Cricket Wireless and Google Voice
04/01/12 22:32 Filed in: PrePaid services
Ever since Google relaunched GrandCentral as Google Voice I have relied on the single number service for all my voice calling and SMS across several mobile devices. It is particularly convenient for the delivery of SMS (actually over the data network) when traveling internationally on local prepaid SIM cards. I have used the service simultaneously with phones from Sprint, T-Mobile, AT&T, and MetroPCS. Several months ago the Cricket Ascend II from Huawei was added to this list without any difficulty.
Not all phones support the automatic Google Voice voicemail integration and require manual conditional call forwarding configuration with * code combination. This was the case with MetroPCS, Cricket, and AT&T and only added a brief step to the configuration. It was a surprise today when configuring a new Huawei Mercury Android phone from Cricket that the *74########## code generated a message that said the feature was not available. A double check of Cricket’s site validated that the $55 Android plan included call forwarding and that the code indeed started with *74. These were the same instructions that Google provided in the settings section of the Google Voice account page. So why the failure of the *74 code on the Huawei Mercury and not the Ascend II from several months ago?
They answer most likely comes from Cricket’s need to maintain cost controls and prevent unnecessary interstate long distance and interLTA fees. Cricket doesn’t operate a national fiber backbone for long-distance calling and must pay a provider for the interstate transport. More importantly the intraLATA calls (calls between defined areas within a state) go through a interexchange carrier which also carrier additional charges. These could be the reason why Cricket only allows call-forwarding within local exchange (area code) of the assigned mobile number. Other carriers, MetroPCS, however do allow call forwarding across interLATA boundaries but also may have different rates or transport agreements in place. Still it would make sense that Cricket would connect its POPs in various markets with IP transport instead of TDM SS7 circuits and then terminate the calls on a intraLATA basis. Cricket most likely does do this and yet still keeps the call-forwarding local exchange restriction either as a policy holdover or as originally stated a cost control, albeit a small one.
The answer to the question of why did the *74 conditional call forwarding fail on the Huawei Mercury comes from the different area codes between the two numbers. The original Huawei Ascend II from several months ago had the same area code as my Google Voice number (both Southern California). The new Huawei Mercury was assigned an Austin, Texas 512 area code and therefore if the fine print had been read should not and does not forward to the southern California 619 Google Voice number.
The next question: Will Cricket swap the 512 number for a 619 number or is everything going to be boxed up and shipped back tomorrow?
Not all phones support the automatic Google Voice voicemail integration and require manual conditional call forwarding configuration with * code combination. This was the case with MetroPCS, Cricket, and AT&T and only added a brief step to the configuration. It was a surprise today when configuring a new Huawei Mercury Android phone from Cricket that the *74########## code generated a message that said the feature was not available. A double check of Cricket’s site validated that the $55 Android plan included call forwarding and that the code indeed started with *74. These were the same instructions that Google provided in the settings section of the Google Voice account page. So why the failure of the *74 code on the Huawei Mercury and not the Ascend II from several months ago?
They answer most likely comes from Cricket’s need to maintain cost controls and prevent unnecessary interstate long distance and interLTA fees. Cricket doesn’t operate a national fiber backbone for long-distance calling and must pay a provider for the interstate transport. More importantly the intraLATA calls (calls between defined areas within a state) go through a interexchange carrier which also carrier additional charges. These could be the reason why Cricket only allows call-forwarding within local exchange (area code) of the assigned mobile number. Other carriers, MetroPCS, however do allow call forwarding across interLATA boundaries but also may have different rates or transport agreements in place. Still it would make sense that Cricket would connect its POPs in various markets with IP transport instead of TDM SS7 circuits and then terminate the calls on a intraLATA basis. Cricket most likely does do this and yet still keeps the call-forwarding local exchange restriction either as a policy holdover or as originally stated a cost control, albeit a small one.
The answer to the question of why did the *74 conditional call forwarding fail on the Huawei Mercury comes from the different area codes between the two numbers. The original Huawei Ascend II from several months ago had the same area code as my Google Voice number (both Southern California). The new Huawei Mercury was assigned an Austin, Texas 512 area code and therefore if the fine print had been read should not and does not forward to the southern California 619 Google Voice number.
The next question: Will Cricket swap the 512 number for a 619 number or is everything going to be boxed up and shipped back tomorrow?
blog comments powered by Disqus