I hope this post doesn't cause rage. I'm seriously just after a good
discussion.
I currently use VoIP. Lots of various service providers here and there
just to check it out. It's pretty much a toy for me - I don't rely on it
anywhere - But I still need to get involved with it a bit to understand
it, just in case, it ever comes up with other people I work with.
VoIP is a service, and as with most services, there's a cost involved.
The thing is, I can't find/see VoIP as having any cost benefits. It's
certainly great from a tech. point-of-view. Example, be anywhere in the
world with laptop and WiFi hotspot to make/receive calls on a normal UK
number, or whatever. I guess that example has a cost benefit in itself
(no international roaming charges or changing numbers all the time with
customers etc.).
But, say, for me at my home office in the UK with broadband, I don't
really save any money. I'm thinking about out going calls here
E.g. 1899 service gives me cheaper calls out + combine that with the
many others like that. Routing is easily achieved and hassle-free with a
£15 dialer box or even Asterix.
I hope someone knows what I'm getting at. I'm lost. Need a point in the
right direction.
I'd really like to know why VoIP then? And more importantly, which
providers? 'cos clearly all the ones I've tried so far (main/well known
ones) are either more expensive or, if cheaper, just unreliable.
Current use:
Skype with SkypeIn UK landline number for when I'm abroad and
friends/family want to talk at pre-arranged times. It's cheap for them
(3pence per call with 1899). Most reliable service. HTTPS proxy support
is its best feature IMO, considering some networks abroad are quite poor
for otherwise direct routing to UK/USA.
Sipgate account and its landline number. Because it was free. Difficult
to test benefit here as it's so unreliable. After all, it is free though.
VoIPCheap/Buster - Handy for Telephone Banking, free and all done
through computer speakers. Works fine, but would be too embarrassing
with business calls its intermittent unreliability.
Others, on-off. Either just sign-up for short while (month) or free
trial online.
So far only using softphones. Because I can't quite see the cost benefit
(yet), I haven't got an ATA. I do plan on setting up an Asterix@Home
server soon though.
dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>
> By Broadband I presume you mean ADSL down a BT line ! where you to go
> over to TW broadband you could sling your BT line for starters which
> would be a saving of at least 10.40 a month.
>
Yes, ADSL.
I don't trust VoIP enough to ditch my landline. It's also used for
incoming fax.
Say there was an emergency and I need to dial 999? And please don't say
use mobiles.
dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 23:27:36 +0100, "T." <nntp-DOT-dump@zen.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>
>>dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>>By Broadband I presume you mean ADSL down a BT line ! where you to go
>>>over to TW broadband you could sling your BT line for starters which
>>>would be a saving of at least 10.40 a month.
>>>
>>
>>Yes, ADSL.
>>
>>I don't trust VoIP enough to ditch my landline. It's also used for
>>incoming fax.
>>
>>Say there was an emergency and I need to dial 999? And please don't say
>>use mobiles.
>
> Vonage
In article <id6sh1hbs9lf8vsr1bd7846c1krkg5pfji@4ax.com>, dexter@blueyonder.co.uk says...
> On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 23:27:36 +0100, "T." <nntp-DOT-dump@zen.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> >>
> >> By Broadband I presume you mean ADSL down a BT line ! where you to go
> >> over to TW broadband you could sling your BT line for starters which
> >> would be a saving of at least 10.40 a month.
> >>
> >
> >Yes, ADSL.
> >
> >I don't trust VoIP enough to ditch my landline. It's also used for
> >incoming fax.
> >
> >Say there was an emergency and I need to dial 999? And please don't say
> >use mobiles.
> Vonage
>
What if that emergency gave you a power cut?
This is a flaw with all VOIP, if you have a power cut, you lost your
phone.
In article <431e1ba8$0$21147$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>, nntp-DOT- dump@zen.co.uk says...
> >>
> >>Say there was an emergency and I need to dial 999? And please don't say
> >>use mobiles.
> >
> > Vonage
>
> It'd be danegerous. Think power-cut.
>
I just put that, before I read this.
> >It'd be danegerous. Think power-cut.
