AOL Enters the VoIP market

freitasm writes "AOL is entering the VoIP market with its new service entitled 'AOL Internet Phone Service'. The service will be available in 40 cities around the US and offer integrated IM presence indicator, voice/e-mail and features like Call Waiting, CallerID. As a bonus current AOL members wil receive a wireless AP when signing-up for the service."

lol i can phone!!1

[Dougie Cool]

If I get woken up at 6am by a phone AOLer wanting to know my ASL I'm going to sue.

Re:lol i can phone!!1

[mysticwhiskey]

Scenario: 3am at recipient's residence.

(Ring, Ring)

Recipient: Hello? (rubs eyes)
Caller: Hi, did I wake you?
Recipient: Whaaa...?
Caller: I'm using VOIP, and it costs me next to nothing!
Recipient: (blinks)... you A-Hole!
Caller: Yep, AOL - how'd ya guess?

Re:lol i can phone!!1

[spidereyes]

What about 11:00PM on a Friday night with Candy and her friends new web cam?

Knowing AOL

[Bazunok]

It would be really easy to use, but you can only call other AOL users on AOL's proprietory phones.

Re:Knowing AOL

[cypher073]

Actually, no...the phone service works with any POTS phone connected to one of the router's rj11 ports. It's a very simple setup: connect the router to your existing broadband modem or router, plug in the phone, turn everything on. Simple as that. Phone calls can be placed to any other phone connected to the PSTN, of course.

Re:Knowing AOL

[misleb]

Isn't that how all VOIP services work? Is AOL's easier?

Re:Knowing AOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, this is similar to AT&T CallVantage and Vonage. What AOL offers is integration with all their backend services, Buddy Lists, Parental Controls, IM, etc.

Re:Knowing AOL

[sporktoast]

Isn't that how all VOIP services work? Is AOL's easier?

Sure it will be easier. All the phones will have big colorful buttons with pictures on them. Plus their new accelerator will mean that calls will go through UP TO 100x FASTER!

That, and it will cost roughly 5 times as much per month as Vonage or SpeakEasy.

Hmmm....

[XFilesFMDS1013]

Yes, the phones come with only 1 button.

Don't you think that'd be a little comlicated for the average AOL user? Maybe just have them talk into the air...it'd still be better then AOL's commercials.

It's as easy as point-and-click

[dangitman]

So, when the phone rings, will it play "You've got telephone"?

And why isn't this thing being released in September?

Re:It's as easy as point-and-click

[dfn5]

So, when the phone rings, will it play "You've got telephone"?

More like "You've got telemarketers". I believe VOIP is not covered by the do not call list.

Re:It's as easy as point-and-click

[bcrowell]

More like "You've got telemarketers". I believe VOIP is not covered by the do not call list.
Can you back up this statement? I have Vonage, and I'm on the do not call list, and it works -- haven't gotten a sales call in months.

Re:It's as easy as point-and-click

[misleb]

Can't you put any number on the do not call list? I don't think it matters what type of service it is. I actually switched to VoIP last month and kept my old POTS number ( which is on the list ). I haven't recieved any telemarking calls.

-matthew

Retro-ringtone

[Anonymous Coward]

You've got Ahoy Hoy!

Re:Retro-ringtone

[dangitman]

You've got Ahoy Hoy!

You've got the 4:30 Autogyro to Siam!

Re:It's as easy as point-and-click

[mekkab]

And why isn't this thing being released in September?

Golf clap for the Eternal September reference. [catb.org]

Re:It's as easy as point-and-click

[WD_40]

I wonder if AOL will be the first service to politely terminate your calls for you. "Goodbye!"

Now that would be a service I could get behind.

Emergency services

[WeirdKid]

Notice that 911 isn't listed in the services offered. AOL's service likely suffers from the same deficiency as Vonage in this respect. Vonage's TOS says that if you cannot clearly state the nature of your emergency and your location, emergency services may not be dispatched. I'm sticking with my land line until the VoIP providers get the 911 thing figured out.

