2)
It has not rolled out to all users yet (as of 3/12 in the AM), similar to when they add new features to GMail it appears that it has to roll through the network. I confirmed this in my own Grand Central account.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Paradox (Score:4, Insightful)
I was just thinking the same thing - Google is in many ways an engine of innovation, and they bring a lot of cash to bear on a problem. But as you suggest, the same was true of Microsoft in the late 80s and early 90s. The only real difference is attitude, and attitudes change.
As someone who makes use of Google's services, I think this is great, but I can't help but wonder whether this is ultimately stifling advancement in the field. Google doesn't NEED to innovate in voice, it just WANTS to. In some ways, that results in a better product: they take risks a small software house dares not. But they're not as committed to innovating, and they drive a lot of people out of the market. Gmail is a great service, and Google continues to do new and interesting things. But I haven't seen a single new webmail service since Gmail went live, and that's a little worrisome.
As a software developer, I used to worry that Microsoft might find my particular niche potentially profitable. Now I worry that Google might think it's cool.
Parent
Re:Paradox (Score:5, Interesting)
That reminds me of a quote from Sid Meier's Aplha Centauri by entrepreneur Nwabudike Morgan: "We are not a monopoly. Our product is simply so good that no one chooses to compete with us."
I'm not terribly concerned about Google, to be honest. I know they have a lot of my personal data. But they provide high quality products/services and don't treat me like shit. They're reliable and friendly and trustworthy. Microsoft, on the other hand, has always been shifty in one way or another, and their products have always seemed only partially baked and ready.
Benevolent dictators are okay when they're actually benevolent. So far, Google hasn't done anything to wrong me.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yes, Google has addressed this. They now send someone to your house to inject you with valium just before the phone rings, so you don't freak out.
Re:Video? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who wants video phones? There are really only two times that I use (or want to use) video calling:
1. Very occasionally, for remote meetings with colleagues that I know well and like, mainly because it is amusing and allows us to connect after not working side-by-side for a long time.
2. When dealing with tiny kids at a long distance.
Other than that, it's awful. I hate it for ordinary business calls because I can't read email, munch on raisins, pick my nose, stare out the window, or whatever else I'd normally do. And I've never felt like I want to see my friends when calling them.
Assuming I'm not too terribly odd in this regard, the market for video is probably limited.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'm a Vonage user. Yes, they do partially do this, but in a MUCH more limited way.
1) There is no option that I know of to screen the calls via voicemail.
2) They don't have any useful way of blocking callers (you can block anonymous, but thats it)
3) The system isn't configurable to forward/simulring individual numbers differently. I find this to be a problem. I have my home (vonage) number simulring my cell phone. Problem is, when I'm trying to call my wife at home, the phone at home ring once, then the simu
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's true of every service, from every company, whether its in Beta or not.
True of every SERVICE. Untrue of every PRODUCT. If I could buy or download a copy and host it on my server, then it goes away when I'm done with it, not when someone else is.