Podcasts

Vector 22: Don Melton on transcoding video

Help, How-To & Tips

How to play video, music, and images from your BlackBerry 10 device on TV over DLNA

News & Rumors

BlackBerry 7 still going strong - New promo videos from RIM

BlackBerry Apps

A quick hands on with the newly updated LinkedIn app for BlackBerry smartphones

BlackBerry Apps

Get your shooting action on with Birds on a Wire for BlackBerry PlayBook

International News

BlackBerry success stories from Nigeria

Devices

BlackBerry Curve 9220 Unboxing Video

News & Rumors

How to use BlackBerry Protect on the web

News & Rumors

Extreme Video Chatting on the BlackBerry PlayBook!

News & Rumors

BlackBerry PlayBook 2.0 highlights featured in a new set of commercials from RIM [video]

News & Rumors

Use your BlackBerry Smartphone with BlackBerry Remote to control your PS3, Android tablet and more! [video]

CrackBerry Humor

Gordon Ramsey gives some advice to RIM's new CEO Thorsten Heins on CBC's "This Hour has 22 Minutes"

News & Rumors

Just how strong is Gorilla Glass 2?

CrackBerry Humor

A humorous look at addiction in a new video called BlackBerry - BlackOut (NSFW-L)

Special Coverage

BBM Ugly Sweater Fan Night [video]

PlayBook Games

Vector Stunt for the BlackBerry PlayBook

News & Rumors

A quick look at BlackBerry Management Center

Software Reviews

Review: Madden 12 for the BlackBerry PlayBook [video]

News & Rumors

The opening of the BlackBerry Lifestyle Store in Indonesia [video]

News & Rumors

BlackBerry Bold 9790 Indonesia launch [video]

< >

IfByPhone Debuts For BlackBerry!

By Bla1ze on 18 Mar 2009 09:30 am EDT
0
loading...
0
loading...
0
loading...

Ifbyphone has been released for BlackBerry devices and seeks to expand upon the functionality of your BlackBerry by offering you a wide array of business orientated offerings. If you run a small business or be it a large business, IfByPhone will help you keep you in touch with the people that need it the most. Your clients!

Check out the description of the services below and be sure to have to a look at their free minutes offer as well (we like free!). I can think of many ways I can put this conference calling and voice-broadcast messaging application to use.

Description of services from the press release:

The Ifbyphone application utilizes BlackBerry users’ existing contacts lists, allowing users to create groups of contacts for conference calls or voice-broadcast messages.

Ifbyphone will provide the first 100 minutes of use per month free to users of the application.

Ifbyphone intends to make its BlackBerry application available at RIM’s App World when it opens this spring.

To use the new application’s conference calling function, a BlackBerry user creates a list of participants from among his or her stored contacts and can then initiate an impromptu conference call immediately or schedule a future call, all with one click.

Similarly, to use the voice broadcasting function, the user creates a list of recipients and records a voice message for immediate or future delivery.

The voice broadcasting function would be ideal for a busy sales manager traveling to a client meeting who wants to give instructions to all members of a team of sales reps.

The BlackBerry application is another example of the flexibility of Ifbyphone’s powerful application programming interface (API), which enables developers to create highly innovative applications and integrate telephony into business processes.

Reader comments

IfByPhone Debuts For BlackBerry!

19 Comments

I set it up and went to do a conference call and it came back and told me I couldn't do a call within 30 minutes for attendees that had only 40 minutes scheduled... what the heck is that? I immediately deleted it off my Bold. If you are going to present an App like this.. make sure it makes sense and is easy to use. This needs to go back to the drawing board. No one is going to waste time with this when it is so hard to use.

@Wezra, If you signed up for the "100 free minutes - no credit card" account, then our system won't let you schedule a conference call that would exceed 100 minutes. A 4 person, 30 minute call would trigger a scheduling error.

Please feel free to call our customer service team if you'd like to give it a second chance. 877-295-5100.

Thanks,

Todd Curry
VP of Marketing
Ifbyphone

Installed the app and setup a broadcast. There are a number of computerized prompts you need to go through to setup the broadcast msg and many were cut-off, some were repeated, I was asked to wait for a tone that never came... many problems. I finally managed to complete the broadcast (to my work phone) and 1 hour later (!) I received the broadcast message.

While some aspects of the interface were good, such as being able to select names/numbers from my address book, the app responded slowly and seemed amatuerish. For a free tool I probably wouldn't expect more. However, there's no way I would rely upon this for my business until it goes through some significant improvements.

@dcuozzo,

Sorry to hear you had trouble -- we did experience some difficulties with one of our carriers this afternoon that affected the sign-up process for a handful of users. The problems included not recognizing keypresses and calls that were cut off.

Since we average 99.99% reliability with our call routing, this outage was both unusual and frustrating for us. We're sorry that you were affected.

