AllThingsD » calls

Verizon iPhone Users Report Far Fewer Dropped Calls, Survey Says

Ina Fried — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 22:45:55 +0000

Verizon iPhone owners report experiencing fewer than half as many dropped calls as those whose iPhone runs on AT&T, according to a new survey.

Those with a Verizon iPhone reported having less than two percent of their calls dropped over the past 90 days. That compared to a 4.8 percent call-drop rate reported by AT&T iPhone owners.

However, it should be noted that the survey, a poll of 4,000 consumers by ChangeWave Research, was completed at the end of March, so none of the Verizon users had actually owned their phones for a full 90 days. Also, the survey asked customers to recall how many of their calls were dropped, rather than offering some scientific measurement.

Of those surveyed who planned to buy another iPhone, 46 percent said they would buy one on Verizon’s network, compared with 27 percent who planned to buy an AT&T model. Another 27 percent said they didn’t know which network they would go with.

In one bit of positive news for AT&T, reports of dropped calls across all phone models have dropped in the past few months, from a high of six percent in September to 4.6 percent as of March. However, that’s still higher than any of the other majors; Verizon has the lowest reported dropped call rate in the survey, with 1.4 percent as of March.

Both Verizon and AT&T customers were happy with their iPhones, with 80 percent of AT&T customers and 82 percent of Verizon iPhone owners saying they were “very satisfied.” Nearly all the rest said they were “somewhat satisfied.”

According to comScore, the Verizon iPhone was the best-selling cell phone in the U.S. for the month of February.

“The results of this survey demonstrate that AT&T’s iPhone subscribers are extremely satisfied with their service but of course we always strive to make their experience even better,” an AT&T representative said, reiterating the company’s iPhone advantages, such as broadband speed, the ability to talk and surf at the same time and compatibility in more international markets.

Verizon Beats AT&T in Voice Calls for iPhones

Walter S. Mossberg — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 02:01:45 +0000

For millions of iPhone owners, or would-be iPhone owners, who dislike AT&T’s wireless service or prefer Verizon Wireless service, liberation is at hand. Starting Feb. 10, Apple’s iconic smart phone finally will be available in the U.S. on a second carrier, Verizon, instead of just on AT&T, which has been the exclusive iPhone network since the device launched in 2007. Current Verizon customers can pre-order the iPhone Thursday.

[ See post to watch video ]

Complaints about dropped voice calls, or calls that can’t be initiated, on AT&T’s service, especially on iPhones, have been legion. Meanwhile, Verizon has enjoyed a general reputation for reliable voice service. So, many frustrated AT&T iPhone users and those scared off by reports of dropped calls, or simply loyal to Verizon, have been eagerly anticipating this move. To these people, I’m here to say: Yes, there are some major benefits to having your iPhone on Verizon, but, as with all good things, there are also trade-offs.

I’ve been testing a Verizon iPhone 4 and comparing it to an AT&T iPhone 4, which has been out since last summer. The phones themselves are essentially identical, except for the fact that they have different radios inside to accommodate the two carriers’ differing network technologies. They aren’t interchangeable.

On the big question, I can say that, at least in the areas where I was using it, the Verizon model did much, much better with voice calls. In numerous tries over nine days, I had only three dropped calls on the Verizon unit, and those were all to one person who was using an AT&T iPhone in an especially bad area for AT&T: San Francisco. With the nearly identical AT&T model, I often get that many dropped calls in one day.

Calls on the Verizon unit were mostly crisp and clear, including speakerphone calls and those made over my car’s Bluetooth connection. On my first full day of testing, I did have several Verizon calls that dropped out for a few seconds, before recovering. Apple attributed this to a very minor glitch I’d encountered in my initial setup of the phone and urged me to reboot it. I did and suffered no more momentary dropouts.

The Verizon model also introduces a feature that some iPhone power users have been craving but that AT&T hasn’t allowed in the past: the ability to use the phone, for an extra monthly fee, as a Wi-Fi hot spot for Internet connectivity to multiple laptops or other devices. In my tests, this worked fine with Windows and Macintosh laptops, and an iPad. Wednesday afternoon, AT&T countered by announcing a similar Wi-Fi hot spot plan for the iPhone at an unspecified future date.

For an extra fee, Verizon iPhone users can use the phone as a Wi-Fi hot spot. AT&T has rushed to counter this feature with one of its own.