Re:Emergency services

[thing12]

At least Vonage will direct your calls to a local 911 dispatcher (based on the location you provide). Most VOIP providers don't even go that far. They're testing e911 service in Rhode Island... apparently it's working quite well.

Re:Emergency services

[feloneous cat]

They're testing e911 service in Rhode Island... apparently it's working quite well.

I KNOW... it only took EMS 36 hours to get from R.I. to Texas!

Re:Emergency services

[Anonymous Coward]

You can have your cake and eat it to. Keep your landline only for 911, they are required to provide it whether you have telephone service or not.

Re:Emergency services

[turtled]

Yes, my telco Verizon has the option of 911 even without phone service. I use Vonage VoIP and I have it setup to forward to my local 911 office. As for the Verizon always on for 911, I would need a special phone, ala batphone, just for 911. That wouldn't work... in an emergency, I would be like, where is the special Verizon red phone? It would be like looking for the remote when the big game comes on...

Re:Emergency services

[WeirdKid]

Forwarding to the PSAP on record isn't the same as knowing your specific location. This would be important if you couldn't speak.

From the Vonage Terms of Service:

2.10 Automated Location Identification
At this time in the technical development of Vonage 911 Dialing, it is not possible to transmit identification of the address that you have listed to the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) and local emergency personnel for your area when you dial 911. You acknowledge and understand that you will need to state the nature of your emergency promptly and clearly, including your location, as PSAP and emergency personnel will NOT have this information. You acknowledge and understand that PSAP and emergency personnel will not be able to find your location if the call is unable to be completed, is dropped or disconnected, if you are unable to speak to tell them your location and/or if the Service is not operational for any reason, including without limitation those listed elsewhere in this Agreement.

Re:Emergency services

[MCZapf]

Here's the perfect phone for that: Ebay Item #6167545235: Fire Engine Red ITT Wall Phone [ebay.com].

Re:Emergency services

[fiji]

I dunno how AOL will handle this, but e911 works with Vonage... sort of.

The deal is that you tell Vonage where the "phone" is and they will send that information with the 911 call. The trouble occurs if you move the adapter and forget to tell Vonage and then call 911.

Then there is the uglier question about VoIP reliability vs. Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS). Lots of things need to work in order to place a VoIP call (power for the adapter, power for your internet infrastructure, the cable/DSL, etc.). However, if you used to have a phone line into the house, that line can still place 911 calls. So keep a plain old phone connected to it for emergencies (hell, paint it red too!).

-ben

Re:Emergency services

[WeirdKid]

Interesting -- was not aware of this. But can someone explain how 911 works (on a landline) if there is no dial tone?

Re:Emergency services

[Desert Raven]

Who said there was no dial tone?

Most states require phone companies to maintain dial tone for 911 on any line connected to them.

So, there is a dial tone, you just can't dial anything except 911. Dialing any other number will get you a nice recording telling you the line is not in service.

Re:Emergency services

[stecoop]

Most states require phone companies to maintain dial tone for 911 on any line connected to them.

It's good that most states have such a law. It will help when the backhoe operator hits a gas line right after he cut through the telephone line. While the flames are shooting twenty feet high I will not worry as the mystical powers of the law keeps 911 working.

Re:Emergency services

[brontus3927]

Well if that happens, having telephone service isn't going to help you. Besides, if the house is on fire, the priority is 1) get out. 2)call 911. Not the other way round.

Re:Emergency services

[bcrowell]

The deal is that you tell Vonage where the "phone" is and they will send that information with the 911 call. The trouble occurs if you move the adapter and forget to tell Vonage and then call 911.
It's no different than a cell phone. If your phone is movable, you're going to have to tell the dispatcher where you are.

Re:Emergency services

[mcd7756]

Sorry, not true. Please google for and read about E911 in the US.

Also, FWIW, companies are working on 911 for VOIP. Use the google genie for info about that too.

Shhhhhh!

[Anonymous Coward]

AOL users use AOL VoIP.
AOL users don't have 911.
AOL users die.
No more AOL users!

It's genius.

Re:Emergency services

[Nos.]

In Canada, the CRTC [crtc.gc.ca] just ruled [crtc.gc.ca] that VoIP providers must provide Basic 911 within 90 days of the ruling (the ruling was Apr 4/2005). Well, if you get down to the meat of it, some will have to provide Enhanced 911 services, but I don't know of any VoIP providers that would fit this category. Most will need to provide Basic 911 service:

Basic 9-1-1 service connects the caller to a central call centre which then connects the call to the correct emergency response centre, at which point the caller must identify his or her location in order for an emergency response service to be dispatched

Re:Emergency services

[stecoop]

I think the 911 situations are starting to look more like FUD. Larger municipals have had 911 starting back in 1968; however, a large segment of rural America didn't get 911 finalized until late 1990s (had to look that up on wikipedia [wikipedia.org]). I remember where I lived it did get come about really late too.

Get this; America now has 911 since 1990 but there is a small problem with addresses. In rural America a lot of places don't (didn't?) have simple things like a street sign so for the last few years a names has had to be labeled to all streets just for 911. So the lets look at it this way; we have survived a large time without 911 as we know it and 911 dispatchers haven't been able to send emergency assistance to the right location; yeah were working on it but if there is an emergency you'll figure out something even if you don't have a phone.

Re:Emergency services

[bitingduck]

Reminds me of one time when I lived in Minneapolis-- I heard a *lot* of sirens and went out to look. There were firemen going door to door all up and down the street. Apparently a little kid had called 911 and our area didn't have 911e, and the kid didn't know his address, so they sent a huge number of trucks-- I looked from the corner and there was a truck on every corner for ~4 blocks in every direction. I found this out from a fireman when he was asking if we knew which houses had little kids.

Re:Emergency services

[Drooling Iguana]

At least you'll be protected from the Terrible Secret of Space.

Actually they support full Enhanced 911

[company nuncio]

Their back-end provider is trunked into the emergency system, same as a landline.

Re:Emergency services

[mynametaken]

From what I understand AOL is using Level 3 to provide E911 capabilities. Level 3 does not have national E911 coverage, which is why AOL is only entering 40 markets.

E911 delivers calls over traditional 911 trunks to the emergency center and delivers callback number and location information. Vonage's service delivers calls to a 10-digit telephone line at the center which does not allow delivery of callback number and location information.

Other limits...

[955301]

Given AOL's history, there are other limits we should expect from AOL's service:

1. Extended phone calls must be made with a series of 4 minute calls.
2. The service will require a dialup line, and won't be available by TCP/IP over an existing ethernet connection until later.
3. All conversations with people you haven't spoken with in the past must begin in a conference call. Please have your gender, age and availability ready to answer questions from other people on the call.
4. When on a call, you won't be able to pick up another phone in the house without disconnecting the first phone.
5. Even though there are hundreds of phone available, you will have to use a boxy AOL manufactured phone with oversized buttons with graphics which have to be downloaded over the aforementioned dialup connection.
6. Despite having signed up for there service, you will be shipped additional phone receivers occasionally, packaged in plastic or tin boxes.
7. You can only contact men with the service, but the receiver will randomly change the pitch of the other person to make them sound like a woman.

What did I miss?

Re:Emergency services

[freitasm]

E911 is listed in the services included in all 40 cities where it's being rolled out.

meanwhile, in Canada

[WormholeFiend]

The CRTC Issues 911 Ruling for VoIP Providers [digitalhomecanada.com]

Impossible to implement!

[yotto]

This will never work, because you can't talk on the phone in ALL CAPS.

In other news...

[AnonymousJackass]

AOL today announced thier new line of telephones to complement their VoIP service. The new phones include special buttons such as 'caps lock','LOL', and 'WTF'. The phone will be nearly impossible to disable. As an added bonus for those especially devoid of friends, if you hang on the line long enough, a random person will start offering you cheap meds and pr0n.

VoIP is very popular...

[Anonymous Coward]

That's all we can hear about these days.

I'm wondering if regular phone companies have "the fear" or not... they should!

These articles forget to mention, however, that latency (jitter) is very important for VoIP QoS.

