For the past coulple of weeks i have been trying to set up caller id in the UK, with little success.
There is not a problem with POS software but with bt and modems.
I spent £40 on a zoom modem "recommended" which is supposed to support uk caller id, but will only work if connected to the internet.
Email from Zoom. All the V92 modems support caller ID within the V92 protocol. This mean it works with Netwaiting (modem on hold).
You must be connected to an ISP that supports V.92 and has Modem on Hold enabled. We do not support it with other software.
I then spoke to one of the other forum members, The Zoom Model only shows caller ID when it is in call waiting mode when connected to the Interent, Secondly, even with a US Robotics 56K fax modem, which does pick up the caller ID from a BT land line it does not seem to be able to hold the info. So the first few times it will come through fine, but then it will stop inexplicably. You can restart the modem server and the functionality will return, only to stop again.
Even in other forums people have the same problems with different software.
Does any one have caller id working in the uk as this is a really useful feature in POS and it seems a waste not to be able to use it.
Does anyone have an answer ?
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:39 am
- Location: UK
You may want to consider switching to a non-modem solution such as CallerID.com's "Whozz Calling" unit. I am pretty sure that they have a UK ready version available.
Scott
Scott
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:39 am
- Location: UK
As no other solution seemed available have bitten the bullet and bought a caller id unit, not cheap, but has solved the problem and works great.
If you can afford it would definately recommend it.
Dont forget with the current strong exchange rate its just over £125.
Thier website is in the reply above from scott.
If you can afford it would definately recommend it.
Dont forget with the current strong exchange rate its just over £125.
Thier website is in the reply above from scott.