These days lots of services get the “VoIP” label. It is one thing that ATA-based services are called VoIP, but calling the new offering from Jajah to be VoIP is over the top. To place a call, users will visit their web site and provide theirs and the other party’s phone numbers; then Jajah will place calls to the two numbers and will bridge the two calls. It is very likely that Jajah originates the calls over IP. But that shouldn’t be sufficient to say that this is VoIP. Neither of the users derives any benefit and the users’ experience no different than if Jajah had placed the calls over PSTN. Isn’t it time that we place a stricter and narrower definition for VoIP?
Posted by aswath at April 9, 2006 11:11 PM
Hey, it seems that VoIP experts begin to agree that Jajah is not VoIP. Here is my post on Jajah:
http://lucafiligheddu.blogspot.com/2006/03/jajah-and-sequoia-why.html
Did Sequoia guys think carefully on this issue ?
bye
It seems that VoIP experts begin to agree that Jajah is not VoIP. Here is my post on Jajah:
http://lucafiligheddu.blogspot.com/2006/03/jajah-and-sequoia-why.html
Did Sequoia guys think carefully on this issue ?
bye
Sorry for posting my comment twice :-)
Posted by: Luca Filigheddu at April 10, 2006 05:24 PM