Are AOL and others going to shape their traffic in order to put their own VoIP traffic before the others?

If not, how do they expect to meet the QoS requirements?

latency != jitter

[mamladm]

Latency is not jitter. Latency is when packets get delayed. Jitter is when packets arrive out of order.

Latency is not generally a problem. Cell phone services tend to have rather heavy latency. Typically you don't even notice latency up to about 500 to 600 ms.

Jitter can be a problem if out of order packets aren't dealt with properly, that is, in most cases, they should be discarded, or more precisely, the longer they have been overdue the more likely they should be discarded for VoIP.

However, there are codecs that can deal with jittery connections and as long as your service provider is using open standards where it is up to the end user equipment or client software to negotiate the best codec for a given connection, you generally don't have to worry about jitter impacting your call quality to the point where you would notice.

Re:latency != jitter

[apt-get dist-upgrade]

I always thought latency played a part in "jitter" from my vague understanding of what potentially causes jitter. Such as on a load balanced link, if packets A,B,C,D, and E were sent to a load balancer and by the time packets D and E came in, it felt that the path it sent packets A, B, and C through was now too heavily loaded and there is a less loaded path for D, and E, it would then send packets D and E through the less loaded link, which might also have a lower latency. That less loaded link with lower latency might actually get the packets D and E to the destination before packets A, B, and C come in on the more highly loaded link and cause "jitter". Without a load-balancing router having multiple paths of varying latency to the same hosts, is "jitter" still possible?

Re:latency != jitter

[mamladm]

yes of course that is correct, but I understood the OP's mentioning of "latency (jitter)" to mean that one is just another name for the other.

The term latency is usually understood to mean as much as "constant delay" and the term jitter as much as "rapidly varying delay" to put it in very broad terms.

I am not sure if a load balancing router is the only thing that could cause jitter. It may well be that multi threaded packet processing on some router along the way might also cause jitter.

Re:latency != jitter

[shakah]

Jitter is when packets arrive out of order.

Isn't jitter really the variability in arrival times of packets? In other words, assuming 10 ms packets, and assuming 6 packets (A thru F) with a 1/2 second latency you might see:

sender:
======================
1:00:00.000 packet A
1:00:00.010 packet B
1:00:00.020 packet C
1:00:00.030 packet D
1:00:00.040 packet E
1:00:00.050 packet F

ideal reception:
======================
1:00:00.500
1 :00:00.510 packet A
1:00:00.520 packet B
1:00:00.530 packet C
1:00:00.540 packet D
1:00:00.560 packet E
1:00:00.570 packet F

jittery reception:
======================
1:00:00.500
1 :00:00.518 packet A
1:00:00.529 packet B
1:00:00.539 packet C
1:00:00.546 packet D
1:00:00.564 packet E
1:00:00.575 packet F

Already in Canada...

[Anonymous Coward]

AOL Canada (oxymoron?) already has something like this:

http://www.totaltalk.ca/ [totaltalk.ca]

Re:Already in Canada...

[mesach]

How is it an oxymoron?

Canada is in North AMERICA!

Sheesh, stop thinking the U.S.A is the only America, There is North America, Central America, and South America, All of which can be on AOL and still be considered right.

Now as for AOL UK, that to me sounds wrong, I mean we had the Boston Tea Party and that whole revolution thing, but yet they want to use some CRAPPY internet provider from here? Sometimes I think I'll never understand the Brits, but then Saturday comes and I get another episode of Doctor Who to download.

Re:Already in Canada...

[BabyPanther]

Canada is in America. So is Mexico. So is Peru. So are many other countries. North America and South America are part of America. If it was United States Online then it would be an oxymoron.

AOL in the U.S. has it too

[ImaLamer]

It's just called Time Warner "Digital Phone". (Web site [timewarnercable.com])

It's the same company, and will be the same service. It's now just pointed/marketed towards AOL users and I'm guessing a few DSL users too. (I've got to add that I hate Time Warner after getting cable. I've only had it for 2 months, but their whole purpose for having a cable tv business is to put Time Warner commercials 25 hours a day! I've already got the service, quit trying to make me a fanboy.)

And 911 calls?

[Silver Sloth]

Doesn't VoIP have issues with 911 calls. I know they can be resolved but I don't see anything in the article about this. Will the average AOL user be aware of the problem? I somehow doubt it as the AOL user base is not known for it technical awareness.

All the bells and whistles will be great until the first time the house catches fire, dad has a heart attack, or there's bad guys in the cellar!

Re:And 911 calls?

[mzwaterski]

Assuming that you don't travel with your phone (just as you can't travel with your landline) there are no issues. The VOIP phone can announce your location to 911. If you do travel, you have to update the service to tell it where you are. Why do people have so much trouble with this versus cell phones? Am I giving people too much credit in their logic skills?

Re:And 911 calls?

[ps_inkling]

The ability to dial 911 is the only boogy-man the phone company can raise against VoIP.

How about this -- look up the phone number to your fire department and police department. Post the numbers next to the phone. In case of emergency, dial the appropriate number. It's what we did before we had 911 service.

If you just can't live without 911, get an old cell phone and use it to dial 911. No contract required.

Re:And 911 calls?

[sharkey]

If you just can't live without 911, get an old cell phone and use it to dial 911. No contract required.

Or get a cheap RadioShack phone and plug it into the wall. Traditional telcos are required to provide 911 service without a contract, IIRC.

what is the 911 problem - power?

[fantomas]

What's the problem with 911 calls? is it that the VOIP phone requires power, whereas standard house phones will operate even if power is out in a house? or is it something to do with what numbers can be dialled?

Re:what is the 911 problem - power?

[apt-get dist-upgrade]

Probably about 911 routing. Some VoIP providers that say they forward 911 to an appropriate PSAP number in your area don't forward it properly, or forward it to non-emergency numbers that aren't properly equipped to handle the typical 911 emergency call, or forward 911 to completely wrong numbers that either no one answers on when you do call them or are merely answering machine or fax lines or have absolutely nothing to do with any emergency service whatsoever. Short of testing your 911 functionality ahead of time, you might not know of this with VoIP until the time comes that you actually do need to use 911 and then realize it doesn't work.

What about keywords?

[jav1231]

"If you're too drunk to drive, just say AOL Keyword "Cab" and a taxi will pick you up!

Free Forever?

[zoomba]

I wonder if AOL will treat its VoIP subscribers like they do normal AOL users when they want to cancel their account.

About 3 years ago I loaded up an AOL free trial CD just for shits and giggles, and to see how much it had changed since I last used it (1.0). Well, I found the experience disappointing (as I expected though) and at the end of the trial went to cancel.

What happened at that point was a 30min conversation where the sales rep practically begged me to keep the service. He offered me 6 months free and told me that if I make this same call every 5-6 months I could end up not paying for the service ever again. I think I said "No, just cancel the damn account, I DO NOT LIKE THE SERVICE" about two dozen times. Finally, defeated, the rep canceled the account. That was the most painful phone convo I've ever had.

I'm wondering if I can pull the free-forever scheme with their VoIP service. Think they'll be desperate enough for subscribers to it?

Re:Free Forever?

[Esion Modnar]

I wonder how common this was. I too had AOL free for over a year before I decided it wasn't worth it, even for free.

My main gripe was that the service kept randomly disconnecting me, completely independent of whether I was active or not. And changing dial-up numbers made no difference. This was probably related to their effort to keep to their "no busy signal" pledge.

Sure, no busy signals, but randomly disconnecting is as bad or worse.

Re:Free Forever?

[Kris Magnusson]

you probably had heard in advance that AOL still sucked. why did you even bother trying it out again? nothing personal here, but wasted your time with AOL, and on top of it you let some phone droid waste 30 minutes of your life. now you're considering doing it all over again. what is up with that?

-- do you go to movies you know you won't like and sit through them until the bitter end?

-- do you listen to prerecorded telemarketing messages all the way through when they ring through on your telephone, then curse the company that placed the call in the first place?

