The phone service that Comcast sells is VOIP, although they only tell you
that you ask. Is Cox the same?
-- 
Larry Hess, CPA | Albuquerque, NM


On 9/23/07, Levi Wallach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's definitely interesting.  We currently have an unlimited landline
> through our cable company (Cox).  Perhaps we could go back to our old
> emergency landline (mainly for emergencies and for our alarm system) and
> replace it with this?  I'll have to look into this more.  One question - can
> one travel with this?  I would think this would be a big advantage so that
> you could get unlimited calling wherever you go, and deal with areas where
> the reception isn't great.  But will this work in areas where there just
> aren't any cell towers anywhere near?  I'm assuming it probably also won't
> work in other countries that don't have CDMA service at all?
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: [email protected] on behalf of Don Ferguson
> Sent: Sat 9/22/2007 9:21 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Treo] Sprint Introduces Airave To Help Weak Reception
>
>
>
> Well, we'll find out soon since I just picked one up.
>
> My view of it is a little less cynical, though.  Since I'm in the test
> market (Denver) I get the device for free.  I will now be paying
> $15/month for unlimited calling while I'm connected to my own little
> cell tower in my house.  They say it covers 5000 square feet.  The
> footprint of the first floor of my house is 2300 square feet, so I'm
> assuming this will work outside to some extent as well.
>
> As a practical matter, that means I can:
>
> 1.  Reduce my cellular plan by the number of minutes I typically use the
> cell phone from home.
>
> 2.  Finally eliminate my second line at home since I'll not only get a
> strong, consistent 5-bar signal inside my house, but get all calls
> included in the $15.
>
> 3.  Possibly eliminate my primary home line at some point since this
> service has a GPS-based e911 component.
>
> In addition, although this doesn't apply to me, this could also allow a
> Sprint user with NO reception at home or another location to make
> unlimited calls from that location.  A rural mountain user here in
> Colorado, for instance, could have Sprint service at home even where
> there is no cellular coverage, and the pick up the regular Sprint
> network upon entering "civilization".
>
> I will probably always have a land line of some sort since my burglar
> alarm uses one, but even now that line has been reduced to just a
> $15/month basic line with no extras.  I have VOIP lines that I actually
> use (Vonage and Broadvoice) and I have to say that cellular compares
> very well in call quality to them.  Now that the "cell tower" will be
> right in the house, from the phone's point of view, battery consumption
> should be reduced on the Treo as well as it won't have to reach very
> hard for a signal.
>
> I see this as analogous in purpose, but not implementation, to the
> T-Mobile [EMAIL PROTECTED] service:  both are targeted at allowing people to
> eliminate a home line.  Each has strengths:  Sprint's offering works
> with all Sprint CDMA phones, not just a limited set of special phones.
> T-Mobile's offering can work anywhere (especially at Starbucks or other
> hotspot) there's a wifi network, not just at one location.
>
> In an office/home environment, however, since the Sprint device is not
> limited to just one phone, one could have a home one of these and an
> office one, and do unlimited calls at those two locations for $15/month
> each.  Depends on how one uses the setup, I guess, as to which way to
> go, but at $15/month this will pay for itself, for me.
>
> Cheers,
> Don
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> john.messeder
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 8:15 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Treo] Sprint Introduces Airave To Help Weak Reception
>
> That was the first thought I had - a new sales approach: instead of
> great service for everyone, Sprint has opted for service /a la carte/.
>
> Lio wrote:
> >
> > Or are they just charging you for bad service


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to