Purple / SnapVRS / CDVRS files petition againist Sorenson - Page 2

Etoile · 06-30-2009, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedWolf

It doesn't matter to me. It's customers' rights to know who is calling. If a deaf person calls to another deaf person, the receiver would want to know who is calling. The receiver would choose whether pick up the phone or answer it. The receiver would never know if there a stalker or a person looking to harass someone. They really need to know who calling. A hearing person would use Caller ID and they would want to know who is calling them. Why not Deaf people to use this feature.

Hearing people have to pay for Caller ID though. It's not free. So I disagree very strongly that it is "rights" to know who is calling. Of course deaf people deserve to have the option AVAILABLE but it is not a right. Especially not for free. Hearing people have to pay for Caller ID, we do not have it at my house, my wife doesn't want to pay for it. It should be available to deaf users but it is not a right.

TechBill · 06-30-2009, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

My guess is that Point To Point is an FCC term and that is why everybody uses it instead of Deaf to Deaf. The FCC probably uses it to mean any call that doesn't involve a TRS operator.

But the question is ....

Are Sorenson breaking a rule if a Deaf user use VP200 and call SnapVRS but SnapVRS operator cannot see the Caller ID from VP200?

Calling Purple or SnapVRS or CDVRS still involes TRS relay and yet they are blocked access to VP200 Caller ID function when Deaf user use it to make relay call with Sorenson's device with other reply provider.

Follow what I am saying?

And it sound like to me that Sorenson said that since they claim to have VP out first "VP100" so the standard should be set by Sorenson not by other providers and other providers need to follow Sorsenson's standard that they set because they had it out first years ago.

.

Etoile · 07-01-2009, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TechBill

But the question is ....

Are Sorenson breaking a rule if a Deaf user use VP200 and call SnapVRS but SnapVRS operator cannot see the Caller ID from VP200?

Calling Purple or SnapVRS or CDVRS still involes TRS relay and yet they are blocked access to VP200 Caller ID function when Deaf user use it to make relay call with Sorenson's device with other reply provider.

Follow what I am saying?

And it sound like to me that Sorenson said that since they claim to have VP out first "VP100" so the standard should be set by Sorenson not by other providers and other providers need to follow Sorsenson's standard that they set because they had it out first years ago.

.

Oh yes I follow you completely!

I just think that the legal documents from both sides use "Point to Point" because that is what FCC calls it. Obviously any call a VP user makes is technically point to point, you cannot call a regular phone with a VP, it doesn't work that way! But they have to differentiate between "calls involving TRS operator" and "calls not involving TRS operator" so they gave it the name Point to Point when really it should be Deaf to Deaf.

I think both sides have a good argument. Which means they both have good lawyers. That's why FCC has judges to figure it out instead of me!

diehardbiker · 07-01-2009, 12:33 AM

Yes, this is true also hearing people DO have choice refusing displaying caller ID on other end as well. Most of the time telemarketer disable the caller ID because they do not want to be traced back. That disabling feature is also NOT FREE either.
"Rights" is just a crap because one person wants rights to not disclose the information, while other person wants the rights to know who, both wants the rights of privacy so they both cancelled each other rights, making the "Rights" moot point.
I wouldn't care much for caller ID.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

Hearing people have to pay for Caller ID though. It's not free. So I disagree very strongly that it is "rights" to know who is calling. Of course deaf people deserve to have the option AVAILABLE but it is not a right. Especially not for free. Hearing people have to pay for Caller ID, we do not have it at my house, my wife doesn't want to pay for it. It should be available to deaf users but it is not a right.

SouthFella · 07-03-2009, 08:57 AM

A call does not have to be shown to the other party . That is not a " right" . Only the TRS have to see where the call came from for 911 purposes. Sorenson is simply stating they have tried to get the " rivals" to come to a common agreement. Now the " rivals" want to force the hand on Sorenson. This looks like the little companies crying and jealous of big ole Sorenson.. FCC will make a ruling on the accusation soon.

I admire Sorenson for being the pioneer and providing the hearing loss community with another choice in communication methods...The "rivals" just need to stop crying in the proverbial sandbox and move on.

yagazn · 07-03-2009, 07:42 PM

Huh? I already called sorenson to make appt for the installer to my place. So, now what? Should I dump sorenson for purple/VRS/CDVRS?

