Can iPhones on Verizon do wifi calling?

[I7guy]

Actually, they pertain specifically to my point: There are significantly more steps, greater challenges, potential for problems, and overall greater expense and resource allocation required for femtocells than WiFi calling.

You're shooting from the hip.

If you look at Verizon's FAQ, they make a point of mentioning more than once that the extender will only work "in many places within the Verizon Wireless coverage area." If you happen to be in parts of the US where Verizon does not have native coverage (and there actually are quite a few such spots), then the extender will refuse to work. If you try to trick it by making sure the GPS doesn't work, or if there's any other reason a position fix can'tt be obtained, the extender won't work either.

So, not so much 1, 2, 3.

Of course there is no guarantee, they need to cover themselves, however, using the same extender on the west and east coast it works as advertised, one, two, three. You actually have to find a spot where the network extender doesn't work and then tell me it doesn't work there rather than a generic cya from a faq. I can see VZW implementing the same rules "if" they had wifi calling available.

And of course, the kicker is if there is no wifi available, you are still stuck.

That's a little unfortunate, considering that you are saying that someone can't possibly disagree with you and be right unless you are convinced that they know what they're talking about... and when they do actually start talking about it, you decide you "could give a hoot."

That is what I am saying, you made a specific claim on this forum and are unable to show anything other than a wild guess as to the veracity of your claim. Also you seem to flip-flopping: are you referring to user setup or IT setup? It's clear from your posts you can't possibly know or what difficulty or ease a Telco company has when it sets up a new calling path. And when you are challenged all sorts of irrelevant things wind up in posts.

I believe you said it best when you said: making such statements requires that you know what you're talking about. You just made it clear you do not, and don't want to.

Same.

I think you yourself have readily admitted here, that you don't have the desire to know anything about it, which would mean that by default I probably know maybe a little more about it than you even want to know. And that's perfectly fine. A user shouldn't have to know what's going on. They should be able to just flick a setting on their screen. And that alone will cause the phone and the carrier to do all that fancy highfalutin' "one, two three" stuff that you shouldn't care about, in order to just make it happen.

I don't think guessing at the engineering aspects of the back-end computer systems qualifies anybody to say they understand a process.

Fortunately, Apple is doing exactly this with WiFi calling in iOS 8. No silly extra boxes to hook up or plug in. No having to be told that your assumptions about where that silly box will work might be a little off the mark. Not even a "one, two three." More like a "one"... and it just works.

And I happen to think that's a really good thing, that all carriers should be actively supporting, regardless of how good their networks are, or how good we think their networks are. Doing so will be easier on the carriers, and easier on the customers, too.

Well somewhere someone (in this case Apple and Tmobile) spent time engineering the complexity so you don't see it when:
1- get wifi
2-flip the switch
3- make call.

Wifi calling is a good thing, but a network extender is a different solution to the same problem with it's own set of pro's and cons. The signal penetration for one is better than both the 2.4 and 5 ghz bands, so within the radius of the device, which is greater than my router, it works flawlessly. Obviously a con is that it is it's own hardware, while another pro it's not clearly not subject to mitm attacks like wifi in 2014.

But a lot of what you posted is just nonsense, especially three year old articles about network extenders being hacked, which has been addressed not even recently. That has nothing to do with anything.

 

[scaredpoet]

You're shooting from the hip.

What does that even mean in this context?

Of course there is no guarantee,

Two posts ago, you clearly seemed to think otherwise. that's why I made sure to disabuse you of that notion.

And of course, the kicker is if there is no wifi available, you are still stuck.

Yeah, funny thing about that network extender: No broadband, no network extender. A network extender costs $249. Adding a good WiFi router to your broadband connection costs one tenth that amount, if you don't already have it. Do the math.

That is what I am saying, you made a specific claim on this forum and are unable to show anything other than a wild guess as to the veracity of your claim.

No, these are not wild guesses, at all. I've provided links that show that Wifi infrastructure is cheaper than buying a femtocell, and will work in more places. basic, easy to understand principles behind a femtocell vs the basic principles of Wifi calling are available on the web for any non-engineer to digest and understand. But of course, any time I provide such information, you come back with "I don't give a hoot."

So fine, don't give a hoot. But please don't tell others that they don't know what they're talking about, when you refuse to understand it yourself.

Also you seem to flip-flopping: are you referring to user setup or IT setup?

I've already repeated myself on this, but fortunately cut and paste is my friend: Wifi calling will be easier on the carriers, and easier on the customers, too.

I think the "and" clearly indicates I'm referring to both.

It's clear from your posts you can't possibly know or what difficulty or ease a Telco company has when it sets up a new calling path.

It's clear from your posts that you are not remotely qualified to make that assertion.

And when you are challenged all sorts of irrelevant things wind up in posts.

