Decius wrote:
] I think there are some people on this site who might have good
] answers to this question.
]
] Why don't I have VoIP? I've got broadband. All my friends have
] broadband. I pull down high fidelity internet radio all the
] time. But, when I want to talk to my friends I pick up the
] phone. What is the deal?
]
] I don't even want to interconnect to the POTs system, but
] while I'm talking about this, dialpad.com used to offer free
] ad supported voice calls. Now they have a VoIP calling card
] system. Did the economics not work out or were people turned
] off by the quality level??
]
] Is there some software out there for this that I just don't
] know about? Is there some technical problem that prevents this
] from working, or is the problem economic?
]
] Aren't the service providers looking for ways to expand
] bandwidth utilization? Why aren't they working on this stuff?
]
]
] What IS the deal?

I actually had a very lengthy and indepth reply, but my browser ate it, so here is the abridged version:

There is no singular answer to this question. In fact, I would answer it with the statement that we do indeed have VoIP, and "why would you want VoIP?"

First, VoIP is alive and thriving. There are a lot of businesses that offer it, either as a carrier, reseller, or broker. Most of the traffic originates in the US and other G7 countries and terminates in Latin America, Pac Rim, and other '3rd world' countries. Prepaid phone cards over VoIP nets is a booming business, so much so that state owned telecom in some of the terminating countries are passing laws making it illegal. I would guess that we're nearing a half a billion minutes, as the last data I saw was that we were billing in the 10's of billions of minutes and this was in 2001.

There are several companies that offer clients and gateways. Google around. www.net2phone.com comes to mind. I have also seen devices that convert TDM based T1's into IP for transport. I wish these would've been around during my BlueStar days. We could've sold the hell out of a PBX tie line alternative.

So why don't you see mainstream VoIP? Why aren't major carriers utilizing it? Well, some are. Chances are, if you make a call to a remote place, it might be using VoIP. But then there's economics and monopoly too.

First, what you have today is very economical. POTS works, is robust, is cheap, and paid for. Digital switching is 30 years old. Most switches were upgraded back in the 80s, so it's hard to compete with 100 year old plant, 30 year old switches, and depreciation schedules that were started before I was born. Most switches in remote locations are actually MORE ADVANCED than what we have here. China has ISDN capable switches in villages that don't even have ubiquitous electricity.

Compare that with installing a new VoIP softswitch, which is expensive, requires training your guys onhow to work it, and doesn't even integrate with your billing system all that well. You might be able to scale it better than POTS, someday, but the costs are simply not worth it. Besides, LD prices are continuing to fall, so margins are getting pressed even more. We're talking about an industry where a half of a penny can get you a promotion or fired. Investing large cap ex in it, from a carrier standpoint, is stupid if you already have existing circuit switched products.

Finally, RBOCs will never have any incentive to deploy VoIP or any other advanced technologies because it fucks up the revenue models. Why use VoIP or VoDSL when you can sell over priced T1? Why deploy ANYTHING if you don't have to? Everything is already paid for. Everytime someone makes a call, it's almost pure profit.

flynn23 wrote:
] "why would you want VoIP?"

Because I don't want to pay a metered rate for long distance. I want to pay a flat rate. And I already am. Its my internet connection. I just can't use it this way, because no one seems to...

] First, VoIP is alive and thriving.

In terms of POTS interconnection yes... But I'm a different market. I want to talk to my friends in the states. I may not be as interesting a market...

] There are several companies that offer clients and gateways.
] Google around. www.net2phone.com comes to mind. I have also

Net2Phone wants your money upfront for metered rate service to the POTs network. They claim you can make PC to PC calls, but there is no discussion of how this works, if its free, etc.... They focus you on their metered rate long distance pots stuff.

] Finally, RBOCs will never have any incentive to deploy VoIP or
] any other advanced technologies because it fucks up the
] revenue models. Why use VoIP or VoDSL when you can sell over
] priced T1? Why deploy ANYTHING if you don't have to?
] Everything is already paid for. Everytime someone makes a
] call, it's almost pure profit.

We're thinking on two different layers...

What I want, as a consumer, is flat rate reasonable quality.

Its not really important to me what the infrastructure is like on the back end. It just seems silly to me that when I want to send one kind of data I have a nice flat rate reasonable quality system in my house, and then when I want to talk voice I moved to a metered rate high quality system, which I pay for in addition to the flat rate I already pay.