Oh, boy, I will stay with sorenson.

Peace

SouthFella · 07-04-2009, 07:46 AM

Yagazn yep keep Sorenson... it is free... lol

yagazn · 07-05-2009, 08:52 PM

Yea, I know. I'll stick with Sorenson. (Well, too late)

radioman · 07-15-2009, 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yagazn

Huh? I already called sorenson to make appt for the installer to my place. So, now what? Should I dump sorenson for purple/VRS/CDVRS?

Oh, boy, I will stay with sorenson.

Peace

You can have both! sorenson vp200 and MVP! you can send and receive calls seperately on either one on same home network using seperate 10 digit numbers.

SouthFella · 07-16-2009, 01:42 AM

I guess the Ojo and Sorenson debacle went to sleep hmmmm

dkf747 · 07-16-2009, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehardbiker

Yes, this is true also hearing people DO have choice refusing displaying caller ID on other end as well. Most of the time telemarketer disable the caller ID because they do not want to be traced back. That disabling feature is also NOT FREE either.
"Rights" is just a crap because one person wants rights to not disclose the information, while other person wants the rights to know who, both wants the rights of privacy so they both cancelled each other rights, making the "Rights" moot point.
I wouldn't care much for caller ID.

What does "who is paying for the service" have to do with whether it is a right or not?

One thought I have is that hearing people have a choice about this feature while we do not. Isn't this the real issue here?

RedWolf · 07-16-2009, 05:30 PM

I think there are confusion about the rights. I was meaning that people have the rights to choose whether if they want to have the caller ID installed or not installed at all. I am sure people would want to know who is calling, but other people have privacy issues and don't want their calling ID being displayed at all. When people called me on VP or MVP, they would display their phone numbers but they did not display their real names. The videophone would display the name only if their names was in their contact list, those would display the numbers and their real name or the name of businesses. Hearing people have choices whether they want to have Caller ID displayed or not being displayed, or people would want to use the Caller ID box to display their name or their phone numbers so people would know who is calling before answering the phone. My hearing fiancee get calls from telemarketers all the time, she look at caller ID before picking up the phone, she don't know them and refused to answer the phone. We don't want to deal with those lame telemarketers.

So, I think I explained what I meant in the last post. I think we want to use equal rights same as hearing people would use Caller ID or not to use Caller ID. I am sure people have a right to choose or decide whether they want to know who is calling them.

Jtm · 07-18-2009, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian

Why do they have to run to the FCC when they could have tried getting this resolved with Sorenson?

They did tried getting this resolved with sorenson. Sorenson like to bite other VRS, thats why they are taking Sorenson to court.

dark · 07-18-2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jtm

They did tried getting this resolved with sorenson. Sorenson like to bite other VRS, thats why they are taking Sorenson to court.

no comment

Jtm · 07-18-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dark

no comment

if you have no comment, then why post? Apparently you have nothing to say.

yagazn · 07-25-2009, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by radioman

You can have both! sorenson vp200 and MVP! you can send and receive calls seperately on either one on same home network using seperate 10 digit numbers.

Thanks RM

I'm happy with VP sorenson so far

I'm going to dump OJO (I'll just leave them 'OJO' in the closet). I'm waiting for making an appointment with Purple MVP soon next week.

web730 · 07-27-2009, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yagazn

Thanks RM

I'm happy with VP sorenson so far

I'm going to dump OJO (I'll just leave them 'OJO' in the closet). I'm waiting for making an appointment with Purple MVP soon next week.

Suggest you to trade your SnapVRS Ojo for a Z-Ojo. I don't know if they still send $25 for returning it back. You can order a Z-Ojo for $39 meaning "you only pay $11 for it".

To trade you need to contact them at: Contact & Feedback

It has a special offer for $39 for Z-Ojo till August 8th or 9th. Z-Ojo has incredible features especially that it can send and receive all calls from any videophones! No need to set up DMZ or port forwarding either... it really has more cool features to it aka zConect and zContacts, etc.

