Sprint and Google Voice

It looks Google Voice and Sprint will get things started in just a few days, as the above flyer is now floating around the Internet.  In case you haven't been paying attention, Sprint customers will soon have the option to use their mobile number for their Google voice number, without porting, fees, or wizardry. 

They've been testing things for a little over a month now, and after a few initial hiccups, folks are saying it's working well.  Most of us here rely on Google Voice, and what Sprint and Google are offering is pretty nice.  I think everyone that it's available to should give it a test run.  Thanks, Randy and anonymous!

 
There are 84 comments

bkj216 says:

Only if Google would let me manage 2 numbers on one account....uggh this would be so useful tho

bawolfe says:

I am in the beta testing group. I reported a bug early on and got a /phone call/ from a googler to get more details and help resolve it. Pretty nice response I thought.

icebike says:

Ok, but being a beta tester, perhaps you can answer this:

How is this different than using Google Voice as a voicemail only service (which you can do with any carrier, and does not require a separate google Voice number)?

Does it still allow ringing multiple phones (home phones, etc)?

Phylar says:

Don't need to be a beta tester to answer that, just need to know how to look things up on the internet.

Your GV and Sprint number are one - before, someone calls you on your GV number, and you call them back on your cell, they will see the caller ID of your cell, not your GV. So I have gotten most of my friends to text me on my GV number, but they still accidentially text me on my cell cause I still call them back on that number. with this, it would disappear, and GV will be the end all be all, and I could call and text from my Xoom or PC or whatever and no one on the end could tell the difference :)

jaykingofgay says:

"Your GV and Sprint number are one - before, someone calls you on your GV number, and you call them back on your cell, they will see the caller ID of your cell, not your GV."

Not exactly true. If you have the GV app, you can make outgoing calls using GV and the recipient will see your GV number, not your regular cell phone number.

icebike says:

A, sorry but you haven't answered the question, and what you post is pretty much not true. You always get the choice of how your GV number works. So next time, maybe look that stuff up on the internet?

The question was about how it differs from using google voice WITHOUT a separate Google Voice number. (Google Voice Lite).

But never mind, I found the differences in this chart:

http://www.google.com/support/voice/bin/answer.py?answer=164819

Impulses says:

Is it me or is there an error on that chart? It seems to indicate you can't use GV for voicemail if using your Sprint # with GV, there's just a checkmark missing next to that feature no?

chefkeyser says:

I am a beta tester to, but when I go to switch my GV number to my Sprint number, it's trying to charge a 20 dollar porting fee. How'd you do this? I can't find anything on it.

tailsthecat3 says:

so nexus s and xoom training start the 25th and theyre launching this the 26th. come on nexus. cause i dont wanna wait /hopeful

randyist says:

No problem and thanks to you guys for all of the great Android News!

linh.nguyen says:

Does anyone know what happens to your current GV number if you opt to have your sprint number be your GV number?

thecarline says:

It will replace your GV number; your old GV number will still be active for 3 months tho.

RoccOn16v says:

Can I keep it somehow? Associate it with another account and have that forward to my current cellphone like my GV does now?

linh.nguyen says:

well that blows. I want to keep both numbers. Guess I won't bother with this.

bawolfe says:

You could just open a second google account for the sprint+gv number and keep the other gv number attached to your current account. Android phones are pretty good about supporting multiple accounts.

mtmjr90 says:

Personally, I'm going to make my current GV number my Sprint number and eliminate my Sprint number:)

I really don't get what the big deal about this is...I like having the App and using 2 numbers. I'm not interested in the slightest

thecarline says:

Here is how I'm going to be using it:
Replace my current GV number with my cellphone number
Now, when I am in my house in an area where I have a poor mobile signal but wifi access; I go into airplane mode, which cuts all of my radios, then turn on wifi. (You can do this, I've tested).

Now, anytime someone calls/texts my cell phone, I will get the call/text through my wifi connection. This is especially nice considering that being in my basement can absolutely kill my battery in my Evo because it's consistently searching for a wireless signal or has a poor signal already in the basement. Basically; you're getting the ability to edit your sprint account and get one of those airrave units but it will respond to all wifi connections, not just at a home location.

Additional benefits include online transcript/online backup of text messages as well as the ability to respond to text messages through my Chrome browser.

jaykingofgay says:

"Additional benefits include online transcript"

You can get that while still having both numbers, all you have to do is have your phone send voicemail to GV instead of your carrier. It's really simple to do. I've never used Sprint's voicemail setup, everything goes to GV.

I guess this is for all those people who actually didn't want another number.

I wanted another number so my cell# can be private.

thecarline says:

O sorry; I meant online transcript of your text messages; not your voicemails. I mean that is there too; but I already have had that setup. It's rather easy

jaykingofgay says:

how do you transcribe a text message?

icebike says:

Now, anytime someone calls/texts my cell phone, I will get the call/text through my wifi connection.

As far as I know, Google never delivers phone calls over wifi.

linh.nguyen says:

but they will deliver the call to google chat.. which is what that person was eluding to I believe. I'm not an android user, so not sure ifyou can access that via your phone

icebike says:

Well, Google Chat(did you mean Google Talk?) won't let take a call on my Nexus One over wifi.

It will on a desktop computer or by using gmail on a desktop.

But I don't have his phone, so maybe that is something sprint added?

Nirvana328 says:

Internet call (wifi only) and SIP account settings were introduced in Gingerbread. I haven't tried it personally but it sounds like all the pieces are in place for this to work.