If you have a paid account, we will reimburse you for the calls that were dropped -- please call our customer service team at 877-295-5100 to discuss with them.

We're grateful that you tried our app out and we aim to improve this app to make it even more useful, so your feedback is appreciated.

Best,

Todd Curry
VP of Marketing
Ifbyphone

I feel that this app could really improve my business. i will give this a real shot just because the VP of marketing is responding to our feed back. Sounds like great service to me. Todd keep up the good work, i love great service maybe more then app. performance.

Uh...Wrong! 'orientated', the preferred spelling and pronunciation of the British, has the same meaning as 'oriented'. Sorry.

From Webster's dictionary:

Main Entry: orientated
Function: adjective
Usage: chiefly British
Date: 1950
: oriented

The correct form is 'oriented.'

Are you suggesting:

A. There are no Brits using this site?
B. There are no Brits in this country?
C. Your statement "there is no such word as orientated" is accurate?
D. My statement that you are wrong, is inaccurate?
E. Webster's does not confirm my statement?

I hope not. All five assertions would also be inaccurate. Stick to math, because you will lose this debate. Badly! A less disingenuous pseudo-intellectual would have clearly delineated the Webster's quote and his/her own misleading quote. The very reference you posted clearly shows that 'orientated' means 'oriented'; therefore, both forms are correct. Let it go. Orientated is a word.

I would love to have seen the look on your face when you went to check this in the dictionary.

And finally, you don't have to be British to use the word - only aware of it.

From Webster's:

Main Entry: ori·ent·ed
Pronunciation: \ˈȯr-ē-ˌen-təd\
Function: adjective
Date: 1937
: intellectually, emotionally, or functionally directed

Nowhere is 'orientated' listed as a synonym, nor is it listed as an option in the thesaurus entry for 'oriented.'

Why? Because it is not the proper form of the word.

If 'orientated' meant something, then Webster's would have had a formal definition listed for it. Instead, they listed the correct form of the word, which is 'oriented' as the definition.

Want more proof? From dictionary.com:

orientated

adjective
adjusted or located in relation to surroundings or circumstances; sometimes used in combination; "the house had its large windows oriented toward the ocean view"; "helping freshmen become oriented to college life"; "the book is value-oriented throughout" [syn: oriented] [ant: unoriented]

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

Hmmm... NOWHERE is the 'orientated' listed in the definition.

You're sort of right in one respect, though. I should have said that 'orientated' is not the CORRECT form of the word, rather than saying it is not a word. There's a difference, and the meaning of what I was saying did not come through well in printed form.

What exactly are your credentials on this? A Ph.D. in mathematics does not automatically exclude me from being knowledgeable on other subjects.

I have seen many English papers that others have turned in where they lost points for using the word 'orientated.' If it's good enough for several English professors (people who have a Ph.D. in English) then it's good enough for me.

Also, why are you the only one chiming in on this? Some innate need to win every disagreement?

Yours is lacking quite a bit more. I've indicated the teaching points (your comments) with quotations marks.

"Main Entry: ori·ent·ed
Pronunciation: \ˈȯr-ē-ˌen-təd\
Function: adjective
Date: 1937
: intellectually, emotionally, or functionally directed

Nowhere is 'orientated' listed as a synonym, nor is it listed as an option in the thesaurus entry for 'oriented.'

Why? Because it is not the proper form of the word.

If 'orientated' meant something, then Webster's would have had a formal definition listed for it. Instead, they listed the correct form of the word, which is 'oriented' as the definition."

OK, this is painful but lets try this (and please stay focused). I am not 'sorta correct' when I say that you are wrong to state that orientated is not a word. I am 100% correct. Are you really disputing this? If not, lets end this here.

But then, you've already refused my request to let it go - so lets try this instead. Apparently, you're trying to define how the dictionary works; I believe you're using the online version of Webster's. You originally posted the entry for 'orientated', the word originally in question (and here's where you need to stay focused). Within THAT main entry is referenced the word 'oriented' (apparently this is not enough to suggest synonymity for you) which, when clicked, gives the definition of both. Now that is only MY abbreviated interpretation of how those entries work, but nowhere in either entry is it stated that 'orientated' (the word in question) is not a word. In both sources you used, oriented is listed as a synonym of 'orientate' (the word in questions). That is a very weak attempt on your part.

"Want more proof? From dictionary.com:"

Let's try not to confuse evidence with proof. They are not always synonymous, and you clearly have not 'proven' that 'orientated' (the word in question) is not a word.

"orientated

adjective
adjusted or located in relation to surroundings or circumstances; sometimes used in combination; "the house had its large windows oriented toward the ocean view"; "helping freshmen become oriented to college life"; "the book is value-oriented throughout" [syn: oriented] [ant: unoriented]

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

Hmmm... NOWHERE is the 'orientated' listed in the definition."