Check it out for more Z-Ojo features at: Z-Ojo - ZVRS

qwerty123 · 08-01-2009, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TechBill

If you read the petition and you will see that they had already made attempts to resolve this with Sorenson before filing the petition.

true

History of Sorenson|Aslpride|DeafVIDEO.TV

SouthFella · 08-01-2009, 01:52 PM

I just tried to contact SnapVRS tech support 4 times today via Live Assistant ( chat window via computer )... And 4 times I was timed out !!! GEESH !!!

yagazn · 08-03-2009, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by web730

Suggest you to trade your SnapVRS Ojo for a Z-Ojo. I don't know if they still send $25 for returning it back. You can order a Z-Ojo for $39 meaning "you only pay $11 for it".

To trade you need to contact them at: Contact & Feedback

It has a special offer for $39 for Z-Ojo till August 8th or 9th. Z-Ojo has incredible features especially that it can send and receive all calls from any videophones! No need to set up DMZ or port forwarding either... it really has more cool features to it aka zConect and zContacts, etc.

Check it out for more Z-Ojo features at: Z-Ojo - ZVRS

Oh, Thank you for the whole info.

Sorry for the delay.
Well, I'm going to keep it anyway. I heard OJO-ZVRS sucked.

web730 · 08-03-2009, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yagazn

Oh, Thank you for the whole info.

Sorry for the delay.
Well, I'm going to keep it anyway. I heard OJO-ZVRS sucked.

Ok, sure whatever you like.

I haven't heard one being unhappy with a ZOjo so far yet. Did someone, who told you Z-Ojo sucked, say anything as why he or she said it sucked?

yagazn · 08-03-2009, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by web730

Ok, sure whatever you like.

I haven't heard one being unhappy with a ZOjo so far yet. Did someone, who told you Z-Ojo sucked, say anything as why he or she said it sucked?

My friend's other friend told me that, that's what he told me about Z-OJO sucked. he's not my friend. he just let me know that's all. *shrug*

Etoile · 08-03-2009, 09:15 PM

I thought Ojo was from Snap!VRS. I'm confused now LOL.

web730 · 08-04-2009, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Etoile

I thought Ojo was from Snap!VRS. I'm confused now LOL.

Yes, you are right although Zvrs also offers Ojos but use their own Z firmwares in them such like Z-Connect and Z-Contacts that SnapVRS Ojos lack of. It also includes both H:323 and SIP protocols.

SouthFella · 08-05-2009, 02:06 PM

Ojo is the name of the device... SnapVRS just happen to be the first to use Ojo for videophone...ZVRS have the Ojo also to use as a videophone...

LilCueballRulez · 08-06-2009, 12:24 AM

But OJO is the one manufacture by WorldGate! ZVRS and SnapVrs contract with WorldGate. ZVRS and SnapVrs is making their own Firmware. I think Brian told meh about WorldGate's videophone last few month ago.

SouthFella · 08-07-2009, 08:26 AM

Still not impress with Zvrs snail response ... Been a week now and still no response at all...

web730 · 08-08-2009, 02:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SouthFella

Still not impress with Zvrs snail response ... Been a week now and still no response at all...

Really? Just one week? Oh please!

Guess what? Purple hasn't responded to my last request for TWO MONTHS but finally responded. That is lot longer than yours while mine did with Zvrs.

Usually, the larger VRS providers have so many people on the waiting list for them to response in timely than smaller VRS providers could.

You just need to be extra patience or feel free to nag over them to reply you back.

IloveVP · 08-08-2009, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by web730

Really? Just one week? Oh please!

Guess what? Purple hasn't responded to my last request for TWO MONTHS but finally responded. That is lot longer than yours while mine did with Zvrs.

Usually, the larger VRS providers have so many people on the waiting list for them to response in timely than smaller VRS providers could.

You just need to be extra patience or feel free to nag over them to reply you back.

Be extra patience... No No... 2 months is way too long. Less than 4 days is a good business to deal with.

LilCueballRulez · 08-08-2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by web730

Really? Just one week? Oh please!

Guess what? Purple hasn't responded to my last request for TWO MONTHS but finally responded. That is lot longer than yours while mine did with Zvrs.