See, you keep saying this, but it's just not true. And again, you don't know or care what's going on, so how can you even make that statement?

I don't think guessing at the engineering aspects of the back-end computer systems qualifies anybody to say they understand a process.

Yeah, I'm just gonna let that comment sit there, since it's very apropos with your situation right now.

Wifi calling is a good thing, but a network extender is a different solution to the same problem with it's own set of pro's and cons. The signal penetration for one is better than both the 2.4 and 5 ghz bands, so within the radius of the device, which is greater than my router, it works flawlessly.

This argument would be very true, if we were discussing equipment that required signal penetration through multiple buildings and a broad coverage footprint. That said, this isn't the case for either a network extender or a home Wifi access point. A network extender is specifically designed to provide a very small coverage footprint, because the spectrum it operates on is licensed and regulated (yeah, I know, you don't wanna know or care about these things... guess what? If you're gonna argue range and penetration, then you're gonna have to learn).

Most of the time, a household with Wifi up and running have already solved their "penetration" problem to their satisfaction: they have mobile devices that need to access that Wifi, so they've done the work they need to do to make that happen in the places they use those devices. From their perspective, getting voice to work over that same network isn't much of a stretch, once the carrier and the phone support it.

Obviously a con is that it is it's own hardware, while another pro it's not clearly not subject to mitm attacks like wifi in 2014.

Completely Wrong. In 2014, too.

But a lot of what you posted is just nonsense,

You have already disqualified yourself from being able to make that statement.

 

[I7guy]

What does that even mean in this context?

That you really don't know the back-end infratstructure; so you can't comment.

Two posts ago, you clearly seemed to think otherwise. that's why I made sure to disabuse you of that notion.

Verizon has disclaimers and TOS for everything; unless you can actually tell me where it doesn't work, I'll take it the network extender works within the boundaries of the United States. Having a disclaimer for the one square inch of land VZW doesn't cover means nothing in this context.

Yeah, funny thing about that network extender: No broadband, no network extender. A network extender costs $249. Adding a good WiFi router to your broadband connection costs one tenth that amount, if you don't already have it. Do the math.

I know many people that have broadband, but no wifi. As I said before there are pluses and minuses to each...you choose.

No, these are not wild guesses, at all. I've provided links that show that Wifi infrastructure is cheaper than buying a femtocell, and will work in more places. basic, easy to understand principles behind a femtocell vs the basic principles of Wifi calling are available on the web for any non-engineer to digest and understand. But of course, any time I provide such information, you come back with "I don't give a hoot."

You are changing your story. That is not what you said originally...flip-flop.

It's clear from your posts that you are not remotely qualified to make that assertion

Ditto.

This argument would be very true, if we were discussing equipment that required signal penetration through multiple buildings and a broad coverage footprint. That said, this isn't the case for either a network extender or a home Wifi access point. A network extender is specifically designed to provide a very small coverage footprint, because the spectrum it operates on is licensed and regulated (yeah, I know, you don't wanna know or care about these things... guess what? If you're gonna argue range and penetration, then you're gonna have to learn).

Why do you care so much about what VZW has already solved for 4 or 5 years? The licensed spectrum has been resolved since 2009. Why are you harping on what has been resolved for over 5 years? Is it because your straw man has crumbled?

Completely Wrong. In 2014, too.

Pick your poison on how you want law enforcement to drop in on your conversations. WIFI through ISP to LE or any other method. With a mitm attack it doesn't even have to be law enforcement. Again a failed straw man argument because you were discussing casual hacking of femtocells, not NSA OR LE survelliance, which basically all forms of communication are intercepted. Not to mention this is another red herring because it has nothing to do with the price of tea anywhere in the world.

Anyway, I'll let you have the last word on this particular item; should you desire to offer a rebuttal. Have at it, my good friend.

 

[scaredpoet]

That you really don't know the back-end infratstructure; so you can't comment.

You should probably just stick to being blunt about your accusations then.

Verizon has disclaimers and TOS for everything;

Yes, because they know for a fact that they cannot guarantee blanket US coverage with a network extender.

unless you can actually tell me where it doesn't work,

The network coverage map is here. All of the white "no coverage" areas, and all of the "Extended 3G" coverage areas on the map are places where a network extended will not work.

I'll take it the network extender works within the boundaries of the United States.

I've done all I can to educate you on how the extended actually works. If you choose to accept that information, that's your choice. Just please don't misinform others who might be disappointed.

Having a disclaimer for the one square inch of land VZW doesn't cover means nothing in this context.

Again, that information is incorrect. Even Verizon isn't that delusional, and they clearly delineate where they have native coverage, where roaming partner coverage ("extended network") exists, and where they don't have anything at all.

I know many people that have broadband, but no wifi.

For the second time: Wifi can be installed for a tenth of the price of a network extender.

