MWPollard wrote:Number porting has nothing to do with whether a service will serve as a home phone replacement. I didn't port when I came to Ooma either.
Unfortunately, most people would beg to differ. Otherwise, MagicJack wouldn't be trying so hard to get porting available; they are in Beta now, I see. I wouldn't even consider NetTalk because of no porting; not only because I need to keep my number but also lack of this service makes "Fly-by-nights" more believable.
MWPollard wrote:Call quality is a bigger issue, but whether or not Consumer Reports included a service in the list doesn't mean that the quality was worse than those that were on the list - it may just mean that there weren't enough survey respondents. And note that Ooma was only reported with "Good" quality and "Good" reliability; there are 5 others with better reported quality and 4 others with better reliability. And Ooma's support wasn't rated at all, as were almost half of them, which is probably explained in the article. Ooma was rated highly on value more than any other issue.
You are right, NetTalk not making the list doesn't automatically mean NetTalk quality is bad...but I know it means NetTalk is still a nobody. Again, makes "Fly-by-nights" more believable. Couple that with anecdotal NetTalk poor quality stories I hear, I wouldn't give NetTalk the time of day.
MWPollard wrote:WOW was rated better on both Quality and Reliability, just apparently a hair lower on Value to get a 1-point lower Reader Score, which the chart notes say is insignificant. I'm not comparing to MagicJunk.
If WOW is not in your area, I suppose Verizon FiOS is your next choice?
C'Mon man?! You going to sign up with FiOS because they got rated higher in both reliability and quality? I see that Vonage scored the same on these 2 measures...is Vonage a toss up to you compared to Ooma?!