Usually, the larger VRS providers have so many people on the waiting list for them to response in timely than smaller VRS providers could.

You just need to be extra patience or feel free to nag over them to reply you back.

Two months?! No way, i would not patience! I ask you a question, what if you are work with Big Company... Your boss will not give you paycheck and you have to waiting until 90 days while you been working with them, would you extra patience unless if you have your bills (car payments, mortgage, your family's needs, etc) is coming without pay it off?

07-03-2009, 08:57 AM	#35 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	A call does not have to be shown to the other party . That is not a " right" . Only the TRS have to see where the call came from for 911 purposes. Sorenson is simply stating they have tried to get the " rivals" to come to a common agreement. Now the " rivals" want to force the hand on Sorenson. This looks like the little companies crying and jealous of big ole Sorenson.. FCC will make a ruling on the accusation soon. I admire Sorenson for being the pioneer and providing the hearing loss community with another choice in communication methods...The "rivals" just need to stop crying in the proverbial sandbox and move on. __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

07-04-2009, 07:46 AM	#37 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	Yagazn yep keep Sorenson... it is free... lol __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

07-16-2009, 01:42 AM	#40 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	I guess the Ojo and Sorenson debacle went to sleep hmmmm __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

07-16-2009, 05:30 PM	#42 (permalink)
RedWolf Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: FL Posts: 1,795	I think there are confusion about the rights. I was meaning that people have the rights to choose whether if they want to have the caller ID installed or not installed at all. I am sure people would want to know who is calling, but other people have privacy issues and don't want their calling ID being displayed at all. When people called me on VP or MVP, they would display their phone numbers but they did not display their real names. The videophone would display the name only if their names was in their contact list, those would display the numbers and their real name or the name of businesses. Hearing people have choices whether they want to have Caller ID displayed or not being displayed, or people would want to use the Caller ID box to display their name or their phone numbers so people would know who is calling before answering the phone. My hearing fiancee get calls from telemarketers all the time, she look at caller ID before picking up the phone, she don't know them and refused to answer the phone. We don't want to deal with those lame telemarketers. So, I think I explained what I meant in the last post. I think we want to use equal rights same as hearing people would use Caller ID or not to use Caller ID. I am sure people have a right to choose or decide whether they want to know who is calling them. __________________

08-01-2009, 01:52 PM	#49 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	I just tried to contact SnapVRS tech support 4 times today via Live Assistant ( chat window via computer )... And 4 times I was timed out !!! GEESH !!! __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

07-03-2009, 07:42 PM	#36 (permalink)
yagazn Registered User Join Date: May 2008 Location: Out of nowhere.... Posts: 2,965	Huh? I already called sorenson to make appt for the installer to my place. So, now what? Should I dump sorenson for purple/VRS/CDVRS? Oh, boy, I will stay with sorenson. Peace

07-05-2009, 08:52 PM	#38 (permalink)
yagazn Registered User Join Date: May 2008 Location: Out of nowhere.... Posts: 2,965	Yea, I know. I'll stick with Sorenson. (Well, too late)

08-03-2009, 09:15 PM	#53 (permalink)
Etoile Registered User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Washington DC Posts: 1,184	I thought Ojo was from Snap!VRS. I'm confused now LOL. __________________ "You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty." -Gandhi Gallaudet University Class of 2011

08-05-2009, 02:06 PM	#55 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	Ojo is the name of the device... SnapVRS just happen to be the first to use Ojo for videophone...ZVRS have the Ojo also to use as a videophone... __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

08-06-2009, 12:24 AM	#56 (permalink)
LilCueballRulez Registered User Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Mil-town Posts: 489	But OJO is the one manufacture by WorldGate! ZVRS and SnapVrs contract with WorldGate. ZVRS and SnapVrs is making their own Firmware. I think Brian told meh about WorldGate's videophone last few month ago.

08-07-2009, 08:26 AM	#57 (permalink)
SouthFella Registered User Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 521	Still not impress with Zvrs snail response ... Been a week now and still no response at all... __________________ Implanted 04/23/2008... MedEl ( with nifty Remote Control } Right Ear, Phonak Savia Left Ear.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode