@David, that's why I keep POTS phones and dont go to VoIP with Comcast, no matter how many times the call trying to get me to sign up. My office phone is a voice phone running on my DSL service. At frst, it was unusable after a few minutes. the voice would break up. Changing modems has solved the problem.
@MB I would wholeheartedly agree with you. The silly thing is that POTS phones are still limited to around 3 to 4 KHz by the codecs, and they still sound great. We recently swapped our good old TDM PABXs at work for a VOIP system. It's good when it works, but we've had no end of niggly problems. And guess what? If your network connection is bad or down you have NO Comms at all! No email, no phones, no IM, NOTHING! Come back TDM/ISDN, all is forgiven!
My nephew tried to connect using hiw Windows 8 computer and said it wouldn't connect. Itried with my Win7 and it found the devices but asked for drivers. I downloaded the drivers but because UBM won;t give me admin rights, I was unable to install. We have a fairly new Android tablet here and a phone so I'll try them.
I wonder if the BT-only-compatible-with-Apple is still true. This seems like it might be a leftover from the days when Android didn't support BT 4.0 (BT Low Energy). Those days were not that long ago, and millions of consumers are still using Android phones that don't support this.
Today, I joined the crowd and bought a JBL Charge bluetooth speaker, a step up from the one shown above. It works fine with Apple devices and in fact, the box indicates that it's only Bluetooth compatible with Apple. Some of the reviews on Amazon point to that incompatibility fact; buyers didn't know that when they bought theirs.
@JeffL_2 thanks so much for explaining that horrible sound that comes out of the phone when I'm on hold. Since so many of us spend so much time on hold, I'd think that the "on hold Muzak people" would select material that can tolerate the low bandwidth or provide some peaceful silence (with periodic confirmations that the line is alive).
I'm not surprised that test equipment exists to measure this but I'm more than a little surprised that there's real popular concern. So many of these modern mobile links just "assume" that the traffic over a link is almost exclusively voice that these links automatically route all traffic through a vocoder path in order to reduce the data rate of the traffic. If you've ever waited on a cell phone for a long time for service (like for support for a federal or state program like benefits) you've noticed the absolutely abysmal quality of "music on hold", it sounds almost literally (to recycle a very old quote) "as if someone pushed the RCA pooch into the horn" (yes it was a joke on their old "his master's voice" logo). You get that hideous sound because the link is trying to "vocode" music (possibly an entire symphony orchestra) and pass it over a link at a few thousands bits per second! My goodness if people are willing to tolerate THAT annoying abuse (and you seldom hear anyone bring it up, although it happens literally all the time) it makes me wonder what the heck WOULD they be prepared to complain about??
@DrQuine. Audio test of speakers and amplifiers in phones assumes a good quality signal. I think that the audio testing os more for music than telephone voice. Unfortunately, even a good quality audio subsystem is at the mercy of the cellular network. At this point, I think telephone service is assumed; the carriers and cell phone makers are more interested in the audio quality of music, movies, and games.
Replay available now: A handful of emerging network technologies are competing to be the preferred wide-area connection for the Internet of Things. All claim lower costs and power use than cellular but none have wide deployment yet. Listen in as proponents of leading contenders make their case to be the metro or national IoT network of the future. Rick Merritt, EE Times Silicon Valley Bureau Chief, moderators this discussion. Join in and ask his guests questions.