> Once in a blue moon in the UK these days and a poor excuse for
at themoment, but it can happen and from what we have been hearing,
powercuts could be the norm in the next few years.
> avoiding VOIP anyway with any of the modern cordless phones
> you need power and a fixed phone is a step backwards in my
> opinion.
>
I have got a corded phone connected for emergencies, I don't know anyone
who have not got a cheap corded phone connected.
I got cordless phones, the whole house is covered with them, almost
every room in the house here has a cordless phone, but I would not get
rid of my old Tandy corded phone.
In article <431e074c$0$3295$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>, nntp-DOT- dump@zen.co.uk says...
> I hope this post doesn't cause rage. I'm seriously just after a good
> discussion.
>
>
At the moment, VOIP is not worth bothering with for many people, unless
you just like the technology and want to muck around with it. BT charges
most people in this country a line rental, which is needed even if VOIP
is used, and a lot of land line phone suppliers prices are very good
now, even beating VOIP suppliers prices.
I came onto this newsgroup, because I was thinking of getting VOIP and
wanted to know more about it, but got to the stage where as you realise,
it is not cost affective.
If you got other people living with you and they want their own phone,
then it could be useful or if you want a second line for business.
I am not going to say what is reliable and what is not, because I don't
use VOIP, apart from MSN and Skype. At the moment, Skype/MSN does what I
want, the extra cost of getting VOIP is just not worth it for me.
I like the techonlogy, but too many things to go wrong.
A mate of mine is looking at VOIP, but only so he can have another line
for his fax and maybe have another line for his daughter, so she don't
run up his bills.
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d88abe1e78b61ee9897b9@news.metronet.co.u k
[snip]
> I like the techonlogy, but too many things to go wrong.
That can be said of a lot of things. I haven't had a serious problem for
months. YMMV of course.
> A mate of mine is looking at VOIP, but only so he can
> have another line for his fax and maybe have another line
> for his daughter, so she don't run up his bills.
Fax over IP is still rather unreliable as the required protocol isn't
supported by most (not all) providers, in any case I rarely use my
standalone machine for incoming faxes now, I have a fax-to-email number
which delivers incoming faxes as emails. I just use it for sending, which
doesn't occupy the ordinary landline for long enough to require a
dedicated line.
"T." <nntp-DOT-dump@zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:431e074c$0$3295$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk...
> I hope this post doesn't cause rage. I'm seriously just after a good
> discussion.
>
> I currently use VoIP. Lots of various service providers here and there
> just to check it out. It's pretty much a toy for me - I don't rely on it
> anywhere - But I still need to get involved with it a bit to understand
> it, just in case, it ever comes up with other people I work with.
>
> VoIP is a service, and as with most services, there's a cost involved.
> The thing is, I can't find/see VoIP as having any cost benefits. It's
> certainly great from a tech. point-of-view. Example, be anywhere in the
> world with laptop and WiFi hotspot to make/receive calls on a normal UK
> number, or whatever. I guess that example has a cost benefit in itself
> (no international roaming charges or changing numbers all the time with
> customers etc.).
Dont forget, consumer voip is riding on the back of corperate voip.
where there saving are there and can be Very large.
>
> But, say, for me at my home office in the UK with broadband, I don't
> really save any money. I'm thinking about out going calls here
>
> E.g. 1899 service gives me cheaper calls out + combine that with the
> many others like that. Routing is easily achieved and hassle-free with a
> £15 dialer box or even Asterix.
>
Cost is not every thing. But think about the need for more than one line or
having to seem to a customer that you are based nearby.
> I hope someone knows what I'm getting at. I'm lost. Need a point in the
> right direction.
>
> I'd really like to know why VoIP then? And more importantly, which
> providers? 'cos clearly all the ones I've tried so far (main/well known
> ones) are either more expensive or, if cheaper, just unreliable.
>
I think you need to workout what you are looking for. If its just cheap
calls then you are looking in the wrong place. Voip is just another trnsport
meduim for voice calls.
