Problems using My Ooma? Ideas on how we can make it better? You’ve come to the right place.
#42104 by Mike-o-Matic
Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:16 pm
southsound wrote:But as a very cost effective, high quality replacement for ma bell, either device is a winner!


Never before on this planet has a raccoon put forth a truer assertion.
#42124 by Davesworld
Fri Jan 15, 2010 9:19 pm
I'm not sure I buy into the assertion that the telo will be more upgradeable than the hub. Does the telo really have that much more processing power? The less lossy audio codecs actually use less processor power than iLBC and g.729 so it just doesn't add up in my mind.
#42129 by allo
Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:05 pm
“more upgradable” is an expression that I came to hate in the 1980s when I was in the process of choosing a PC: the choice was whether to upgrade to the latest and fastest CPU which was 200 MHz Vs the less expensive main stream 133/166 MHz at the time, with a $250+ difference in price tag... So since I was assured it was a hedge against new technologies and “Upgradable for the next 3+years!”; and will not become obsolete for a “very long time”... I bought the expensive one.
Guess what , the next fall they were selling a CPU with more than double the speed of the one I bought a few months earlier, and also cheaper!
Since then I laugh at anyone who pretends, he/she can read the future of any technology hardware/software “upgrading” capability.
What concerns me more: can the product I am considering deliver in its “present setting” what it is supposed to deliver Now... not in the "murky" future!
.
#42130 by southsound
Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:46 pm
Davesworld wrote:I'm not sure I buy into the assertion that the telo will be more upgradeable than the hub. Does the telo really have that much more processing power? The less lossy audio codecs actually use less processor power than iLBC and g.729 so it just doesn't add up in my mind.


southsound wrote:I am also looking forward to new features that will be made available to Telo users but may not be available for the hub due to hardware limitations.


I am specifically talking about things like:
- ooma claims that the processor in the Telo runs twice as fast as the one in the hub. I have no info on either.
- Bluetooth - it will be available for the Telo via a USB dongle - but not for the hub. The hub's USB port is useless.
- A wireless scout-like device that gives wired access to the second line - leaked by Rich Buchanan on twitter.
- Google Voice Extensions - these may be available for the hub in time but will be out for the Telo first.
- Incoming DTMF - not possible for the hub but promised at a later date for the Telo.
- A more flexible VOIP software on the Telo. Freeswitch compared to Asterisk on the hub.

None of these things make the hub a bad choice. In fact, many people will be happy as a clam with the wonderful performance of the hub or hub/scout. It was a tough decision for me before I heard about the wireless scout device and GVE. With those factors, I'm happy I chose to eventually transition to the Telo and at some point delete the hub from my system.
#42139 by dsinternet
Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:05 am
No matter which one you get, you will be happy. Both of them save you lots of money. Like anything tech, you wait and you can get something better. I am sure someone is working on the replacment of the Telo in a few year. Just like Microsoft and Apple are working on the next OS software, ipods, Office software products. Everything keeps getting better, we just need to say, this is what is out now and go for it. Hub is older, and has a good track record. Can't go wrong with the Hub. Telo is the new kid on the block and is have a few problems that it needs to work out. For basic phone service you can't go wrong with the Telo and it might end up turning out great in the future. Both are great!
#42514 by Davesworld
Tue Jan 19, 2010 3:36 am
southsound wrote:
Davesworld wrote:I'm not sure I buy into the assertion that the telo will be more upgradeable than the hub. Does the telo really have that much more processing power? The less lossy audio codecs actually use less processor power than iLBC and g.729 so it just doesn't add up in my mind.


southsound wrote:I am also looking forward to new features that will be made available to Telo users but may not be available for the hub due to hardware limitations.


I am specifically talking about things like:
- ooma claims that the processor in the Telo runs twice as fast as the one in the hub. I have no info on either.
- Bluetooth - it will be available for the Telo via a USB dongle - but not for the hub. The hub's USB port is useless.
- A wireless scout-like device that gives wired access to the second line - leaked by Rich Buchanan on twitter.
- Google Voice Extensions - these may be available for the hub in time but will be out for the Telo first.
- Incoming DTMF - not possible for the hub but promised at a later date for the Telo.
- A more flexible VOIP software on the Telo. Freeswitch compared to Asterisk on the hub.

None of these things make the hub a bad choice. In fact, many people will be happy as a clam with the wonderful performance of the hub or hub/scout. It was a tough decision for me before I heard about the wireless scout device and GVE. With those factors, I'm happy I chose to eventually transition to the Telo and at some point delete the hub from my system.


I have a Telo that I'm playing with much like you are. I was not aware of the wireless scout like device and I am glad that the bluetooth feature can be added to the telo as we know it. When they make the BYOD plan available, I'm not ruling out using a Grandstream 502 two port ata or something with even more fxs ports. They'll have to create some sort of plan since you are not prepaying with hardware. I must admit that the Telo is pretty cool now that the firmware is maturing. I'm curious if Ooma uses software echo cancellation via a codec or hardware which I doubt. Looking at multiport pci cards, using an optional hardware echo cancellation daughtercard costs a few hundred. I think most echo cancellation is software.

Is it true that the hub uses asterisk and the telo uses freeswitch? Reading up on the comparison now.
#42541 by bw1
Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:47 am
Davesworld wrote:Is it true that the hub uses asterisk and the telo uses freeswitch? Reading up on the comparison now.


From what I've read, yes.
#42624 by Davesworld
Tue Jan 19, 2010 5:37 pm
bw1 wrote:
Davesworld wrote:Is it true that the hub uses asterisk and the telo uses freeswitch? Reading up on the comparison now.


From what I've read, yes.


That would in itself give the telo a bright future. I like the architecture and philosophy of freeswitch better. The main devel was at one time a key asterisk developer but didn't like the whole model of it.
#42650 by qchau
Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:48 pm
I have both, for me $12 a year is not much and is a whole lot better then paying $30 per month on basic landline. For myself I use the Telo, for my brother house I'd setup a hub/core which I purchase from Fry's for the same price as the Telo. I like the call-ID with name free for this unit and no yearly fee but do thing the Telo will have future upgrade/add-on which will make it stand it's ground even if you had to pay the $12 per year. My suggestion is if you didn't get the Core which include the hub and scout then you should return it to Costco and order the Telo from Costco online. It will cost the same and shipping is very fast. I was at my Costco and saw that they only offer the hub so I ordered my Telo from them. I'd tried the service and really like it so I'd suggested to my brother into getting one also. This time I'd notice my local Fry's store was selling the ooma Core at the same price as Costco and told him to get that one. I enjoy using both and have not found any drawback from either one. I've also recommended ooma to my friends and family member and everyone is jumping in on it also. Again it just depend on what you are looking for. Future proof for now = Telo, no yearly fee and call-id with name = Core.
#42657 by allo
Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:08 am
Davesworld wrote:
bw1 wrote:
Davesworld wrote:Is it true that the hub uses asterisk and the telo uses freeswitch? Reading up on the comparison now.


From what I've read, yes.


That would in itself give the telo a bright future. I like the architecture and philosophy of freeswitch better. The main devel was at one time a key asterisk developer but didn't like the whole model of it.



From what I have read :
"Asterisk has a larger user base and ecosystem of support in software & hardware."
Which means bugs get fixed much faster than with freeswitch- because of the sheer number of users .

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests