Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Cringely Shows How to Get Free Cell Calls

Posted by timothy on Mon Jun 27, 2005 05:40 PM
from the all-depends-where-you-hop-on dept.
Communications
SafariShane writes "In this week's pulpit, Bob describes how to properly use new software from a company called IPDrum. Basically, you use the free mobile-to-mobile feature of any major carrier to call a dedicated cell phone attached to your computer. That call is then connected to Skype, allowing you to make free cell calls just about anywhere. Just how long till someone does this on a large scale, by overselling the dedicated lines, and starts selling true unlimited cell plans?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Cringely Shows How to Get Free Cell Calls 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Hmm (Score:4, Funny)

    by pHatidic (163975) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:44PM (#12926225) Homepage
    Just how long till someone does this on a large scale, by overselling the dedicated lines, and starts selling true unlimited cell plans?"

    I'm guessing Cringely has made a prediction

    • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ndansmith (582590) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:47PM (#12926261)
      I'm guessing Cringely has made a predictio

      I'm guessing he has made an investment, too.

      • Re:Hmm (Score:4, Informative)

        by Guspaz (556486) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:33PM (#12926664) Homepage
        Before anybody complains that skype-to-skype calls are free, keep in mind that that isn't truely unlimited; that's the exact same restriction that the mobile phone companies put on their same-network unlimited plans, in that the person you are calling must be on skype as well.

        There are two types of unlimited. Unlimited minutes to any local number, and unlimited minutes to ANY long distance or international number. Skype-to-skype isn't to anybody, only people with skype.

        Don't get me wrong, this whole plan is genious, and it allows people to get skype's SkypeOut rates for their cellphones, and if the computer is hooked up to the POTS itself then free local.

      • Re:Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)

        by NoMoreNicksLeft (516230) <john DOT oyler AT comcast DOT net> on Monday June 27 2005, @08:27PM (#12927431) Journal
        I'll do you one better. I have a $12 asterisk card. I have a landline that allows me to make unlimited calls in the Richmond, VA area. I have broadband.

        I don't care if my landline is tied up most of the time, I have a cellphone finally (just got my first a few months back). Maybe you're in a similar situation. Maybe you'd buy a $12 asterisk card too.

        If we set up the hardware correctly, well then, I can make long distance calls to your area, and you to mine, and it won't cost us anything. Better yet, technically, your grandma down the road, who doesn't even have a computer, could make a LD call to Richmond VA, without it showing up on her bill. She dials into your asterisk machine, it puts it through over broadband to mine. My grandma could do the same thing... or for that matter, anyone in Richmond could do the same thing.

        Why would I do this, you ask? Because even if I only cheat the bastard phone companies out of a nickel of long distance revenue, I consider it a victory.

        Anyone feel like helping?

        • Re:Hmm (Score:3, Informative)

          by Guspaz (556486)
          You just described a VOIP provider ;)

          I'm not sure what they call the ones that work they way you describe, but the idea is you call a local number, get another dial tone, then call a long distance number.

          On the other hand, imagine a free (opensource?) service that tracked all such numbers in all locations, and also when they were in use (Each "node" could report to the master server when it was in use). The only trick about this is getting the numbers to the people. As in, person A wants to make a call, a

  • Interesting, but how novel is it? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by moz25 (262020) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:44PM (#12926226) Homepage
    With a free mobile-to-mobile feature, you don't have to be able to make free calls, but cheap calls would be cool too. You could interface directly to your computer for a whole range of other things too. My take is that the cool part is in the interface to the computer, with free calls being one of the multiple possibilities. Once this gets popular, there may be some limitations though.

    I wonder if this method is patented... ?

    • With a free mobile-to-mobile feature, you don't have to be able to make free calls, but cheap calls would be cool too. You could interface directly to your computer for a whole range of other things too. My take is that the cool part is in the interface to the computer, with free calls being one of the multiple possibilities.

      IPOfC (IP over free-cellular)

      The telecom's worst nightmare. Being your own forwarder into the net from free wireless from anyplace? (Not to mention security concerns)

      But, they wo

  • Some company did this before. They had a bunch of cell phones connected to VoIP service, and offered unlimited calls for $10-20/mo. (The phone companies weren't too happy about it.)

    I think it was on Slashdot, but I can't find the link.