>
>
> Current use:
> Skype with SkypeIn UK landline number for when I'm abroad and
> friends/family want to talk at pre-arranged times. It's cheap for them
> (3pence per call with 1899). Most reliable service. HTTPS proxy support
> is its best feature IMO, considering some networks abroad are quite poor
> for otherwise direct routing to UK/USA.
>
> Sipgate account and its landline number. Because it was free. Difficult
> to test benefit here as it's so unreliable. After all, it is free though.
>
> VoIPCheap/Buster - Handy for Telephone Banking, free and all done
> through computer speakers. Works fine, but would be too embarrassing
> with business calls its intermittent unreliability.
>
> Others, on-off. Either just sign-up for short while (month) or free
> trial online.
Its seems that cost is you prime concern, then that being so you will have
to stick with the companies you have mentioned and accept that you dont get
something for nothing in this world.
>
> So far only using softphones. Because I can't quite see the cost benefit
> (yet), I haven't got an ATA.
Thats a fair point as you are onlylooking to save money.
>I do plan on setting up an Asterix@Home
> server soon though.
Why ?
There is a problem at the moment where domestic customers for voip have
listened to the benefits of voip for business use and assumed they are the
same for them.
This is not realy so. The savings dont realy scale down well. Remember a
business will be using voip to call between offices and to remote workers at
peak times and in large volumes, hence making a descent saving. You sitting
in your home office making a few calls a day will take a very long time to
make any savings at all.
In article <o8wTe.1328$fb.912@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, a77w@yahoo.co.uk says...
> >>It'd be danegerous. Think power-cut.
> > Once in a blue moon in the UK these days
>
> you obviously don't live in the countryside.
>
>
>
I don't think he lives in the real world.
In article <3o7mbbF4kgkhU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
> > I like the techonlogy, but too many things to go wrong.
>
> That can be said of a lot of things. I haven't had a serious problem for
> months. YMMV of course.
Maybe so, but you now got to rely on equipment that could fail for your
phone calls. Your ISP could have a problem. My next door neighbour is on
BT Broadband and he haves so many problems I am surprised he is still
with them.
Every sunday at about 2pm, his internet goes off, and the only way to
get it back is to switch the router off and back on. I thought it may
have been a router problem, but I have had a look and can't find
anything. I have also lent him my old router for a week and the same
thing happens.
So ISps can have problems and some are worse than others, mine is pretty
good, but they do have their bad days.
Then you got the router, that can go wrong, I know electronics are more
realible than ever now, but that is still another link that can wrong in
the chain.
Then Electric, if it goes off, you are in deep doggy poos.
>
> > A mate of mine is looking at VOIP, but only so he can
> > have another line for his fax and maybe have another line
> > for his daughter, so she don't run up his bills.
>
> Fax over IP is still rather unreliable as the required protocol isn't
> supported by most (not all) providers, in any case I rarely use my
> standalone machine for incoming faxes now, I have a fax-to-email number
> which delivers incoming faxes as emails. I just use it for sending, which
> doesn't occupy the ordinary landline for long enough to require a
> dedicated line.
>
>
Is the fax to email number expensive for the sender?
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d8937cb82d12f919897c4@news.metronet.co.u k
> In article <3o7mbbF4kgkhU1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
[snip]
> > Fax over IP is still rather unreliable as the required
> > protocol isn't supported by most (not all) providers,
> > in any case I rarely use my standalone machine for
> > incoming faxes now, I have a fax-to-email number which
> > delivers incoming faxes as emails. I just use it for
> > sending, which doesn't occupy the ordinary landline for
> > long enough to require a dedicated line.
>
> Is the fax to email number expensive for the sender?
The free (for the recipient) ones are usually 0870 numbers, mine is. I
don't normally agree with them but it does drastically cut down on the
junk faxes..! You can get geo numbers at a price though.
<dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:esfuh1pk18s006edfanhgnljif2h8scf7b@4ax.com
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:55:13 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> > You can get geo numbers at a price though.
> Oh yes very expencive ( NOT ) 1.99 a month from Voipfone .
Read the post again. I was talking about fax-to-email.
Ivor Jones wrote:
> <dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:esfuh1pk18s006edfanhgnljif2h8scf7b@4ax.com
>>On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:55:13 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
>><ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>>>You can get geo numbers at a price though.
>>
>>Oh yes very expencive ( NOT ) 1.99 a month from Voipfone .
>
> Read the post again. I was talking about fax-to-email.
It does appear from the voipfone site as though they also offer
geographic fax-to-email for 1.99/month - I've haven't looked to see if
there are any conditions, nor do I have any experience with their product.
"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dfnfou$g1d$1@custnews.inweb.co.uk
> Ivor Jones wrote:
> > <dexter@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:esfuh1pk18s006edfanhgnljif2h8scf7b@4ax.com
> > > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 18:55:13 +0100, "Ivor Jones"
> > > <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
> > > > You can get geo numbers at a price though.
> > >
> > > Oh yes very expencive ( NOT ) 1.99 a month from
> > > Voipfone .
> >
> > Read the post again. I was talking about fax-to-email.
>
> It does appear from the voipfone site as though they also
> offer geographic fax-to-email for 1.99/month - I've
> haven't looked to see if there are any conditions, nor do
> I have any experience with their product.
Fair enough, I wasn't aware of that. However given that I'm stuck with at
least one landline I might as well use that as a fax line. The voice calls
are all on Sipgate now, and it's been working fine for months thanks,
Stefan/Dex.
dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>It'd be danegerous. Think power-cut.
>
> Once in a blue moon in the UK these days and a poor excuse for
> avoiding VOIP anyway with any of the modern cordless phones
> you need power and a fixed phone is a step backwards in my
> opinion.
Who said anything about avoiding VoIP?
I'm saying I'd avoid getting rid of a normal traditional landline.
>On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 23:27:36 +0100, "T." <nntp-DOT-dump@zen.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>dexter@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
>>>
>>> By Broadband I presume you mean ADSL down a BT line ! where you to go
>>> over to TW broadband you could sling your BT line for starters which
>>> would be a saving of at least 10.40 a month.
>>>
>>
>>Yes, ADSL.
>>
>>I don't trust VoIP enough to ditch my landline. It's also used for
>>incoming fax.
>>
>>Say there was an emergency and I need to dial 999? And please don't say
>>use mobiles.
>Vonage
The conditions specificly state that it should not be used as a
substitute where 999 is concerned due to the powercut/no Internet
issue, and also because you would have to speak to the operator in
order to get location details.
Thanks.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 22:15:45 +0100, "T." <nntp-DOT-dump@zen.co.uk>
wrote:
>I hope this post doesn't cause rage. I'm seriously just after a good
>discussion.
Yes I think it is a good post.
>
>I currently use VoIP. Lots of various service providers here and there
>just to check it out. It's pretty much a toy for me - I don't rely on it
>anywhere - But I still need to get involved with it a bit to understand
>it, just in case, it ever comes up with other people I work with.
>
>VoIP is a service, and as with most services, there's a cost involved.
>The thing is, I can't find/see VoIP as having any cost benefits. It's
>certainly great from a tech. point-of-view. Example, be anywhere in the
>world with laptop and WiFi hotspot to make/receive calls on a normal UK
>number, or whatever. I guess that example has a cost benefit in itself
>(no international roaming charges or changing numbers all the time with
>customers etc.).
Yes.
>
>But, say, for me at my home office in the UK with broadband, I don't
>really save any money. I'm thinking about out going calls here
I think it depends on the volume of the calls. I have seen several
reviews and people post in this newsgroup saying that they have saved
money on their business where most of the calls have been in the
daytime, and they use something like Vonage on a business rate tariff,
or Sipgate to give them cheaper calls in the day then BT could give
them.
>
[...]
>I'd really like to know why VoIP then? And more importantly, which
>providers? 'cos clearly all the ones I've tried so far (main/well known
>ones) are either more expensive or, if cheaper, just unreliable.
I think you need to work out what you want from the system (i.e, a new
incoming number, cheaper rates than BT in the daytime, a new office
system that doesn't have several sets of wires for ethernet and the
phone system etc). I think you are correct in saying that there are
not many benefits of the Vonage/Sipgate sort of deals for someone who
is on their own, and makes most of their calls through cheap means.
