On 03/29/2011 01:21 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> GV has been around for years - but previously you had to get an invite
>> from an existing user or go on a waiting list. Now you can just sign up
>> and get a free number which you ca
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 01:37:22PM -0400, ken wrote:
>
> On 03/29/2011 01:21 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> > With the right software and hardware (asterisk and an ATA) you can even
> > use the conjunction of google voice and google chat to act as a "real"
> > phone line. Indeed I just wrote up a pr
On 03/29/2011 01:37 PM ken wrote:
> On 03/29/2011 01:21 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> GV has been around for years - but previously you had to get an invite
>>> from an existing user or go on a waiting list. Now you can just sign up
On 3/29/2011 12:37 PM, ken wrote:
>
> On 03/29/2011 01:21 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 12:08:33PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> GV has been around for years - but previously you had to get an invite
>>> from an existing user or go on a waiting list. Now you can just sign up
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:17:58PM -0400, ken wrote:
> > On 03/29/2011 01:21 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> >> phone line. Indeed I just wrote up a process :-)
> >> http://sweh.spuddy.org/gvoice/
> >>
> >> But I think that's getting a little off-topic :-)
> Just read your webpage. It answered my o
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 01:24:47PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> The latter. If I followed the scenario correctly, the asterisk server
> (which acts as a PBX) logs into the google chat session pretending to be
> you at your browser, and when a voice call comes to the chat session it
> forwards i
On 3/29/2011 1:37 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 01:24:47PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> The latter. If I followed the scenario correctly, the asterisk server
>> (which acts as a PBX) logs into the google chat session pretending to be
>> you at your browser, and when a voice
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:52:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/29/2011 1:37 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
> > Exactly correct. It also works the other way; pick up the phone and
> > dial a number and asterisk routes it via google chat so you get your
> > free US calls and cheap international cal
On 03/29/2011 04:32 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 02:52:16PM -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 3/29/2011 1:37 PM, Stephen Harris wrote:
>>> Exactly correct. It also works the other way; pick up the phone and
>>> dial a number and asterisk routes it via google chat so you get yo
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 05:02:47PM -0400, ken wrote:
> This was one feature I was interested in with the "answering machine" I
> spoke of before: I'd want to be able to pick up an incoming call with a
> bluetooth phone so I could walk around and not be tethered by a phone
> line. A friend of mine
On 3/29/2011 4:02 PM, ken wrote:
>
Exactly correct. It also works the other way; pick up the phone and
dial a number and asterisk routes it via google chat so you get your
free US calls and cheap international calls.
>>> Do you know if asterisk (freeswitch, 2600hz, etc.) can do this
On 03/29/2011 05:10 PM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 05:02:47PM -0400, ken wrote:
>> This was one feature I was interested in with the "answering machine" I
>> spoke of before: I'd want to be able to pick up an incoming call with a
>> bluetooth phone so I could walk around and not
On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>
>
>> What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
>> said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>
> That was the point of the base station with wireless handsets. I've
> seen those with 3 or 4 handsets for well under $100.
On 3/30/11 6:04 AM, ken wrote:
>
>
> On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>>
>>> What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
>>> said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>>
>> That was the point of the base station with wireless handsets. I've
>> seen those wi
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 06:57:04AM -0400, ken wrote:
> What I'd hope to do is plug the analog output from the ATA into the
> input of my home's POTS (Plain Old Telephone System, i.e., the 1970s
> technology). That way all the cabling I have for extensions into nearly
> every room could still be us
On 03/30/2011 09:04 AM Stephen Harris wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 06:57:04AM -0400, ken wrote:
>> What I'd hope to do is plug the analog output from the ATA into the
>> input of my home's POTS (Plain Old Telephone System, i.e., the 1970s
>> technology). That way all the cabling I have for ext
On 03/30/2011 08:55 AM Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 3/30/11 6:04 AM, ken wrote:
>>
>> On 03/29/2011 05:23 PM Les Mikesell wrote:
>>>
>>>
What tames my enthusiasm about bluetooth though is its maximum range is
said to be 20'. Gimme a wifi phone.
>>> That was the point of the base station
On 3/30/11 8:15 AM, ken wrote:
> >>
>> This description does sound like it uses the cell's in/outbound connection:
>> http://www.frys.com/product/5916034
>>
>
> Again, I remember reading that bluetooth's range was 20 feet max.
> That's not much. It'd be cheaper and easier and better just to get a
18 matches
Mail list logo
