AT&T's announces NumberSync, a phone number-based version of Apple's Continuity

Posted:
in iPhone edited November 2015
While Apple's Continuity feature allows users to place calls and texts within its own ecosystem of products, AT&T plans to bring those same capabilities to a range of LTE-capable devices sharing the same phone number, regardless of platform, thanks to a new service called NumberSync.




Apple's Continuity requires devices running iOS 8 or OS X 10.10 Yosemite or later, and they must be connected to an iPhone via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi for features such as SMS text messages and traditional phone calls.

But AT&T NumberSync will operate on the carrier's wireless network with LTE-connected, registered devices, meaning it isn't dependent on a Bluetooth connection to the user's smartphone. NumberSync will work even if a user's smartphone isn't near their other devices, or even if it's completely turned off.
While Apple's Continuity is free with the company's latest hardware and software and an Apple ID, AT&T NumberSync will require an LTE-connected device registered to a shared data plan.
Though AT&T's announcement on Wednesday didn't specifically mention Apple, the carrier said it's working to bring it to future connected devices, regardless of hardware manufacturer or operating system. AT&T plans to bring the first NumberSync device to market "soon," with additional devices set to launch this holiday.

"We're taking a standards-based, network approach that will make connecting a wide variety of devices easier to give you a better user experience," AT&T Chief Marketing Officer David Christopher said in a blog post. "Our plan is for NumberSync to become the norm on a variety of our future connected 'devices.'"

NumberSync will work with tablets and wearable devices with integrated cellular radios. It will be offered at no extra charge beyond the $10-per-device fee AT&T charges per month for a connected tablet or smartwatch.

That means that at launch, Wi-Fi-only devices -- like the Apple Watch, Apple's Mac lineup, or certain iPad models --?won't feature compatibility. In comments to Engadget, the company said only LTE-compatible devices officially added to a Mobile Share data plan will work.

Apple's Continuity, meanwhile, is free for users who own an up-to-date iPhone, iPad or Mac.

There are also technical changes that device makers, including Apple, will need to make if NumberSync will come to their platform. For example, the iOS Phone and Messages apps would need to be modified to support AT&T's NumberSync network.

Though NumberSync won't work with Wi-Fi, AT&T did begin enabling Wi-Fi calling for iOS 9 users last week, giving subscribers the ability to place calls via their home wireless network and bypass its own LTE signal. Rivals T-Mobile and Sprint have offered Wi-Fi calling on compatible devices for some time.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 34
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    "It will be offered at no extra charge beyond the $10-per-device..."

    In plain language: it will be offered at an extra charge.
  • Reply 2 of 34
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,369member
    Sounds dumb and doomed to failure.
  • Reply 3 of 34
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 6,092member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post



    "It will be offered at no extra charge beyond the $10-per-device..."



    In plain language: it will be offered at an extra charge.



    Funny.  That is precisely how I interpreted it.  



    I absolutely love Continuity on OSX.  I use it extensively, and it works really nice.  Kind of difficult now wondering how I managed prior to it.



    AT&T really should just stick to what it knows best.  It is not a software company and the logistics of getting devices from a multitude of different companies is a daunting task to say the least.  For me, there is no way I would "pay no extra charge after the $10" to get this feature that is included with OSX/iOS for free, and no way would I trust AT&T to keep such a system working seamlessly on an Apple-level.



    Stick to being the pipe for mobile.  Even with just that, you're barely able to keep that working.

  • Reply 4 of 34
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    This is great example of how a feature comes into existence because someone in the engineering department says, hey, this is possible so let's do it. Completely opposite of the way Apple functions, which can be described as designers thinking about what would be best for the user experience, regardless of whether it's possible or not, then telling engineering to 'make this possible.' AT&T getting into the software platform business is a huge joke.
  • Reply 5 of 34
    neilmneilm Posts: 985member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

    Apple's Continuity requires devices running iOS 8 or OS X 10.10 Yosemite or later, and they must be connected to an iPhone via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi for features such as SMS text messages and traditional phone calls.

     

    No, they must be connected via Bluetooth or be on the same WiFi network. Both, obviously, are local network only.

     

    AT&T's variant works via their LTE cellular service, and so over a wide area network. This is fundamentally different, but only time will tell whether people will find it useful – or worth the extra cost

  • Reply 6 of 34
    genovellegenovelle Posts: 1,480member
    And there my friend is why AT&T are afraid. They fear their voice usage and text will go down because if they are on the same network and wifi calling in implemented, there network is bypassed automatically. Over time customers with lower their plans.
  • Reply 7 of 34
    ahmlcoahmlco Posts: 432member
    Had this idea a couple of years ago. Why can't I, for example, have an iPhone 6s Plus and an iPhone 5s and just pick whichever device I need for the day?

    Or use the Plus for my workday and slip the smaller 5s into my pocket if I'm going out for the evening and I don't need the super-phone with me?
  • Reply 8 of 34
    ahmlcoahmlco Posts: 432member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post



    "It will be offered at no extra charge beyond the $10-per-device..."



    In plain language: it will be offered at an extra charge.



    No, in plain language it will be offered for the $10 you already pay to put a cellular iPad or other device on a shared account.

  • Reply 9 of 34
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post



    And there my friend is why AT&T are afraid. They fear their voice usage and text will go down because if they are on the same network and wifi calling in implemented, there network is bypassed automatically. Over time customers with lower their plans.



    They're not afraid, and you're not my friend. They're simply changing with the times.

     

    It'd be bad PR not to offer calling over WiFi. And with the proliferation of LTE-enabled mobile devices, it only makes sense to assign multiple devices to a single phone number.

     

    This will effectively extend Apple's Continuity-type functionality to multiple cellular devices, enabling calls/messages to be sent/received on any of them.

     

    On the contrary, as customers enjoy this enhanced functionality they will be MORE likely to extend their data plans. AT&T is already proportionately reducing the prices of its larger data packages.

     

    Please knock off this incessant AT&T bashing.

  • Reply 10 of 34
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member

    so.. this is useful for those people who leave their iPhones at home but have their LTE enabled iPad with them?  :???:

  • Reply 11 of 34
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post



    And there my friend is why AT&T are afraid. They fear their voice usage and text will go down because if they are on the same network and wifi calling in implemented, there network is bypassed automatically. Over time customers with lower their plans.



    They're not afraid, and you're not my friend. They're simply changing with the times.

     

    It'd be bad PR not to offer calling over WiFi. And with the proliferation of LTE-enabled mobile devices, it only makes sense to assign multiple devices to a single phone number.

     

    This will effectively extend Apple's Continuity-type functionality to multiple cellular devices, enabling calls/messages to be sent/received on any of them.

     

    On the contrary, as customers enjoy this enhanced functionality they will be MORE likely to extend their data plans. AT&T is already proportionately reducing the prices of its larger data packages.

     

    Please knock off this incessant AT&T bashing.




    Of course you would disclose if you were associated with AT&T in any way.  right?

  • Reply 12 of 34
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,842moderator
    danielsw wrote: »

    They're not afraid, and you're not my friend. They're simply changing with the times.

    It'd be bad PR not to offer calling over WiFi. And with the proliferation of LTE-enabled mobile devices, it only makes sense to assign multiple devices to a single phone number.

    This will effectively extend Apple's Continuity-type functionality to multiple cellular devices, enabling calls/messages to be sent/received on any of them.

    On the contrary, as customers enjoy this enhanced functionality they will be MORE likely to extend their data plans. AT&T is already proportionately reducing the prices of its larger data packages.

    Please knock off this incessant AT&T bashing.

    I think the problem with this whole story is that the capability is being compared with Apple's Continuity feature. I don't see how AT&T is going to be able to allow me to continue composing a document or working on a spreadsheet on my no-name Android phone or tablet that I began on my Windows desktop in OpenOffice, or even in MS-Office. This AT&T capability is likely far less functionally than Apple's Continuity. Also, Apple's solution recognizes that your devices are highly likely to be in proximity to one another when you are switching off from one to another. You don't really need your iPad, at home, to continuously synch with your iPhone while you're out and about, as you can't grab you iPad at that moment (unless you have really long arms). It's appropriate for the two devices to synch at the last moment as you're walking through your front door. After a day of activity on your iPhone, you arrive home, the devices synch in the time it takes you to walk in, drop your keys and pick up the iPad. No long distance over-LTE synching needed. So what AT&T is offering, and how it's being characterized, invites bashing and negative comparisons to Apple's Continuity. Perhaps it should have been described without reference to Apple's capabilities.
  • Reply 13 of 34
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by genovelle View Post



    And there my friend is why AT&T are afraid. They fear their voice usage and text will go down because if they are on the same network and wifi calling in implemented, there network is bypassed automatically. Over time customers with lower their plans.



    I was under the impression that AT&T makes money either way because the call or text is still processed through their central office network regardless of how it gets to your phone (ATT cell tower, ATT microcell via YOUR broadband, or YOUR wifi via YOUR broadband).  Makes no difference form a billing point of view.  They only saving that I can think of is avoiding roaming costs.

  • Reply 14 of 34
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RadarTheKat View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DanielSW View Post





    They're not afraid, and you're not my friend. They're simply changing with the times.



    It'd be bad PR not to offer calling over WiFi. And with the proliferation of LTE-enabled mobile devices, it only makes sense to assign multiple devices to a single phone number.



    This will effectively extend Apple's Continuity-type functionality to multiple cellular devices, enabling calls/messages to be sent/received on any of them.



    On the contrary, as customers enjoy this enhanced functionality they will be MORE likely to extend their data plans. AT&T is already proportionately reducing the prices of its larger data packages.



    Please knock off this incessant AT&T bashing.