Decius wrote:
] flynn23 wrote:
] ] "why would you want VoIP?"
]
] Because I don't want to pay a metered rate for long distance.
] I want to pay a flat rate. And I already am. Its my internet
] connection. I just can't use it this way, because no one seems
] to...

almost any of the tools available allow you to do this. I'm unaware of any OSS tools, but I'm sure they exist. The problem you're having isn't that it's not available, but that no one you want to talk to has a client.

] ] First, VoIP is alive and thriving.
]
] In terms of POTS interconnection yes... But I'm a different
] market. I want to talk to my friends in the states. I may not
] be as interesting a market...

you are a market that many people don't want to materialize for obvious reasons.

] ] There are several companies that offer clients and gateways.
]
] ] Google around. www.net2phone.com comes to mind. I have also
]
] Net2Phone wants your money upfront for metered rate service to
] the POTs network. They claim you can make PC to PC calls, but
] there is no discussion of how this works, if its free, etc....
] They focus you on their metered rate long distance pots stuff.

Net2Phone will do free PC to PC calls. It's in the FAQ. However, Net2Phone is annoying in that RealAudio/IE kinda way where it takes over your system. There are other clients available. I also believe that Linksys has a hardware box that utilizes Net2Phone's technology. You could use that to place IP only PtP calls I'm sure.

There are now enough standards in the VoIP world where you could conceivably place calls to different clients. I have not dinked around with this stuff since 1999, but it worked *very* well then (perfect quality over a cable modem). So I imagine that things are just as good if not better now. I'd be willing to act as a guinea pig for client tests if you find something you like.

]
] ] Finally, RBOCs will never have any incentive to deploy VoIP
] or
] ] any other advanced technologies because it fucks up the
] ] revenue models. Why use VoIP or VoDSL when you can sell over
]
] ] priced T1? Why deploy ANYTHING if you don't have to?
] ] Everything is already paid for. Everytime someone makes a
] ] call, it's almost pure profit.
]
] We're thinking on two different layers...
]
] What I want, as a consumer, is flat rate reasonable quality.
]
] Its not really important to me what the infrastructure is like
] on the back end. It just seems silly to me that when I want to
] send one kind of data I have a nice flat rate reasonable
] quality system in my house, and then when I want to talk voice
] I moved to a metered rate high quality system, which I pay for
] in addition to the flat rate I already pay.

The issue there is that metered is superior and ultimately, the way things will go. There's very little metered data services right now (and certainly almost no IP based services) because it's very expensive to put in the accounting systems necessary to do this. ISP's can barely stay alive with what they have. It's almost impossible for them to implement metered billing into their networks. Besides, all their customers will leave to unmetered nets.

I'm not a big fan of metered based data services. I think it's not the way to go. But it'll have to be purely from an economic standpoint. People who utilize the service more should pay more.

So what I'm saying is enjoy it while you can. At some point, every byte will cost ya.

flynn23 wrote:

] I'm not a big fan of metered based data services. I think it's
] not the way to go. But it'll have to be purely from an
] economic standpoint. People who utilize the service more
] should pay more.

People are willing to pay more in sum not to have the meter running. There is a really good paper on this that this guy at bellcore put together, but I can't find it right now. It was from before the days when I used MemeStreams.

Decius wrote:
] flynn23 wrote:
]
] ] I'm not a big fan of metered based data services. I think
] it's
] ] not the way to go. But it'll have to be purely from an
] ] economic standpoint. People who utilize the service more
] ] should pay more.
]
] People are willing to pay more in sum not to have the meter
] running. There is a really good paper on this that this guy at
] bellcore put together, but I can't find it right now. It was
] from before the days when I used MemeStreams.

There are a million research papers into this. I know that I've read at least a dozen. The bottom line is that every utility in existance today is metered. Internet access will be (is?) a utility, and will follow suit. I don't think people will have a choice as to whether they can pay more for unmetered access. It's not going to work that way when the providers eventually make the switch. I don't like it. I don't know anyone who likes it. But it's going to happen.

The only x factor that I can think of might be the overcapacity of fiber in the ground. That could definitely delay things for quite some time. But I predict that we'll likely have a killer app that will require lighting all that crap up inside of 10 years. So who knows.

ISPs don't want you to use bandwidth. At least not edge providers. They have to pay for it.

Reknamorken wrote:
] ISPs don't want you to use bandwidth. At least not edge
] providers. They have to pay for it.

True, but if you didn't use it, then you wouldn't be shelling out $50/mo for it, and that's ultimately what they want. Which only adds to the pressure to make this a metered service.