Also, Verizon is, for an unspecified but limited time, offering an unlimited $30 a month data plan for the iPhone. That is something AT&T once offered new customers, but has since replaced with capped plans offering fixed amounts of data at $15 or $25 a month. (Existing AT&T customers have been allowed to keep their $30 unlimited plans.)

What about the trade-offs? Chief among them is data speed. I performed scores of speed tests on the two phones, which I used primarily in Washington, and its Maryland and Virginia suburbs, and for part of one day at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport. In these many tests, despite a few Verizon victories here and there, AT&T’s network averaged 46% faster at download speeds and 24% faster at upload speeds. This speed difference was noticeable while doing tasks like downloading large numbers of emails, or waiting for complicated Web pages to load. AT&T’s speeds varied more while Verizon’s were more consistent, but overall, AT&T was more satisfying at cellular data.

Also, because Verizon’s iPhone—like most other Verizon phones—doesn’t work on the world-wide GSM mobile-phone standard, you can’t use it in most countries outside the U.S. AT&T’s iPhone does work on this standard, and can be used widely abroad, albeit at very high roaming rates. In the midst of my testing, I had to travel to Hong Kong, one of the few countries where the Verizon iPhone functions. But even there, it only worked for voice, not data, at least in the areas where I was working. The AT&T model handled both voice and data everywhere I tried it there.

Finally, the Verizon model can’t fetch Internet data at the same time it is making a voice call, something the AT&T model can do. In fact, if you try to, say, call up a Web page while on a voice call with the Verizon model, you get an error message warning the two things can’t be done simultaneously. While this distinction is a weapon in the war of words between the carriers, I doubt it’s a big deal for most average users. My guess is that the most common things you’d want to check while talking would be your calendar, contacts and notes. And, in my tests, it was possible to check all those things on the Verizon model during calls, even though I have them set up to sync via the Internet.

I did have some issues with the Verizon model. In the D.C. area, long a coverage stronghold for Verizon, it kept switching briefly from 3G mode to slower 2G mode. This didn’t affect voice quality, and didn’t last long, but it slowed data downloads drastically for short periods. Also, on my first day of testing—after the setup glitch but before I rebooted—the Verizon phone showed poor battery life, and had trouble connecting to my car’s Bluetooth setup. After that, these problems disappeared. Bluetooth worked fine and I was able to make it through a day with the battery on both phones.

Apple lists the specs on the two models as identical. They both start at $199, both have the same battery-life rating, both run the same operating software. In my tests, I was easily able to transfer all my apps, music, photos, settings, music and videos from the AT&T iPhone to the Verizon model, using iTunes, and I didn’t run into any apps or media that failed to work as expected.

Prices for voice and data plans are a bit different. The least you can pay monthly for an iPhone on Verizon is $75, which includes 450 voice minutes, 250 text messages and unlimited data. On AT&T, you can pay just $65, but your data is limited to a paltry 200 megabytes, though you get 1,000 text messages in this scenario.

The Verizon wireless hot-spot plan costs $20 a month for 2 gigabytes of data, but gets expensive if you run over: $20 for each extra gigabyte.

One big question about the Verizon iPhone that neither company is answering is whether it will be updated to a new iPhone 5 model when the AT&T model is updated. Such updates typically have occurred in June or July, which could make people who buy a Verizon iPhone now resentful that their new phone was bested so soon. Of course, Verizon customers who wait might be resentful if their version of the iPhone isn’t upgraded at the same time as AT&T’s.

Officials at both Apple and Verizon will only say they don’t intend to make Verizon customers unhappy, but that could mean anything.

Bottom line: In my tests, the new Verizon version of the iPhone did much better at voice calling than the AT&T version, and offers some attractive benefits, like unlimited data and a wireless hot-spot capability. But if you really care about data speed, or travel overseas, and AT&T service is tolerable in your area, you may want to stick with AT&T.

See a video of Walt Mossberg discussing the Verizon iPhone at WSJ.com/PersonalTech. Find all his columns and videos at the All Things Digital website, walt.allthingsd.com. Email him at mossberg@wsj.com.

Free Gmail Calling Is the New Landline

Liz Gannes — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 21:21:41 +0000

One of every four American homes has only wireless telephones, according to the National Health Interview Survey. Personally, having only the very occasional need for a fax machine, I too am one of those mobile cord cutters.

But the thing is, I need to actually converse with people when I make phone calls, and that’s often impossible using AT&T in San Francisco. The majority of mobile calls made from my apartment on my cellphone are dropped or inaudible. So you might say I should regret that decision to drop the landline when I moved earlier this year.

But because of free Gmail voice calling (which launched last August), I’m doing okay. My home Internet service (also provided by AT&T, I should say) is mostly reliable, so I just dial out of my Web browser using my laptop’s built-in speakers and microphone. The calls almost always connect and sound fine.

Google announced today that this free calling from the U.S. to anywhere in the States and Canada would be extended through all of 2011 (back in August, it said it wouldn’t charge for those calls “for at least the rest of the year”).

Since I have a Google Voice account (which isn’t required to make calls), I can also receive calls in Gmail. When I dial out, my calls look like they’re coming from my Google Voice number.

I wouldn’t mind having a cellphone that actually worked for voice calls, but for now this will continue to be my backup.

Faxing with magicJack and Reusing the Windows 7 CD

Walter S. Mossberg — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 21:58:00 +0000

Can the magicJack Internet phone device you reviewed last week be used for faxing?

The company says: “We do not officially support using faxing with magicJack.” It says it “sometimes” works with fax machines and suggests a number of steps to try this, including turning off error correction on the fax machine and setting the fax speed to the lowest possible, then gradually increasing the speed, testing at each level. However, I would advise thinking of the $40 device, which allows free unlimited domestic calls over the Internet, as a voice-calling product and nothing else.

You said that, if you buy a magicJack, you need to keep it plugged into a PC that’s constantly on and constantly connected to the Internet, to make and receive calls. But what if a call comes in and your computer is off or disconnected?

Even if the magicJack isn’t plugged into a running, connected computer, the service behind it will still record voicemail you receive. In fact, magicJack’s voicemail includes a feature that sends each message as an audio file via email, which will also keep working. You can also check your magicJack voicemail from other phones. In addition, even if a magicJack is disconnected, its number will continue to be forwarded to other phones, if you have chosen the option to do so.

Can I use the Windows 7 CD that came with my Dell (DELL) PC for either the Boot Camp or Parallels installation on a Mac?

I have heard of some who say they have done this successfully, and you can certainly try it. But I strongly recommend using a fresh copy of Windows 7. There are two reasons for this. First, Microsoft (MSFT) licensing policies may block your use of copies of Windows already in use on other PCs. Second, Windows disks that come with PCs are sometimes customized for the particular features of that PC, and might not work properly on the Mac.

You can find Mossberg’s Mailbox, and my other columns, online at the All Things Digital Web site, walt.allthingsd.com.

magicJack: Cheap, Way Overhyped, But Really Works

Walter S. Mossberg — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:06:20 +0000

When I see a high-tech product that’s advertised mainly via frequent hard-sell TV ads, as if it were a diet pill, I tend to assume it can’t be very good, especially if its price is absurdly low. So, I haven’t paid much attention to a product called magicJack, a small $40 adapter for your computer that claims to let you make unlimited domestic phone calls over the Internet with your home telephone free for a whole year—and for just $20 a year thereafter.

But after receiving reader requests to review magicJack, I decided to do so. To my surprise, it worked pretty much as advertised. It has a few drawbacks, and extra fees for added services, such as vanity phone numbers. But I found magicJack easy to set up and easy to use, and it yielded decent, if not pristine, call quality. I even tested customer support—a source of complaints online—and found it friendly, fast and responsive.

[ See post to watch video ]

MagicJack looks like an oversized USB flash drive. On one end is a standard USB connector for the PC; on the other is a standard phone jack to plug in a phone. It’s compatible with PCs running Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7, as well as with all Intel-based Macs. It works with both corded and cordless phones, and comes with software for dialing, though you can also dial directly from a connected phone.

The low annual fee covers calls to and from any phone on any telephone network—landline or cellphone—not just phones connected to computers or to other magicJacks. The only restriction is that the numbers called must be in the U.S., Canada, Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands. You can also buy low-cost prepaid international minutes, or take your magicJack abroad to make free calls home. You can move it among different computers and locations.

MagicJack can also be used without a phone handset, via a computer headset or the computer’s built-in microphone and speakers.

YMAX’s magicJack

There’s nothing new about Internet phone calling. Companies like Vonage and Skype have been doing it for years. But magicJack is different. It emphasizes calling to and from phones on regular wired and wireless phone networks, and its prices for calls to and from such non-Internet-connected phones are much lower.

For instance, the lowest plan advertised on Vonage’s (VG) Web site for calling regular phones in the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico is $17.99 a month, or about $216 a year, versus magicJack’s $20. And Vonage gives you only 500 minutes a month, while magicJack sets no limit. Skype charges per-minute or monthly fees for calls to regular phones and an added fee to receive incoming calls.

The maker of magicJack says its low prices are possible because the product is produced by a privately held Florida company called YMAX, which is also a phone carrier. The company also runs ads inside its software. You can buy the device at a wide variety of stores, even drugstores and convenience stores.

I tested magicJack on both a PC and a Mac. The software resides inside the magicJack itself and installs each time you connect it.

In my tests, I made and received calls on both computers, using a single landline phone and using a cordless-phone system in my house after plugging its base station into the magicJack. In the latter case, I could make and receive calls from cordless phones all over my house. I exchanged calls with both landline phones and cellphones from the magicJack.

The call quality was good, except for a few times when the connection got scratchy for a second or two. Most of the people I called said they couldn’t tell I wasn’t on a regular call. The system offers voice mail, call forwarding and conference calls, and you can save contacts.

A couple of times I didn’t get an immediate dial tone, and had to hang up and try again.

The biggest downside of the magicJack compared with regular phone service is that you have to be running an Internet-connected computer, with a magicJack installed anytime you want to make or receive calls. Also, as with all Internet phone systems, you have to register your address with 911 emergency systems.

With magicJack, you get a new phone number. The company says it is working on allowing you to port your existing landline number. You can keep your landline number for use on some phones or when you’re not using magicJack.

I found magicJack worked better on Windows than on the Mac. At one point, magicJack customer support had to send me software to patch the Mac version. But the company claims it is fixing that with a new Mac version coming soon.

YMAX also says it plans to roll out this year a Skype-like service that won’t require any magicJack hardware, just a PC or an iPhone. It also plans a new version of magicJack to turn cellphones into wireless magicJack handsets.

I don’t know if those diet pills in the TV ads work. But magicJack does.

Find all of Walt Mossberg’s columns and videos online, free, at the All Things Digital Web site, walt.allthingsd.com. Email him at mossberg@wsj.com.

CES: Taser’s Turn at Cellphone Safety

Marisa Taylor — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 19:53:09 +0000

For parents who want to keep their kids from sexting–or just texting at the dinner table–new cellphone software called Protector keeps them in the loop.

Protector, which debuts Thursday at CES, is made by Taser International, a company that’s best known for its series of electronic stun guns (watch the video below, from CES 2009, to see The Journal’s Andy Jordan test one out for himself).

Protector uses GPS so that a child’s calls, texts, emails and photos are first routed to the parent’s phone, where they can be screened and blocked if desired. It also monitors a child’s location and can even track driving habits, Taser said. (In case you’re wondering, it emphasized that Protector is not a stun gun.)

Parents can dial up restrictions by, say, blocking all calls from outside a local area code, or ease up by allowing all text messages to be received. “It grows with the child,” a Taser spokesman said, in that the special needs of each age group can be addressed.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Lawmakers Ask FCC to Probe Google Voice

John Paczkowski — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:59:54 +0000

Should Google be able to offer voice services unfettered by regulations that apply to broadband carriers simply because Google Voice is a free Internet application? AT&T certainly doesn’t think so, and it seems at least a few Congressional representatives agree.

Yesterday, A group of House members from rural districts called on the Federal Communications Commission to investigate Google’s practice of blocking calls to numbers that use rural exchanges to charge inflated prices–something regulation prevents traditional telecom carriers from doing.

In their letter to the FCC, the lawmakers–among them Reps. Steve Buyer (R., Ind.), Charlie Melancon (D., La.), Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.) and John Barrow (D., Ga.)–claim that rural consumers will be harmed if Google is allowed to “evade compliance with important principles of access and competition.”

“We understand Google has asserted Google Voice is not a ‘traditional’ telephone service–despite its use of 10-digit telephone numbers and its ability to connect calls between telephones through a local exchange carrier,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter. “Instead, Google maintains it ought to be allowed to block calls to rural telephone exchanges–a position we find ill conceived and unfair to our rural constituents.”

This, of course, is pretty much what AT&T (T) said in September when it slagged Google (GOOG) as “one of the most noisome trumpeters of so-called net-neutrality” and asked the FCC to order it to “play by the same rules as its competitors.” Google, however, insists those rules don’t apply in its case.

“The FCC’s open Internet principles apply only to the behavior of broadband carriers–not the creators of Web-based software applications,” Google telecom counsel Richard Whitt wrote in response to AT&T’s complaint. “Even though the FCC does not have jurisdiction over how software applications function, AT&T apparently wants to use the regulatory process to undermine Web-based competition and innovation.”

Investors Wary of AT&VoIP

John Paczkowski — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:33:25 +0000

A complete reversal of its earlier policy restricting Internet telephone services to Wi-Fi only, AT&T’s decision to allow iPhone owners to use such services on its 3G network has gone over well with consumers, and more importantly, with Apple.

“We are very happy that AT&T is now supporting VOIP applications,” said Apple (AAPL) spokeswoman Natalie Kerris. “We will be amending our developer agreements to get VOIP apps on the App Store and in customers’ hands as soon as possible.”

But the new policy hasn’t gone over well with AT&T investors. Shares in the company slipped on the news yesterday and they’re falling still further today. AT&T (T) is trading at $26.21 as I write, down more than two percent from its open. Why? Perhaps due to concerns that the carrier might take a revenue hit when iPhone owners who are using telephony services to make cheap calls switch to low-minute voice plans.

As JP Morgan analyst Mike McCormack notes, voice accounts for $50-$60 of the $95 in monthly revenue generated by the typical iPhone user. If the average user were to drop AT&T’s unlimited voice plan ($99.99/month) in favor of its cheapest ($39.99/month), the carrier could lose upward of 20 percent of voice revenue.

That’s an ugly drop. And while AT&T might offset it by raising its data plan rates, doing so would inevitably outrage customers who are already giving it hell for poor coverage and lousy call quality.

Investors Wary of AT&VoIP

John Paczkowski — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:33:25 +0000

Unlike Google Voice, Vonage Now Available on iPhone

John Paczkowski — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:00:54 +0000

Apple seems to have gotten over its aversion to apps duplicating core iPhone functions. This morning Internet telephony company Vonage released an app that allows iPhone users to make calls over Wi-Fi and AT&T’s voice network. Place a call in range of a Wi-Fi signal and it will be routed over AT&T’s (T) data network; place it out of range of Wi-Fi and it will be routed over the carrier’s voice network, where it will consume minutes from the caller’s AT&T service plan

Interesting, given the recent flap over Google Voice for iPhone, which Apple (AAPL) hasn’t yet allowed into its iTunes App Store because it “appears to alter the iPhone’s distinctive user experience by replacing the iPhone’s core mobile telephone functionality and Apple user interface with its own user interface for telephone calls, text messaging and voice mail.”

How is Vonage’s (VG) app different? Its features and functionality are certainly very similar to those of Google Voice.

Apple won’t say, but the company did tell the Associated Press that Vonage’s app falls under the same category as other VoIP applications that have already been approved for the iPhone.

Easy Way to Log In Face Time

Katherine Boehret — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:20:02 +0000

Nowadays, new laptops usually come with built-in Webcams, including the ultra-small, inexpensive models known as netbooks. But many people don’t know what to do with these Webcams or how to use them for videoconferencing with other people. Some don’t even realize their computers have these tiny videocameras.

[ See post to watch video ]

This week, I tested a new videoconferencing-software program designed to help these people. It’s made especially for non-techies who simply want to use their Webcams to see someone while they’re talking to them. These people don’t want to conference several people into a call. And they especially don’t want to have to sign up for a confusing, intimidating videoconferencing service.

I used Logitech Vid by downloading it from www.logitech.com/vid. This program comes from Logitech Inc. and makes use of technology from SightSpeed, the videoconferencing-software company that Logitech acquired last fall. Vid works with Macs and Windows PCs that have built-in Webcams or those that use Webcams that plug into a computer’s USB port; it can even work if only one person has a Webcam so the person without one still sees video and hears audio from the other person.

Expiration Date for Some

If this was a free download for all, Logitech Vid would be a slam dunk for the consumer. But as of now, it is free only for people who use Logitech Webcams or the people they invite, and for people who are registered on SightSpeed or Dell Video Chat, Dell’s version of the SightSpeed service, regardless of their Webcam brand.

For everyone else, the software expires after 30 days, with no option to pay for continued use. This means Logitech misses out on the growing number of people whose laptops and desktops have built-in Webcams, but who don’t want to buy a Logitech camera just to use Vid (and shouldn’t have to). Logitech says it intends to add a payment plan for Vid.

I tested Vid with my parents, who recently bought a netbook for the kitchen but — before this column — didn’t quite know how to use its Webcam. I also tried it with tech-savvy friends who have video-chatted with me on programs like Skype, Apple’s iChat and Google Chat. Everyone had the same reaction: They liked Logitech Vid’s refreshingly clean interface and simple setup. My Mom appreciated Vid’s easy instructions, which are written in plain terms that anyone can understand.

Vid worked while I was video-chatting from one Mac to another; from a Mac to a Windows PC and vice versa; and from one Windows PC to another.

Invitations to Chat

I ran into trouble one night when Vid invitations that I sent to friends and family didn’t go through until after several attempts. Logitech says Vid was undergoing some behind-the-scenes server maintenance, which caused the glitches. (People who have trouble sending invitations like I did can alternatively direct friends to Logitech’s Web site to download the software.) And Vid didn’t work properly when I tried using it on my company-issued PC, which runs on a corporate network protected by firewalls. Logitech says Vid is targeted for consumer use, and not for sophisticated corporate environments.

Logitech Vid arranges photos of friends, along with their availability, in a visually pleasing carousel display.

People who are used to more advanced videoconferencing programs may find Vid unsatisfying. It doesn’t let friends instant message or share photos with one another, nor does it pull in buddy lists from outside videoconferencing programs. Vid isn’t designed to record conversations, host multiparty calls or take still photos during chats. Like other videoconferencing programs, slow Internet connections can occasionally cause video and audio to stutter.

But for simple video chats, Vid was a pleasure to use. If not for its 30-day expiration, I would definitely see myself chatting with my parents through this program on a regular basis. I used it to hold up three colors of dresses for my Mom so she could help me decide whether tea rose, azalea or peppermint was the best shade for my sister’s wedding (we’re leaning toward tea rose). My Dad and I had a face-to-face talk about my latest job news, and I saw a New Orleans friend and her dog, Boudreaux, appear on my computer screen almost as if they were in my house.

Smile for the Camera

Vid users invite others to chat by entering the other person’s email address. For invitees to accept an invitation, they must download the Vid software, which could be a deterrent for some. Those who do download the software and start their own Vid accounts (by just entering an email and password) appear to the original inviter in a carousel-like display of their contacts’ photographed faces.

These images are taken by the Webcam when someone sets up a Vid account, rather than allowing one to select his or her own photo from elsewhere on the computer. This is one example of Vid’s nod to simplicity and fewer choices. Likewise, the carousel of friends is organized in left-to-right alphabetical order showing those who are online followed by those offline. A simple status line below each person’s face identifies them as Unavailable, Available or Busy (already in a videoconference).

Clicking on a Pic

I called someone by clicking on their photo. The video-chat screen has four buttons that change its size, hide a small-image view of yourself, pause your video feed or end the conversation.

In a few instances, I heard a steady, high-pitched chirp and so did the person on the call with me. And we occasionally heard the echo of our own voices. Logitech said this sometimes happens when both users have open-air microphones and speakers turned up at the same time. Turning the speakers down usually solves the problem.

By August, all of Logitech’s standalone Webcams will come loaded with Vid software that starts up when the Webcam is plugged in. Now, the software is only downloadable from the Web.

Logitech Vid isn’t fancy, but it works well and presents its users with a satisfying experience so they can concentrate on enjoying their conversations. But it is a shame that Logitech doesn’t offer a payment plan for people who don’t use Logitech Webcams. If it did, Vid could help many people appreciate the Webcams they might never have otherwise used.

Edited By Walter S. Mossberg

Email us at mossbergsolution@wsj.com. Find this and other columns and videos online free at the All Things Digital Web site: http://solution.allthingsd.com