Matt, are you purposefully trying to get me into an argument?
You're obviously not getting from my posts what I'm intending.
what I'm hearing is "I already have what Google Voice offers, so I don't need it and therefore it's a useless product."
I've already gone out of my way to specifically say that's not the case. By calling the product a "lame duck" I didn't mean to imply it was useless. I would have said "useless" and some other colorful hyperbole if that's what I'd intended. It's just a non-starter for many people, either because of feature duplication, poor positioning/brand-messaging or even implementation. Forget for a moment that it's also only available to those with US phone numbers.
I will compare it to the Apple TV (previous generations if you will). In the grand scheme of things, it is currently small potatoes, similar to Apple's "hobby" stance on the ATV. It has just not achieved significant mind-share.
A lame duck can still serve the purpose of an otherwise healthy one if what you intend is to eat it.
I don't have any other means of getting anything that GV offers me, so GV is a great product (and free, too).
You have the same possibilities as I or anyone else should you want to. If you don't already have something else, then it may make perfect sense to go with GV - we both agree "free" is nice.
I also still think that chastising the service for not being VOIP, when it never claimed to be VOIP, is odd.
I did no such thing. And you're toeing the same line that I've seen so many other people. What I said was that some (other) people criticize it because they were mistaken about this. I'm fully aware of this aspect and what I've said is that GV is not as strong a solution without VOIP. So they should add it sooner rather than later if they want to make this product a complete solution. I really don't know what Google's motivation is behind GV, so while I've heard VOIP is coming, who knows when or if it will ever actually debut. Or when one might start seeing/hearing targeted ads.
And no, I don't get the problem where a random number shows up on the caller ID, either for incoming or outgoing calls. I understand why it uses this, and it's never been a problem for me. It really sounds like this is an iPhone issue.
The iPhone experience is mine, but what I'm reading elsewhere is from both iPhone and Android users.
GV essentially lets me use my cell carrier as a dumb pipe. I'm not dependent on them for a cell phone number or a voicemail box (and SMS, of course).
That's fair. But you are dependent on them for minutes. And that's the big piece I want to avoid. Voice is data anyway, so I only want to pay the carrier for a data plan.
I know there are also differences between cell plans in the US and Canada (and the rest of the world) that can make the GV proposition better/worse depending on where you'll be using it, in terms of minute usage and feature duplication.
If I have time later I'll make an attempt (which will be in vain) to give you a reason to use GV. But since you already have many of the services it offers,
It won't be in vain if you can spot something I've missed. Again, I find the features useful, but they must also be easy to use and as least convoluted as possible. In the end I don't care how I achieve them if the goals (including price) are satisfied.
and assume that the majority of everyone else does too (which is not the case),
I didn't say this either. Just that a lot of people do. Enough that it ends up being a contributor to why GV is not this run-away train of a success story, like say for instance the iPhone, Android, Facebook, etc.
and it's also impossible to convince you of anything at all
You don't have to convince me of anything. I'm already sold on the idea, I just have to see how fitting GV into the mix can benefit me.
Previous Topic
Index
