I use a Google Voice number that is associated with a Gmail account that I do not use for any other purpose (Hangouts/Talk or otherwise). It doesn't even have a Google+ account associated with it.
It's nice to have single number that can ring all my lines.
I have Google Voice. I don't use it for outbound calls, just inbound. I'm porting it out to Twilio. $1/month for keeping the number plus $0.01/minute to receive calls (http://www.twilio.com/voice/pricing).
It'll be more complicated, but I'm not terribly shocked I have to replace yet another Google service with an outside solution.
Hurry up Mailpile.is! Before I have to move out of Gmail!
True, but this is Hacker News. We're not the typical audience.
With regards to costlier, yes, pennies per minute are more than free Google Voice. But if Google Voice is going away in the traditional sense, having another option is worthwhile even if you must pay for it.
... which will then require you to log in with a Google Plus-upgraded account. I have two Gmail accounts, and can't use the hangouts feature on one of them (in the browser or through their client) without enabling Plus.
Google's login system is horribly broken. They seem to have to reinvent a method for handling the multi account scenario in every product.
The resistance to adding G+ to accounts seems Sisphyean. Larry Page clearly envisions a common integrate identity systems across the product tree and I don't think anyone is going to stop him.
A common identity system across the product tree is not a bad thing actually. If it were there from the beginning nobody would complain about this whole thing now.
The problem is that they wanted to brand this move as "hey g+ify your account".
It probably has something to do with the change in terms and conditions. I guess they could have forced everybody to this new terms and conditions (or leave) but instead they let people choose to use google products with the old terms and conditions by letting users to actively opt in to g+ (ehm, some might say "tricked", but that's another story).
What I wanted to say is that usually people look at this whole thing as an evil move, but hey all the companies around amend their terms and conditions and usually don't let you a choice about whether you want to be part of a new incarnation of the service, or not yet.
Note: I'm not talking in favour or against the actual terms and conditions (e.g. the real name policy), this is an orthogonal issue. I have the feeling that in the end it all boils down to this.
Anyway, this is so confusing. The fact that we are still talking about all this crap means that the was a failure in communication.
I wish there was a way to switch to this new identity system, and then disable G+ for your account. This would make so many people happy and probably it won't reduce the number of new G+ users by much.
Fair enough. But the GP seemed to be worried about inbound call forwarding through Google Voice numbers, which I imagine will continue to work even without using the Hangouts client, which would mean you don't have to use G+.
I find Voice to be incredibly useful when wanting to conduct business with someone once and then have no connection to them again. Such as Craigslist. Every time I list, it is a disposable number.
I've used Voip.ms as my primary phone service for years and it's been very reliable. Voip.ms is one of only two VoIP services that has a Gold Award at DSLReports:
I also have a Google Voice account, but the service is less reliable than Voip.ms, and I only use it to call a couple of family members who use Google Voice as their primary phone service.
I use a Google Voice number that is associated with a Gmail account that I do not use for any other purpose (Hangouts/Talk or otherwise). It doesn't even have a Google+ account associated with it.
It's nice to have single number that can ring all my lines.
If/when this is killed, what's the alternative?
(Article appears to be down/inaccessible for me).