On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:23:33 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

The sound quality you get is highly dependent on available bandwidth,

Yes it is. Home internet connections are a poor medium for real time voice and
video. Real time data needs a minimum fixed bandwidth. The POTS service with
its dedicated lines provides this.

Dedicated or prioritized (QoS) bandwidth for VoIP over DSL is no problem.
My DSL router is configured with a dedicated port for the VoIP adapter to
achieve this, together with some configuration on the DSLAM side.

POTS does not have sufficient bandwidth for video.

--
jhk

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:55:03 +0200
Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 11:23:33 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

The sound quality you get is highly dependent on available bandwidth,

Yes it is. Home internet connections are a poor medium for real time voice
and
video. Real time data needs a minimum fixed bandwidth. The POTS service with
its dedicated lines provides this.

Dedicated or prioritized (QoS) bandwidth for VoIP over DSL is no problem.
My DSL router is configured with a dedicated port for the VoIP adapter to
achieve this, together with some configuration on the DSLAM side.

QoS won't help you if there is congestion at the exchange or anywhere along
the line.

B2003

Roland Perry wrote:

As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit
rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number
rather than a landline.

Not expensive if they are calling from their mobile and are also on a
contract with free minutes.

Indeed my latest O2 contract is for unlimited (no doubt with fair use
policy) calls to landlines and mobiles.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

Roland Perry wrote:

I'd be expecting most of the calls from other landlines.

A generational thing I think. I have a landline but pretty much never use
it. As soon as I can get Internet access to my house without it (not a
cabled area) I will get rid of it.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

In message

..net, at 13:01:50 on Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Neil Williams
remarked:
As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit
rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number
rather than a landline.

Not expensive if they are calling from their mobile and are also on a
contract with free minutes.

Indeed my latest O2 contract is for unlimited (no doubt with fair use
policy) calls to landlines and mobiles.

If you spend enough money each month, then you get things free. Not many
of my callers are that kind of user. Indeed, not all are in the UK.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 10:25:45 on Tue, 12
Jun 2012, d remarked:
As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit
rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number
rather than a landline.

Thats true - unless they're using free minutes on another mobile of
course )

I'd be expecting most of the calls from other landlines.

In our generation maybe but not in our kids'. Mine make all their calls from
mobiles.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message


, at 13:01:50 on Tue, 12 Jun 2012, Neil Williams
remarked:
As for having a landline, I need it for ADSL. I also think it's a bit
rude to expect friends and family to call an expensive mobile number
rather than a landline.

Not expensive if they are calling from their mobile and are also on a
contract with free minutes.

Indeed my latest O2 contract is for unlimited (no doubt with fair use
policy) calls to landlines and mobiles.

If you spend enough money each month, then you get things free. Not
many of my callers are that kind of user. Indeed, not all are in the UK.

My brother in the USA usually calls my mobile these days. He uses Skype.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article

, (Neil Williams) wrote:

Roland Perry wrote:

I'd be expecting most of the calls from other landlines.

A generational thing I think. I have a landline but pretty much never use
it. As soon as I can get Internet access to my house without it (not a
cabled area) I will get rid of it.

Even if you were in a cabled area you'd have to pay for a Virgin Media
landline even if you didn't use it.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Tue, 12 Jun 2012 13:01:06 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:

Dedicated or prioritized (QoS) bandwidth for VoIP over DSL is no problem.
My DSL router is configured with a dedicated port for the VoIP adapter to
achieve this, together with some configuration on the DSLAM side.

QoS won't help you if there is congestion at the exchange or anywhere along
the line.

While this is true, if you get a VoIP number from your internet provider,
the calls will not be routed over the regular Inernet, so this will not be
a problem. The point beeing that it's perfectly possible to provide the
same quality as POTS over IP.

--
jhk

Jarle H Knudsen wrote:

While this is true, if you get a VoIP number from your internet provider,
the calls will not be routed over the regular Inernet, so this will not be
a problem. The point beeing that it's perfectly possible to provide the
same quality as POTS over IP.

Most office telephone systems are run over IP these days, indeed. Much
cheaper to install only one set of wiring.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.