As I said before there are pluses and minuses to each...you choose.

Too bad Verizon customers in this predicament can't, because they don't HAVE a choice. Verizon does not currently support WiFi calling.

You are changing your story. That is not what you said originally...flip-flop.

All of my posts in this thread are here for everyone to see. There has been no change to what I've said.

Ditto.

False.

Why do you care so much about what VZW has already solved for 4 or 5 years? The licensed spectrum has been resolved since 2009. Why are you harping on what has been resolved for over 5 years? Is it because your straw man has crumbled?

You keep saying things like "resolved," but there's zero contextual meaning. Are you trying to say Verizon has total US blanket coverage in the frequencies which a network extender operates? Because that's completely false.

On the other hand, WiFi is unlicensed... anyone in the US can use it, anywhere in the US. I'll consider the coverage problem "resolved" when carriers make use of WiFi calling as nice additional supplement to their existing coverage, which would most definitely "resolve" the spectrum issue. Without having to make people buy additional $250 pieces of equipment that might or might not work in their area.

Pick your poison on how you want law enforcement to drop in on your conversations.

We don't need to: A private firm is supplying law enforcement with gear that does exactly what you say is impossible: man-on-the-middle attacks on the cellular network.

Anyway, I'll let you have the last word on this particular item; should you desire to offer a rebuttal. Have at it, my good friend.

Why thank you, I thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to correct the misinformation that you're perpetuating.

 

[Deucemimo]

Just grab the MagicJack app and do all the WiFi Calling u want.

 

[I7guy]

You should probably just stick to being blunt about your accusations then.



Yes, because they know for a fact that they cannot guarantee blanket US coverage with a network extender.



The network coverage map is here. All of the white "no coverage" areas, and all of the "Extended 3G" coverage areas on the map are places where a network extended will not work.




I've done all I can to educate you on how the extended actually works. If you choose to accept that information, that's your choice. Just please don't misinform others who might be disappointed.



Again, that information is incorrect. Even Verizon isn't that delusional, and they clearly delineate where they have native coverage, where roaming partner coverage ("extended network") exists, and where they don't have anything at all.



For the second time: Wifi can be installed for a tenth of the price of a network extender.



Too bad Verizon customers in this predicament can't, because they don't HAVE a choice. Verizon does not currently support WiFi calling.



All of my posts in this thread are here for everyone to see. There has been no change to what I've said.



False.




You keep saying things like "resolved," but there's zero contextual meaning. Are you trying to say Verizon has total US blanket coverage in the frequencies which a network extender operates? Because that's completely false.

On the other hand, WiFi is unlicensed... anyone in the US can use it, anywhere in the US. I'll consider the coverage problem "resolved" when carriers make use of WiFi calling as nice additional supplement to their existing coverage, which would most definitely "resolve" the spectrum issue. Without having to make people buy additional $250 pieces of equipment that might or might not work in their area.



We don't need to: A private firm is supplying law enforcement with gear that does exactly what you say is impossible: man-on-the-middle attacks on the cellular network.




Why thank you, I thoroughly enjoyed the opportunity to correct the misinformation that you're perpetuating.

Likewise I'm sure. # it's been fun.

 

[ET iPhone Home]

I'm definitely out of the loop. What is the best wi-fi app for wi-fi calling. ATT has limitation to certain countries. They offer a $10 fee for 1000 mins. of international calls, but none of the countries I want to call is on their list. Ugh! pathetic and discriminatory because the countries unlisted make them bank I guess :roll eyes:.

 

[YoungCalusa]

I'm not sure about SMS but it's just a new feature for the iPhone. Android and Windows mobile have had it.

SMS does work while on wifi calling, the only drawback is that making phone calls on you mac is not supported while wifi calling is enabled

 

[CEmajr]

I'm definitely out of the loop. What is the best wi-fi app for wi-fi calling. ATT has limitation to certain countries. They offer a $10 fee for 1000 mins. of international calls, but none of the countries I want to call is on their list. Ugh! pathetic and discriminatory because the countries unlisted make them bank I guess :roll eyes:.

The Wi-Fi calling being discussed in this topic is not available on AT&T.

 

[tigres]

Apple announces that iOS 8 will support Wifi calling and all of the sudden all the rest of the major carriers are suppose to support it??? I think NOT. None of you gave wifi calling a second thought before Apple announced it.

AT&T and Verizon WILL NOT support wifi calling because they don't need it! T-Mobile only uses it because their frequencies are higher and don't travel as far. In-building penetration is also a challenge on T-Mobile, hence the wifi calling.

Speak for yourself, and not the entire internets- kthx

My ATT microcell sucks too as I get no service.

I for one hope ATT gets on this, but I sincerely doubt it as I cannot tether on my unlimited plan.