-- do you let chatty clerks at gas stations keep you from getting in your car and driving off to go about your business, then fume afterward because they wasted your time?

timewasters will suck the life right out of you, and AOL is right up there at the top of the list. be careful of timewasters, and you'll have more time left for you and your family.

(this is not advice, this is a suggestion from someone who used to let these things happen to me. now i just walk off or hang up the phone because I DON'T BUY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' BULLSHIT AGENDAS.) .......... kris

Hot damn!

[alispguru]

As a bonus current AOL members wil receive a wireless AP when signing-up for the service.

Does this mean we'll see a bunch of new unsecured wireless APs soon?

Re:Hot damn!

[CdBee]

No, it means you'll see a bunch of AOL-type users flooding tech support forums with help stopping their AP crashing when they try and run kazaa through it without forwarding all the ports

You can be pretty sure it won't be a decent US Robotics or Linksys, but will be a rebranded far-eastern Safecom or similar.

Wow, OSS beat our the commercial Version

[bahwi]

http://sipphone.com/phonegaim/ [sipphone.com] has been around for awhile. =)

Test your connection...

[fiji]

If you are at all interested in this service (or one of the alternate offerings from the other VoIP providers) then make sure your line can support a VoIP call by using this free service: ahref=http://testyourvoip.com/ [slashdot.org]http://testyourvoip. com/>.

Also you can roll your own with the Asterix software, and some cheap hardware... (URL:http://asterix.org/ [asterix.org]). There are companies who you can pay to bridge to the phone network calls from an Asterix server.

-ben

It's Asterisk, not Asterix

[mamladm]

It's http://www.asterisk.org/ [asterisk.org] and the name is Asterisk, not asterix.

Re:Test your connection...

[10Brett-T]

Asterisk. Say it with me. Asterisk [asterisk.org].

Aww, c'mon

[lorcha]

Who axed you?

Re:Test your connection...

[apt-get dist-upgrade]

If you are at all interested in this service (or one of the alternate offerings from the other VoIP providers) then make sure your line can support a VoIP call by using this free service: ahref=http://testyourvoip.com/ [slashdot.org]http://testyourvoip./ [testyourvoip.] com/>.

Here is a working link for www.testyourvoip.com [testyourvoip.com] just incase some people don't feel like highlighting the proper part of that URL and pasting it in their browser.

Only 40 cities? Why not everywhere?

[dnaboy]

I can't understand why they would only launch in 40 cities instead of nationwide (or worldwide). I've got vonage, and when I signed up, I got to pick phone numbers from essentially anywhere in N. America, so really, where the customer is located doesn't matter.

For what it's worth, my vonage line is my home office line, so I've even been known to travel with it when I want to work from my college friend's house. Just plug it in to their cable modem, then plug it in to a phone. Ultimate portability.

Re:Only 40 cities? Why not everywhere?

[fatboy]

I've got vonage, and when I signed up, I got to pick phone numbers from essentially anywhere in N. America, so really, where the customer is located doesn't matter.

I have been a Vonage customer over a year and hoping that they will add Knoxville,Tn.

Let me know when they have service for the 865 area code.

Another Movie??

[tesseract5d]

So are Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks actually going to be able to talk on the phone this time??? Brilliant!

Hhhmmm....

[Slashcrap]

As a bonus current AOL members wil receive a wireless AP when signing-up for the service.

Excellent! Everyone in their neighbourhood will be getting free VoIP as well then!

Open Access Points

[SmokeyDP]

Chances are these AP's will be open and most AOL users are not savvy enough to secure them. So looks like this should create some more open AP's for us when we are away from home.

Call Me Paranoid but

[TooCynical]

AOL/TM knows my buddies, surfing habits, shopping preferrences, magazines subscriptions, TV and cable viewing tendencies - do they really need to know who I talk with on the phone???

I am probably giving them more credit than they are due but knowing that much about 40+ million people cannot be good...

Re:Call Me Paranoid but

[Wybaar]

We now bring you a special report ... the United States Department of Homeland Security has just announced it has acquired internet service provider AOL. Secretary Michael Chertoff had this statement for the press about the acquisition: "We believe that Osama Bin Laden and other terrorist networks throughout the world have been using AOL Instant Messenger, and so acquiring AOL's infrastructure will bring us one step closer to finding Al Qaeda. In addition, now we won't need Congress to renew the PATRIOT Act ... we'll have all the information we need thanks to AOL's databases of subscriber information." No word on how much the Department of Homeland Security is paying for AOL, but given that this is a government agency, estimates start at three times AOL's net worth.

Hmmm...

[Patrick Mannion]

I wonder if they'll try connect to AOL using their VoIP phones.

Re:Hmmm...

[dygital]

I tried, it worked, but dropped the connection. hehe. Landline is better on dialup.

Just an extension of a current feature

[LaughingLinuxMan]

It seems like they just tacked on "computer <-> phone" to their existing AIM voice technology.

To me, it is arbitrary to say that once the "computer <-> computer" voice technology gets connected another voice system, POTS, that one is suddenly regulated (USF, etc). \

That being said, however one communicates, there needs to be technology for that medium that locates you in an emergency. One is not always able to spell out an exact location to 911 when in trouble.

My two cents...

-LLM

What will happen?

[Patrick Mannion]

Will MSN now rush to get on the VoIP wagon? What about the Baby Bells?

It seems like VoIP will become more and more commonplace. I predict it will maybe be used about 50% or 75% of the telephone system by about 2010.

AOL VOIP = Good

[dygital]

I use broadband, so dont flame me. I have AOL For Broadband for free, and I participated in the beta test of the "Internet Phone Service". Its very reliable, and you get a free Linksys box to hook your telephone into. To make things easier, and less linksys boxes (I have 4 as it is now), I hooked up the TA into the Telephone Network Interface and put a label on it that says "Anti-Qwest Device". All phones work in the house on it. I performed one 911 test call, and took slightly longer to reach than a cell phone, but I was overall connected to the PSAP in a decent amount of time. However, I dont know how much AOL plans to charge for it, I'm thinking ballpark like $15/mo. I get it for free though, so thats maybe why I like it more. ;)

Their basic is 19.95 for 3 months,34.95 thereafter

[Sark666]

That's pretty much what I pay for regular service. One of the big pushes of voip is the national calling, but for me 99.9% of my calls are local.

Is there any voip service in canada that can really save you money over traditional local service?

When I see less than 5 bucks savings I think it's not worth the hassle. Plus the headaches of qos, e911 etc, it's gotta be worthwhile to switch.

Does anybody know if this is open or proprietary?

[mamladm]

The article doesn't say anything about what protocol AOL's service will be using. Does anyone know? Is it SIP or yet another incompatible derivative of SIP (like Skype and Apple's iChat) or something else?

Re:Does anybody know if this is open or proprietar

[dygital]

Powered by Level3 VOIP network. ;)

Re:Does anybody know if this is open or proprietar

[mamladm]

But that might only refer to the backbone, not the "last mile" between AOL's POPs and AOL customer premises.

If they use SIP for the last mile, that would mean you could use your own SIP phone to connect to the network. I am kind of skeptical about AOL using a standard protocol, though.

Them and every-damn-body else!

[IdJit]

Another communications company dabbling in VoIP isn't news anymore. Everyone's doing it now...from big names like Cox, to smaller firms like Cavalier Telephone and a bunch of others.

When a company can patch a network line straight into my brain, then I'll be interested...Oh...Hi, Sony...What's that?...You're working on it?...You want me to test it out?...Ummm, maybe that's not such a good ideeee0a1a10a01a1010101011010101101010101001010101 01010010101010010101010010101010101010101010100101 01010101010101...

Free wireless access point for AOLers? Wheeeeee!

[Anonymous Coward]

As a bonus current AOL members wil receive a wireless AP when signing-up for the service."

I think the bigger story here is that AOL's clueless subscribers will unwittingly be rolling out a national, free, wireless IP network-- if the wireless AP is unsecured out of the box and enough people sign up for this service.

This is good...

[Run4yourlives]

But the real fun will begin in a few years when VOIP, combined with free WI-FI seriously impacts the telecom giants.

