Ignite Home Phone - TV Call Display

[markhammike]

Call Display not appearing on the TV on Ignite! It did before on cable!

*Added Labels*

[-G- · Accepted solution]

> Call Display not appearing on the TV on Ignite! It did before on cable!

On-screen Call Display is not supported with Ignite TV.

[JerryCurtis]

Well, that sucks! Just as the loss of a clock display in the system.

[BramptonBud]

It really sucks and nothing about the loss of this feature was mentioned in the promotion of Ignite!

[JerryCurtis]

I find it a little difficult to believe that a company like Rogers - size... expertise in phones and cable TV and other communications areas - couldn't make this work if they wanted to. They just are not making it a priority.

[raymorgan]

This is so very disappointing.  Converted today.  I require this for a hearing-impaired member of the family. 

I guess I'm switching back tomorrow.

[57]

---

@raymorgan wrote: I guess I'm switching back tomorrow.

---

FYI, If you're talking about switching back to Rogers Legacy Digital Cable, it's highly unlikely that Rogers will let you.  Switching to IgniteTV is usually a one-way street. Everyone is being migrated to IgniteTV.

[blunks_249]

No call display really sucks, surely this is a step backwards, so much for technology,I’ll be looking for another provider.

[ColdGranite]

|  No call display really sucks,

Well,  it does and it doesn't.

Today's technology allows you to have a wireless phone at your elbow in your favorite viewing spot... and so you can easily pick it up and look at the call-display on the phone.

You can even have the phone announce the caller in voice.

The "necessity" of call-display on the TV is much diminished as there are other ways to accomplish the same goal... which is to see (or hear) the number without having to get up.

[Pauly]

It's all about the Queen Elizabeth's. If Rogers wants to invest in a feature or service they need to know they will get a proper return on their investment, in this case they must have done the math and decided against doing such. We all know home phone landlines are dying in popularity.

[BramptonBud]

Rogers, the supposedly high tech company, is unwilling or unable to detect the difference between the originating number and the number that they display to us, and cancel the call if they’re different. The scammers aren’t paying Rogers for their services, we are! Rogers should never allow these calls to get through to us! We have had to put up with up to ten or more of these annoying calls in a day! We don’t sit with a phone in our hands while watching TV to check to see who is calling. If the caller’s number was displayed on the TV, as in the past, the decision to answer or not would be a lot easier but that’s not a solution. The calls have to be blocked! If Rogers isn’t capable of blocking these calls they should publish an understandable explanation, if they have one, of why they aren’t willing or capable of doing so!

[ColdGranite]

Well, I am not up on the ease or difficulty of blocking spoofed numbers at source.

And perhaps I don't get as many of those as you do... although it is more than zero per day.

But I have adopted an SOP that i do not  answer anything that is not in my phone's "phonebook", unless they leave a message.  With talking-caller-id, I do not need to be anywhere close to the phone, especially with 3 or 4 or more wireless handsets scattered around the place.

I don't really disagree with you... just that the "problem" can be handled in another way.

[harjo]

I have a feeling if a large number of people put this out there on social media Rogers would probably come up with a solution sooner rather than later. So lets get at it.

[bmg3]

Well, that just sucks! Had I known that…..

Surely Roger’s can do better!