  • A new acronym? (Score:5, Funny)

    by bfizzle (836992) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:45PM (#12926244)
    Talk about a hack...

    Makes me wonder how much delay there is between talking and the other party listening with the cell to cell to skype to skype to cell to cell.

    We have a new acronym c2c2p2p2c2c
    • Good point. On my Verizon service there is a noticable lag of almost one second (at times) within their network. So multiply that by send and recieve and add to that any delay in Skype, and you might have some bizarre conversations.
      • Good point. On my Verizon service there is a noticable lag of almost one second (at times) within their network. So multiply that by send and recieve and add to that any delay in Skype, and you might have some bizarre conversations.

        I tried to make a tech support call to SBC internet services over Skype once. Take the Skype delay, and add the .75 second delay for the signal to go to the call center in India, throw in the inevitable "clipping" effect, plus the irregular language and hint of an accent of an

    • ... I think that is the formula for crack, which Cringely must be smoking if he thinks this will be useful...

      I could be wrong about that formula.

  • And then? (Score:5, Informative)

    by daVinci1980 (73174) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:46PM (#12926253) Homepage
    There are already companies that offer this. For example, metroPCS [metropcs.com] which offers unlimited calls. No minute counting.
    For $40 a month [metropcs.com], you get unlimited local and long distance calls.

  • Only free to Skype users (Score:3, Informative)

    by winkydink (650484) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Monday June 27 2005, @05:47PM (#12926263) Homepage Journal
    While it's a step in the right direction, if you want to call somebody on a landline, you still have to pay for the SkypeOut, yes?

    It seems like a lot of trouble for little savings. I guess my perspective would be different if I was a very mobile person who needed to make frequent out-of-country calls (more common in Europe, yes, I know).

  • Interesting (Score:2, Interesting)

    by gazuga (128955)
    But not very cost-effective if you're the only one using it.

    2x cheapest cell plan is still about $60-70. For that much money, you can almost buy unlimited minutes (or at least practically unless you talk non-stop) from the cell provider.

    For a family or group of friends, however, this sounds like a great deal.

  • Phone Phreaking! (Score:4, Funny)

    by creimer (824291) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:47PM (#12926273) Homepage
    I didn't know that Captain Crunch [wikipedia.org] whistles work on cell phones.

  • Voice compression hell (Score:5, Informative)

    by Strom Carlson (809024) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:49PM (#12926291)
    By running from Skype to a mobile phone, you use two fairly crappy codecs: iLBC at 13 kilobits per second on top of GSM at 12 kilobits per second. On their own, each one is marginally tolerable, but I would rather gouge my eardrums out with a dagger than listen to the two codecs combined.
    • In the US, you'd more likely be using one of the CDMA voice codecs instead of GSM, which are usually higher bitrate as well as higher quality.

      • I haven't been impressed. I don't know if it's the codec, or something else about Skype, but the quality is underwhelming.

        I live in Asia, and have non-mind-blowing DSL (1024/384, with 300ms ping to the USA). I use VoIP providers via Asterisk on a colo box in the USA to place and receive calls via a Sipura SPA-1001. Most people I talk with in Europe or the USA can't tell that I'm using VoIP or on the other side of the planet.

        However, whenever I use Skype (from here or elsewhere) there's this sort of cycl

      • Actually, I don't think the streams would be cascaded. I would expect that the iLBC would be strictly used for the Skype portion of the call and that your cellphone would be responsible for vocoding into GSM/CDMA.

        Unless it is a datacall. If it is a datacall, then you wouldn't need anything other than iLBC, but I don't think it is a datacall, because you are listening on the other end. When you listen on the other end, your network provider's vocoder must encode voice from you and decode voice to you.

  • Investing in Phone Numbers (Score:3, Interesting)

    by podperson (592944) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:50PM (#12926307) Homepage
    He goes on to suggest that investors should move their money away from phone companies to NeuStar -- a company that vends telephone numbers.

    Cough.

    It seems to me that the obvious place to converge points of content would be email addresses -- which will make phone numbers obsolete as well.

  • Sure it's free, you just ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 27 2005, @05:51PM (#12926314)
    ... have to pay $60/month minimum [verizonwireless.com] for two-phone wireless service and 2c a minute [skype.com] to termine the call at a real phone.

    You've met "free-as-in-speech" and "free-as-in-beer" -- now meet "free-as-in-really-expensive"! Yayyyy capitalism!!
    • Nah, you can get a 2-phone plan for 49.99 and unlimited VOIP for 19.99 (not from skype). At least you could when I came up with this idea six months before Cringley (actually inspired by one of his articles though [slashdot.org]. Also, turns out other people [xcelis.com] had the idea too). Truly unlimited domestic minutes along with super-low VOIP rates on international cell-phone calls could actually be worth $70 for really heavy users (big plans can get up in the $100s, plus international charges on top). Also, you might be able

  • I'll pass.. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Geekenstein (199041) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:53PM (#12926336)
    Well, it sounds good on the surface, but starts getting a little muddier when you get into it.

    How much does your average cell phone provider charge for a month of service? Let's be generous and say $30, plus $10 for the "in network" plan. So, $40 right there.

    Next, you add the regularly poor quality of a cell phone call, with its drop outs in sound, etc. to the equally (if not moreso) poor quality of a VoIP call, and you end up with a lot of "huh? what? can you hear me now?" in your conversations.

    People who tend to spend so much time on their cell phone that they go over the costs associated with having the second phone line value value their ability to communicate and won't tolerate the kind of frustrations with this "cheap" solution.

  • Free? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Blindman (36862) on Monday June 27 2005, @05:58PM (#12926382) Journal
    The plan requires two active cellular phone connections. Last I checked that isn't free. Sure, it will be cheaper than actually making direct calls, but that is not the same as free. Furthermore, it doesn't sound like it handles incoming calls, so really what you have is a flat fee for unlimited outgoing calls. This doesn't sound particularly free.
    • RTFA. It apparently works for incoming calls too. Presumably their software automatically dials your preprogrammed cell number when an incoming call comes in via Skype.

      • Re:Free? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by raju1kabir (251972) on Monday June 27 2005, @11:47PM (#12928761) Homepage
        It's a better plan over here in the UK, where we don't have to pay to receive calls. (why you lot put up with paying for incoming calls, I don't understand....)

        Because when you add everything up, it's cheaper that way.

        Remember, you don't only receive calls, you make them too (even if you personally only receive calls, there would be no calls to receive if people in general weren't making them).

        Studies have shown again and again in that receiver-pays markets (e.g., USA, Singapore, China), the total amount paid by consumers per unit of mobile phone airtime is lower.

        This is because the person who is paying for the call is the same person who has market power in the relationship with the service provider. In the caller-pays system, the person who is paying for the call has no way to express their dissatisfaction with the rate by switching to a different provider, so it is not a competitive factor. The people who pay have to put up with whatever rates are in effect, or not make the call at all.

        Caller-pays is a huge swindle, built on a transparent lie, and it's costing European consumers billions.

  • Cost?? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by RapmasterT (787426) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:01PM (#12926402)
    So instead of paying for cell phone minutes, I pay for cell service on two phones and an Skype account.

    Seems like you'd need to be spending a LOT of time calling international to make this worthwhile.

  • Need a Bluetooth link (Score:4, Interesting)

    by MDMurphy (208495) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:02PM (#12926415) Homepage
    A cable between the phone and PC running Skype is too narrow of a focus. The "home version" rather than someone trying to make a service buisness out of sounds better.

    Give me a bluetooth adapter than plugs into my POTS phone jack and communicates with the phone. This could be a regular phone line, or VOIP like Vonage. Then I can call out via link, or have incoming calls get transferred as well. As far as the cell company is concerned, I'm making a bunch of calls to the wife.

    Incoming should be fairly easy, all incoming calls to the home line get sent to a pre-configured number in the home cell phone. Outbound might be trickier since you'd have to tell the home cell phone what number to dial out.

    I'm sure it's coming soon, but a Skype-only solution that takes a cable, that's not all that exciting

  • This is how long... (Score:3, Funny)

    by fishlet (93611) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:06PM (#12926453)
    "Just how long till someone does this on a large scale, by overselling the dedicated lines, and starts selling true unlimited cell plans?"

    Just longer than it takes for some shady lawmakers to sneak in a law to prevent that.

  • Read the ToS carefully.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Myself (57572) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:09PM (#12926479) Journal
    You might find that connecting the cellphone to the bridge device contradicts some term in the contract. If they figure out that this is what you're doing, they might decide to hit you with $0.50/min for all the "breach of contract" minutes, or something similarly evil.

    The mobile-to-mobile minutes are free for two reasons. First, they don't have to pay a termination fee for moving the call to someone else's network. Second, it's a sales tool to get your friends to sign up. By doing this, you sabotage the second goal, and they'll try everything possible to make your life miserable.

  • The Opportunity Here (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:10PM (#12926489)
    The opportunity here is not for you to have a second phone tethered to your computer, but for some person to set up a bank of phones tied to broadband for each mobile phone carrier. If this person can manage to charge you less money and trouble than setting this up on your own, he (or she) has a new business opportunity.

  • No good business model goes unpunished (Score:5, Insightful)

    by G4from128k (686170) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:10PM (#12926494)
    Technology seems to be increasing the economic efficiency of the marketplace by supporting a type of business model arbitrage. If somebody offers something for less than it really costs or is really worth, people use technology to quickly find a way to exploit it.

    For example, cell companies offer free in-system minutes to encourage friends & family to recruit new customers -- a nice little viral marketing ploy and something that, I'm sure, reduces stress in friends & family cell phone conversations. But it also creates an opportunity because those free in-system minutes are worth something if they can be somehow converted to out-of-system calls. Hence the motivations for this little hack.

    Or consider the case of the single-use video camera [slashdot.org]. The unit is offered at a subsidized price (less than the true price of the camera) with the expectation that the consumer will return the camera and pay for the DVD conversion service. With a bit of hacking, though, a person can get a low-grade digital video camera for only single-use price of about $20.

    Technology allows people to exploit these situations (and publish the results), much to the chagrin of the businesses that use these models. I wonder if this will drive businesses to a true pay-for-what-you-get mode of operation. No cell minutes will be free because it will be too easy to abuse free minutes. No single-use device will be as cheap -- it will require a deposit for the value of the asset.

    That technology allows people to use products and services in unintended ways will force companies to change their products or business models to either lock-out unintended uses or build in a charge for the cost of those uses.
    • I suspect the opposite will happen, and they'll stop counting minutes altogether. Where I live, the cell cartel ($120 for 90 min/mo avg.) fell apart once the POTS phone company started offering unlimited wireless minutes for $50/mo (not including long distance, but I'm on an island so any long distance is international by definition). Once they crossed the line, the rest of the companies followed suit.

      I can't prove, but highly suspect, that per-minute calling is nothing more than milking the customer. I
      • Telephone rates have been traditionally based on business use, which determines the peak usage and the cost of the switching system and number of trunk lines. The system is designed to provide a specified quality-of-service during peak usage. Since the business users determine the system cost, they get hit with the highest rate. Residential users use the capacity that was paid for by the business users.

        Usage patterns have changed over the years and the costs of switches and trunks have declined considerab

    • For example, cell companies offer free in-system minutes to encourage friends & family to recruit new customers -- a nice little viral marketing ploy and something that, I'm sure, reduces stress in friends & family cell phone conversations. But it also creates an opportunity because those free in-system minutes are worth something if they can be somehow converted to out-of-system calls. Hence the motivations for this little hack.

      Actually, they like getting an upfront fee in exchange for use of t

  • Another way (Score:5, Funny)

    by eugeneiiim (852592) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:23PM (#12926596)
    Another way to get free cell calls [cmu.edu]

    *ducks*
  • It's really great to read about what Cringely has to say. But I think I also need to know what Dvorak thinks about this.

    • Re:Link to Microsoft.com? (Score:5, Informative)

      by NetNifty (796376) on Monday June 27 2005, @06:03PM (#12926420) Homepage
      You're using Firefox I guess? If firefox doesn't recognise a url entered as a url it does an "I'm Feeling Lucky" google search on the "url" entered. The link is broken and is starts with "http" and the first result on searching for http (and thus the I'm Feeling Lucky link) on Google is Microsoft.com.
    • It's not too far fetched, although I'd agree that "Dwarfs" is a little extreme.

      What's the Windows desktop market share? 95%?

      The vast majority of Windows and Mac systems have Flash player installed. I'd wager on 95% or more. And probably more than half of Linux and other OSS workstation boxes have Flash too.

      Now if you add in non-PC's, it's probably wrong. Java runs (albeit probably too slowly for voice) on a LOT of phones... and PDA's? Does Flash run on PocketPC yet?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.