The above is where I have to ask, ARE YOU F'ING KIDDING ME?! First of all, this is not the full result for the entry. The full result clearly demonstrates that 'orientate' and 'orientated' (the word in question) are words. Are you familiar with the abbreviation 'syn' at the bottom of the result? It means that 'orientated' (the word in question) is synonymous with the word Oriented. That is a far cry from stating that the word does not exist. And finally on this 'proof' of yours: I would suggest that in your future writings, you too should avoid using the word you are defining, in the definition.

You appear to be using the abridged version of the World Wide Web. As I have the expanded version, I was able to access the Oxford English Dictionary too (with paid subscription) and a free site called Askoxford.com (I know what you're thinking - what do they know about the English language? Just humor me).

From Ask Oxford:

FAQ

Which is the correct spelling: 'oriented' or 'orientated'?
Printer Friendly Version
It really doesn't matter: it's a matter of personal taste. Orientated is currently preferred use in general British use. Oriented is prevalent in technical use, and in the US.

I hope this helps. I could find no evidence in the above, that 'orientated' (the word in in question) is not a word.

"You're sort of right in one respect, though. I should have said that 'orientated' is not the CORRECT form of the word, rather than saying it is not a word. There's a difference, and the meaning of what I was saying did not come through well in printed form."

I already addressed the "sort of right" part. However, had your comment been worded as suggested above, you would have been incorrect. I believe what you're grasping for is the word 'preferred'. Both oriented and and orientated (the word in question)are 'correct'. And as there are most certainly Brits who frequent this site, who are you to determine which is preferred - or even proper?

"What exactly are your credentials on this? A Ph.D. in mathematics does not automatically exclude me from being knowledgeable on other subjects."

This is as appropriate a point as any to retract the pseudo-intellectual comment. That was little harsh. There. Retracted. (Caution: Backhand alert!) My credentials are irrelevant, and I doubt you would believe me. For the purpose of this discussion, let's just say I'm a guy who educated a Ph.D. (they usually thank me when they achieve such status). I am certain that in obtaining your Ph.D. in mathematics, you've become knowledgeable in many areas. However, you've provided neither proof nor evidence of knowledge of this subject. Given your (albeit weak) concession above, why would you even bother to offer "proof" that 'orientated' (the word in question) is not a word?

"I have seen many English papers that others have turned in where they lost points for using the word 'orientated.' If it's good enough for several English professors (people who have a Ph.D. in English) then it's good enough for me."

You appear to be making a few assumptions there. Those aside, are you suggesting that all of that status are of equal knowledge of the English language; none have greater knowledge than the others? Perhaps you are suggesting that you have only come into contact with those that are the most knowledgeable. Those are very impressive institutions you've attended. But I digress. Wouldn't it be silly to choose credentials over what is clearly right or wrong; to allow authority to go unquestioned - even when you know better (pssst Think altar boys)?

"Also, why are you the only one chiming in on this? Some innate need to win every disagreement?"

I believe YOU were the only one "chiming in" on the author's use of the word 'orientated' (the word in question), so I don't see your point. But I must tell you, I thought I was doing you a favor. I suspect you've 'corrected' more than one person on this. I would hate to see you having to defend your position with facts, in a life or death situation. No need to thank me. This was never a matter of winning or losing since 'orientated' is, in fact, a word - regardless of your response. Now ask yourself (and be honest - no one needs to know) - were you even aware that the word existed at all? Of course not. And had you been aware, would you have posted "orientated is not the preferred form of the word here in America (despite the fact that this site is accessed by citizens of several countries)? Of course not, that would be silly - no, that would be idiotic.

My original post was not driven by any need, but rather a desire to rid all forums (and the world - but I'll start small) of those who fail to recognize that effective communication of one's thoughts is sometimes far more important than 'proper' communication of the same - again, they are not always synonymous. Your offense was minor, but again, I thought I was doing you a favor. One should be careful when making such absolute statements.

Again, your thanks are not necessary, but I must insist that you cry Uncle.

Yawn. You are boring me with your ignorance.

Now if you'll excuse me, this "pseudo-intellectual" has a couple of papers to get published.

Because orientated is not a word? You are a funny guy. Yes, you are so bored, you came back and read every word and then took the time to post your weak response. You are a joke and what's worse is that you're a bad joke. No bully likes to be bullied, but I warned you that you would lose a debate on this topic badly. The important thing is that you've learned something. Here's a homework assignment for you: Go to dictionary.com and merriam-websters.com and type in 'zdregiite'. The results are what you should expect when attempting to look up a word that doesn't exist - not a definition.

All things considered, when it comes to the English language, you are indeed a pseudo-intellectual. I was being kind. If you are to be believed, you are further proof that even those holding a Ph.D. can be unwavering in their idiocy.

I hope your papers don't require research (of course not - you know it all), because you are sorely lacking in that area. Now if you'll excuse me, this poster has several writings to edit.