    I think the problem with this whole story is that the capability is being compared with Apple's Continuity feature. I don't see how AT&T is going to be able to allow me to continue composing a document or working on a spreadsheet on my no-name Android phone or tablet that I began on my Windows desktop in OpenOffice, or even in MS-Office. This AT&T capability is likely far less functionally than Apple's Continuity. Also, Apple's solution recognizes that your devices are highly likely to be in proximity to one another when you are switching off from one to another. You don't really need your iPad, at home, to continuously synch with your iPhone while you're out and about, as you can't grab you iPad at that moment (unless you have really long arms). It's appropriate for the two devices to synch at the last moment as you're walking through your front door. After a day of activity on your iPhone, you arrive home, the devices synch in the time it takes you to walk in, drop your keys and pick up the iPad. No long distance over-LTE synching needed. So what AT&T is offering, and how it's being characterized, invites bashing and negative comparisons to Apple's Continuity. Perhaps it should have been described without reference to Apple's capabilities.



    maybe I am mistaken but I thought Continuity and Hand-Off were two separate things.

  • Reply 15 of 34
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ahmlco View Post



    Had this idea a couple of years ago. Why can't I, for example, have an iPhone 6s Plus and an iPhone 5s and just pick whichever device I need for the day?



    Or use the Plus for my workday and slip the smaller 5s into my pocket if I'm going out for the evening and I don't need the super-phone with me?

     

    A lot of nay-sayers here, but I agree with you. We should be long past the day where phones/devices to phone numbers is a 1-1 relationship. Apple partially solves the problem with Continuity, which even includes non-cellular devices. But the limitations are that they have to be on the same wi-fi network or within BT range of each other, and that it only works with Apple devices. What if I left my iPhone at home, or lost it? Wouldn't it be nice if I could still get calls to my phone number routed to my cellular connected iPad?

     

    The case above (owning two phones) could be solved using Google Voice, but there are pros and cons with that. But whether by Google or the carrier, this would even allow you to, for example, use your giant Samsung phablet at work but then switch your svelte iPhone when you aren't at work. Imagine that...being allowed to use the best tool for the job without being locked into any one company's ecosystem!

     

    I'd even extend the concept to have "family numbers." My wife and I each having our own, private phone numbers, but also another number that would ring both our phones. Again, I could to that with Google Voice. Apple could even do that by their association of AppleIDs under the family sharing umbrella if they wanted to, but you'd still have the same limitations (same wifi/bluetooth network and only Apple devices allowed to play).

  • Reply 16 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by snova View Post

     



    I was under the impression that AT&T makes money either way because the call or text is still processed through their central office network regardless of how it gets to your phone (ATT cell tower, ATT microcell via YOUR broadband, or YOUR wifi via YOUR broadband).  Makes no difference form a billing point of view.  They only saving that I can think of is avoiding roaming costs.




    AT&T's not charging any minutes for WiFi calling, even for metered plans. I checked on the billed minutes on the website. Voice minutes are worthless anyway, my company buys long distance minutes at around 1/10 to 1/4th of a cent/min, rounded to 6 seconds. They want you to feel that you're getting value for voice minutes, even though voice use has plummeted.

  • Reply 17 of 34
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by konqerror View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snova View Post

     



    I was under the impression that AT&T makes money either way because the call or text is still processed through their central office network regardless of how it gets to your phone (ATT cell tower, ATT microcell via YOUR broadband, or YOUR wifi via YOUR broadband).  Makes no difference form a billing point of view.  They only saving that I can think of is avoiding roaming costs.




    AT&T's not charging any minutes for WiFi calling, even for metered plans. I checked on the billed minutes on the website. Voice minutes are worthless anyway, my company buys long distance minutes at around 1/10 to 1/4th of a cent/min, rounded to 6 seconds. They want you to feel that you're getting value for voice minutes, even though voice use has plummeted.


     

    http://www.eweek.com/mobile/att-rolls-out-wifi-calling-for-ios-9-users.html

    "Callers will continue to use their existing mobile phone numbers and will be able to make and receive calls as they normally would on the cellular network. No separate app or configuration is needed. There are no additional costs for the service for calls to U.S. phone numbers. "



    "AT&T customers can make and receive unlimited domestic calls within the U.S., Puerto Rico, and U.S. Virgin Islands at no additional charge using WiFi, according to the company.

     

    International long distance rates apply for calls made to international numbers. Text messages sent or received using WiFi will be counted and charged under a user's existing rate plan."

  • Reply 18 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post

     

     

    No, they must be connected via Bluetooth or be on the same WiFi network. Both, obviously, are local network only.

     

    AT&T's variant works via their LTE cellular service, and so over a wide area network. This is fundamentally different, but only time will tell whether people will find it useful – or worth the extra cost




    For phone calls, yes. But you don't need to be connected to the same network to use SMS forwarding from the phone.

  • Reply 19 of 34
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Does everyone get their phone number synced with the NSA?
  • Reply 20 of 34
    Yes you do. If you drive halfway across town, you won't get a text message from your other device. Only iMessage works like that. And if you forgot to forward your calls on your other device then you're screwed. I have two phones. One for work and a personal phone. Would be great to leave one in the car and just carry my main iPhone everywhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.