Regarding outbound calling, I noticed GV didn’t let me place calls to one of the free conference call services, using one of the “expensive rate center” numbers you refer to. I wonder if this was an accident or intentional on their part and whether they may now be blocking calls to certain numbers that they’ve identified as such. And of course in this process, I was also remined that there is no obvious way to report a problem with Google Voice to anybody – even Skype has a support email address that they sometimes respond to (moreso recently than in the past). I don;t see how that’s going to fly – not having any support – if GV wants to be my “one and only number”.

i have always thought the whole ‘one number’ forwarded to ‘multiple phones’ has very limited appeal. a far more popular offering would be to offer ‘multiple numbers’ all forwarded to the ‘same phone’ and could be more effectively used for GV’s intended purposes. you would have one number that you give to family and friends that rings all the time, another for business associates that rings on weekdays otherwise voicemail, one for possibel telemarketers that goes straight to spam voicemail box, etc., etc.

i do find the recent mass media portrayals of GV also to be very misleading. i have see a few news anchors literally describe GV a free phoneline replacement. if i mention it at a social gathering everyone has heard of it, wants to know when it will be available and many believe it is a way to eliminate your cell phone bill completely. the news about the iphone app rejection only has added to this general misinformation.

so yes when it becomes generally available it will definatly be used overwhelmingly as a way to make free long distance phone calls. how google will react to that is what will be interesting. if the put ads in phone calls that will likely trigger a bit of outrage. maybe they can just eat the cost for a while. but suspect it would not be long before GV hardware devices that trigger the calls on user behalf in a completely transparent way start to appear to wreak some havoc. and if these device come with free DID’s to help out in the process that come from expensive rate centers(like IPKall’s) googles bank accounts will certainly feel the pain.

Skype gave away IP calls and had a value add income generation option…. lets see what offers google voice and competitors can tempt us with.

I agree that any provider could offer the caller-ID spoofing, but so what? That’s essentially the service Gizmo is offering now, as I note. It’s not really a GV call at all, at that point anyway.

My main point is this little “event” portends the “free calling conundrum” in Google’s future and I’m pretty sure I’m right about that – I guess time will tell.

The Gizmo service was actually very clever. Kudos to both Gizmo and Google. The service works flawlessly for inbound calls. Outbound creates a few challenges. The entire Google Voice service has outbound calling challenges. There are really only two ways – either Google calls you (as you describe in their click to dial), or you call out and spoof the callerID.

The first one works fine and no one is overwhelmed with the demand or the ease of use. It is a hassle. I found a third party Firefox plug in that makes it much nicer.

The second one isn’t Google at all – or Gizmo for that matter. Any SIP provider or even T1 provider could do the DID substitution as their service offering. It requires the right combination of carrier and phone system. Some carriers are pretty hung up about inserting DIDs that they don’t control – but some don’t care. The important thing is to address 911.

I suspect you will see more and more carriers support this substituion. I also think we will see more and more services similar to Google Voice.