<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
On 4/19/2012 8:17 AM, Michael Campbell wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAKtB=OBW+xZN6ScWQAU77CoTZS_O2DsS1jOwW9x_eiFfiAqJLQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:18 PM, JD <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:jdp@algoloma.com">jdp@algoloma.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">I
have a friend using a Oomla <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ooma.com/products" target="_blank">http://www.ooma.com/products</a>
. Saw a sale last<br>
week for $140 on that - lifetime calling, but I think they must charge
monthly<br>
for E911 by law. This same friend tried the MagicJack on a PC for no
other use<br>
and said it worked well enough, but he always felt slimy.<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A colleague of mine uses Ooma and raves about it. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I use Skype dial-out (I can dial regular #'s with it), and it
works well enough for me. I'm on business in Belgium right now, and I
use it to call my home phone in Atlanta on the anemic hotel wifi, and
it works very well with voice. It also works moderately well with
video on a Skype-Skype call to home also.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't have a Jihad against Microsoft, so I'll continue to use
Skype until a better valued option comes up, or it starts to suck. So
far neither have happened.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I haven't tried Google Voice from my computer to regular # yet,
but I might try that in the next couple days.</div>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hi Michael and all,<br>
<br>
I use both Microsoft and Linux products routinely, and don't have an
axe to grind for or against either. However, I thought I'd mention
this regarding Skype. Microsoft filed for a patent back in 2009 and it
was recently published regarding allowing the covert "wiretapping" (my
words) of VOIP calls. Now that they've bought Skype, I think you have
to assume that your Skype call could be monitored and recorded. Now,
it's supposed to be only legally authorized wiretapping, and I
understand that law enforcement sometimes has a need for that.
However, it used to be only the highly regulated telco that had access
to wiretap your calls. Now, it's a less regulated (I would say) mega
corporation that's routing the call, and one that's not intrinsically
in the phone business. I think that, if I needed VOIP for anything
remotely sensitive, and if I had an alternative that I could encrypt,
I'd avoid using Skype. I don't know precisely what that alternative is
though. Just my 2 cents.<br>
<br>
Here's one of many articles that come up if you type microsoft skype
patent into Google.<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/29/microsoft_skype/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/29/microsoft_skype/</a><br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
Ron<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
(To whom it may concern. My email address has changed. Replying to former
messages prior to 03/31/12 with my personal address will go to the wrong
address. Please send all personal correspondence to the new address.)
(PS - If you email me and don't get a quick response, you might want to
call on the phone. I get about 300 emails per day from alternate energy
mailing lists and such. I don't always see new messages very quickly.)
Ron Frazier
770-205-9422 (O) Leave a message.
linuxdude AT techstarship.com</pre>
</body>
</html>