Then we'll see RIAA vs. the people all over again (Save me the "Copyright is theft" rant).

I'm keeping me fingers crossed, but experience tells me this is going to be a massive legal mess.

Speakeasy Too

[Greyfox]

I got some snail-mail spam from Speakeasy and they're getting into the market too. They also address 911 service, although I'd be willing to bet that it won't work if the power goes out. Standard telephone service works during power outages as long as you don't have a phone that needs to be plugged into a wall socket. Still, I might have to take 'em up on it since Qwest has been ass-raping me on phone service since I moved into the area.

If memory serves me correctly, and I do believe it does, a phone jack that doesn't have service has to, by law, provide 911 service. So if you were concerned about the 911 service from... whoever... you could get a red bat-phone style phone and plug it into a wall jack in case you ever need to make that emergency call.

It's too expensive....

[Newer Guy]

The leader in VOIP right now is Vonage, who prices their time proven product at $24.99 a month. AOL's VOIP is an unknown product with no history that's priced five dollars a month more. Vonage also offers a rich feature set including simultaneous ring (where any incoming calls ring on both my home and cell phone; the first one answered gets the call). The next lower tier of VOIP is flooded with providers like Packet 8, Voicepulse, Broadvoice, etc. which offer similar service to AOL but are priced TEN DOLLARS a month less. As always, AOL has set their prices way too high.... AOL is also 10 dollars more then the next ter

The actual Press Release

[puck13]

Straight from AOL/TW, not just a summary from a newspaper: AOL introduces internet phone service [timewarner.com]

*picks up phone after being gone for awhile*

[SeaFox]

"Welcome! ... You've got voicemail!"

Re:AOL

[RailGunner]

AOL Internet Phone Service...AIPS... rhymes with "Apes".

How fitting, considering most AOL users are only slightly more advanced than trained monkeys. And on the bright side, if you get this service you can look forward to koreans calling you at 4 AM asking you if you want a larger penis or herbal cialis.

The Nigerian VoIP Spam ought to be really interesting, especially if it comes with sounds effects like machine gun fire in the background.

I doubt anyone gets porn VoIP spam, though - people wouldn't have a reason to call 1-900 numbers anymore.

Re:Skype?

[papaia]

In the future? Probably because - if I would be AOL and would like to charge you for MY services - I would prioritize traffic for my application (of course - making sure it is identifiable somehow, either by TCP/UDP port, or using a specialized field in the header or payload), and let you decide whether Skype would still compare. Even worse, I would block or put Skype in low priority queue, on the network I have contol over, to make sure you are not happy with it, and start paying me the big bucks.

VOIP != computer phone

[mamladm]

You are mistaken.

VOIP doesn't mean that your computer becomes a phone. All it means is that voice is encapsulated into IP packets. Period.

In fact, a software that allows you to use your computer as a phone, a so called softphone is a very bad compromise.

You will always get far superior quality if you use a real VOIP phone, that is, a device that looks just like an old fashioned telephone, but instead of a phone jack (RJ-11) it has got an ethernet jack (RJ-45) at its back and circuitry to convert between analog voice and IP packet encapsulated digitised voice.

http://www.voip-info.org/wiki-VOIP+Phones [voip-info.org]

Re:VOIP != computer phone

[Reignking]

:) = sarcasm

Re:superior quality?

[mamladm]

Get a real IP phone and see for yourself.

The short explanation is that IP phones are made for one sole purpose only and they are very good at fulfilling that purpose, while desktop computers are multi-purpose machines optimised for time sharing, not real-time apps like telephony.

BTW, Skype uses the ILBC codec only. It cannot negotiate other codecs if the circumstances allow or require it. ILBC is OK, but it's inferior to both uncompressed codecs such as G711 (aka aLaw and uLaw) and other compressed ones such as G729 or Speex.

And no, this is not about any particular call routing scenario.

Re:Open source

[smilheim]

http://www.asterisk.org/ [asterisk.org]

Re:Interesting Acronym

[Digz]

..or rather

AOLIPS

Eh yo lips!