This is originally why I didn't go with anyone for a long time,
because I just didn't see the point. Now that we were seriously
thinking about getting a new line, I can see the point more than I
previously could. We are with Vonage currently, but may change to
another system if this one doesn't suit us, and even if we don't go
with them, I am glad to have had the experience.
None of the services are necessarily bad, I just think they are
targeted at specific people/purposes, and if you don't meet those
criteria, then I don't think there is much point.
Andrew.
--
Andrew Hodgson in Bromyard, Herefordshire, UK.
My Email: use <andrew at hodgsonfamily dot org>.
Ian wrote:
>
>>E.g. 1899 service gives me cheaper calls out + combine that with the
>>many others like that. Routing is easily achieved and hassle-free with a
>>£15 dialer box or even Asterix.
>>
>
> Cost is not every thing. But think about the need for more than one line or
> having to seem to a customer that you are based nearby.
>
Correct. Value for money is everything. I can see your point about the
more than one line thing, or "local" numbers. For me though, that
doesn't apply (apart from the SkypeIn number that I have). If it did
though, I think that kind of service is currently available at a value
for money price (e.g. SkypeIn, Gizmo SIP phone service, voipfone, etc.)
Like I said, in my OP, I'm talking mainly about cost of outgoing calls.
>
>>I'd really like to know why VoIP then? And more importantly, which
>>providers? 'cos clearly all the ones I've tried so far (main/well known
>>ones) are either more expensive or, if cheaper, just unreliable.
>>
>
> I think you need to workout what you are looking for. If its just cheap
> calls then you are looking in the wrong place. Voip is just another trnsport
> meduim for voice calls.
I think that answers my question then.
Incoming: VoIP is worth it.
Outgoing: don't bother.
>>
>>Others, on-off. Either just sign-up for short while (month) or free
>>trial online.
>
>
> Its seems that cost is you prime concern, then that being so you will have
> to stick with the companies you have mentioned and accept that you dont get
> something for nothing in this world.
No. Value for money is my main concern. There are some services from the
above that I use which do actually give me something for nothing, but I
do agree that nothing is really like that, in that, they're not always
reliable.
>
>>So far only using softphones. Because I can't quite see the cost benefit
>>(yet), I haven't got an ATA.
>
> Thats a fair point as you are onlylooking to save money.
Save money? I'm looking to not have to pay out more than I'm currently
doing. If it then saves money, then that's great, a bonus if you like.
Where is the business benefit for me? Seeing how this thread is going,
I'm thinking none.
>
>>I do plan on setting up an Asterix@Home
>>server soon though.
>
> Why ?
To play with it, understand it, learn more, and so on. Maybe I can even
find somesort of setup which is then actually useful, to me.
>
> There is a problem at the moment where domestic customers for voip have
> listened to the benefits of voip for business use and assumed they are the
> same for them.
> This is not realy so. The savings dont realy scale down well. Remember a
> business will be using voip to call between offices and to remote workers at
> peak times and in large volumes, hence making a descent saving. You sitting
> in your home office making a few calls a day will take a very long time to
> make any savings at all.
>
Few calls a day? My current usage is about 70 hours a month. All to UK
domestic landline/mobile. I pay no more than £20/month for that
(collective across services), which also includes mobile email over
GPRS. I don't use the BT landline (which runs the broadband) for calls,
just outgoing faxes for once in a blue moon.
>
> Save money? I'm looking to not have to pay out more than I'm currently
> doing. If it then saves money, then that's great, a bonus if you like.
>
> Where is the business benefit for me? Seeing how this thread is going,
> I'm thinking none.
>
As a business you should be aware that to provide a level of service you
will have to make capital purchases and ongoing charges such as phone calls,
These are offset against you Tax and Vat. Therefore saving money is not
realy that important.
> >
> >>I do plan on setting up an Asterix@Home
> >>server soon though.
> >
> > Why ?
>
> To play with it, understand it, learn more, and so on. Maybe I can even
> find somesort of setup which is then actually useful, to me.
>
Then the questions now why AAH, Why not Asterisk its self. You will learn
far more and have a better understanding of the workings, And be able to
upgrade to later releases
> > There is a problem at the moment where domestic customers for voip have
> > listened to the benefits of voip for business use and assumed they are
the
> > same for them.
> > This is not realy so. The savings dont realy scale down well. Remember a
> > business will be using voip to call between offices and to remote
workers at
> > peak times and in large volumes, hence making a descent saving. You
sitting
> > in your home office making a few calls a day will take a very long time
to
> > make any savings at all.
> >
>
> Few calls a day? My current usage is about 70 hours a month. All to UK
> domestic landline/mobile. I pay no more than £20/month for that
> (collective across services), which also includes mobile email over
> GPRS. I don't use the BT landline (which runs the broadband) for calls,
> just outgoing faxes for once in a blue moon.
Now to some domestic users thats a lot, but to business it is 1 line in use
about 2 hours or so a day which is low. you cannot expect to make much
savings on what you already have. What you can do is provide a better
service though by putting out a unified CLI to people you call, Diverting
incoming callers to you mobile seamlessly giving location independant
working etc.
In article <3o8ns3F4qlnoU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
> >
> > Is the fax to email number expensive for the sender?
>
> The free (for the recipient) ones are usually 0870 numbers, mine is. I
> don't normally agree with them but it does drastically cut down on the
> junk faxes..! You can get geo numbers at a price though.
>
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d897f647bb274059897e0@news.metronet.co.u k
> In article <3o8ns3F4qlnoU1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
> > >
> > > Is the fax to email number expensive for the sender?
> >
> > The free (for the recipient) ones are usually 0870
> > numbers, mine is. I don't normally agree with them but
> > it does drastically cut down on the junk faxes..! You
> > can get geo numbers at a price though.
> >
>
>
> Maybe so, but it isno good if you run a business.
Possibly, but in that case you can usually offset costs against tax, so a
geo number would be affordable.
AD C wrote:
> In article <431f4742$0$323$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>, nntp-DOT-
> dump@zen.co.uk says...
>>Who said anything about avoiding VoIP?
>>
>>I'm saying I'd avoid getting rid of a normal traditional landline.
>
> It is not so much that I would like to get rid of my line, I would just
> love to get rid of the line rental, but I know that will never happen.
Well no, because then you'd be getting a service for free.
Ivor Jones wrote:
>>>
>>
>>
>>Maybe so, but it isno good if you run a business.
>
>
> Possibly, but in that case you can usually offset costs against tax, so a
> geo number would be affordable.
>
A tax rebate is the only reason to buy something else.
T. wrote:
> Ivor Jones wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe so, but it isno good if you run a business.
>>
>>
>>
>> Possibly, but in that case you can usually offset costs against tax,
>> so a geo number would be affordable.
>>
>
> A tax rebate is the only reason to buy something else.
Sorry, should read:
A tax rebate is NOT the only reason to buy something else.
Andrew Hodgson wrote:
>
> None of the services are necessarily bad, I just think they are
> targeted at specific people/purposes, and if you don't meet those
> criteria, then I don't think there is much point.
>
> Andrew.
Thanks for the reply.
Sounds like you're comments are spot on with my conclusions after this
thread.
In article <dfnri4$kn5$2@custnews.inweb.co.uk>, paul@cupis.co.uk says...
>
> Well no, because then you'd be getting a service for free.
>
What service? Bt is not going to give up this line rental lark, because
it is easy money. I know that they need to get money for updating the
exchange and things like that, but I think over £9 a month is a bit
much. My gas supplier do not have a meter rental, they have done away
with the standing change, so have my electricity suppier. the only
utility apart from BT that charges me a standing charge is my Welsh
water and hopefully that will change one day.
In article <3o99cqF4tkf8U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> > Maybe so, but it isno good if you run a business.
>
> Possibly, but in that case you can usually offset costs against tax, so a
> geo number would be affordable.
>
Cost benefit of VoIP 
Linear Mode