Personally I would love for Google to stream line the whole process. Then eventually I could only pay my carrier for a data connection and be done with their ridiculous charges...(end day dream)

icebike says:

It does work with a SIP account. I use it.

But it's nothing to do with google voice.

I would like to know how you get calls through your Wifi....

Do you have to be running 2.3?

It's all about options :)

I'm like you are -- i need that second number to give out, because I separate business from pleasure. Other folks will like the fact that they can now ring all their phones from one number, and it's the same number they've been using for years.

I see the draw both ways

sfasu77 says:

What about using MMS? If Google Voice takes the place of your texting app.. won't MMS fail every time? I love GV.. but i also use my regular number to send/receive MMS via the stock texting app.

purebishop says:

If you choose to use your Google Voice number as the primary number,
MMS will still go to your original Sprint number, as stated in the Sprint FAQ about Google Voice. I'm not sure what would happen if you ported your Sprint number to Google Voice, though.

harold42483 says:

Hmm thinking about it maybe this is why we haven't seen gingerbread for the HTC evo. Maybe they are waiting for this so they can incorporate it into the OS

stopsign002 says:

The fact that they are giving us this option is pure awesome sauce. Plan and simple

tnolte says:

The other problem with text messaging is that Google Voice doesn't support shortcodes. Basically forget about using SMS with Twitter and Facebook to name a few.

You can still use your phones stock SMS app and it will work just fine. You just cant send them from the GV App.

lornaevo says:

All I care about is the anytime minutes usage.

Insp_Gadget says:

Nice!

another great option for all sprint users what more needs to be said sprints rocking it

Marty1781 says:

Hi everyone, I have a few questions, hopefully someone can help me out:

1. The chart here (http://www.google.com/support/voice/bin/answer.py?answer=164819) shows that when you use your Sprint number as your GV number, you do NOT get GV voicemail. Is that true? I thought I specifically remember reading that enabling GV with your Sprint number automatically disables the Sprint voicemail and simultaneously enablse GV voicemail? Perhaps I am misinterpreting the chart?

2. Relatedly, assuming that enabling GV with my Sprint number does enable GV voicemail, how do I access the new voicemails on my phone (Evo)? It sounds like the Sprint visual voicemail app will no longer work. Will new voicemails still be of the visual voicemail variety or will I now need to call my own number to access them old-school style? Do I need to install the GV app to now access them?

3. If I elect to use my Sprint number as my GV number, can I continue to use the HTC messaging app on my Evo to send/receive SMS/MMS messages? Or do I need to install and use the GV app to do this?

Sorry about all the questions and thank for any assistance that you can provide.

mattchew86 says:

I apologize that I am unable to answer your question, but I have one of my own.

If I port my number over to GV, does that mean I can switch to a straight data-only plan?

If that's an option, then I'm in. If not, then its nothing more than a waste of time.

Marty1781 says:

No offense, but if you have a question, then you need to start your own new topic within the comments, not hijack mine. By doing what you did, you only encourage others to do the same (see below) and you take the focus away from my questions. To start a new thread, do NOT click "reply." Instead, type your question(s) in the box that is below "post new comment" towards the bottom of the page.

mattchew86 says:

......ok......?

I didn't think that posting a question on here was going to get people so pissed off.

Next time I have a question, I'll just keep it to myself. That way I wont have to worry about getting a response from a 4 year old.

Way to be a douchebag about it.

Offense taken.

Edit: By the way, here's a little tidbit I stumbled across concerning voicemail. http://www.google.com/googlevoice/sprint/

Have a nice day ;)

Marty1781 says:

It is clear that you have failed to comprehend the point of my post and have reacted very much like the 4 year old you accuse me of acting like. No one is telling you not to ask questions. In fact, asking questions is very much encouraged. However, how would you feel if you had questions you wanted answered and then someone came along and changed the topic of the discussion preventing you from getting the answers you were seeking? It is simple common courtesy that if you have a question that differs or takes the focus away from the established topic at hand, you start a new thread or topic. Changing the subject of an established thread/topic simply so that you can get the answers YOU want at the cost of someone else not getting their answers is just plain selfish. Instead, why not show just some common courtesy and start a new thread/topic within the comments section. Its simple, easy, and gives everyone the opportunity to obtain the answers they are seeking. There's no need to get rude and start calling someone else a "douchebag" simply because you acted selfishly and someone called you out on it.

mattchew86 says:

If someone asked another question after me that was on a different subject, I would do my best to answer the question, if I had the answer they were looking for.

Or if it was a good question that I had some interest in, I would await a response.

Its happened before.

I would not however get upset and/or throw a hissy fit because someone changes the subject. It happens all the time. No big deal.

And judging by the post below me, I'm not the only one who thinks you were out of line.

If you're worried about getting your questions answered before everyone else, without interruption, go post in the forums.

Marty1781 says:

Just because its "happened before" or because someone else agrees with your selfish behavior doesn't make it right or proper. Seems you simply didn't like being called out and instead of offering a simple apology or just moving on, you felt the need to launch a personal attack and are now suggesting that I ask my questions elsewhere. I didn't realize that treating other members with basic respect and common courtesy was asking so much.

mattchew86 says:

I didn't see anything in your replies that even hinted at courtesy or respect.

And I don't mind being called out....if I'm doing something wrong. That has also happened before, and I apologized to the parties involved.

And what do I have to apologize for? An inconvenience? Really?

And finally, yes, I did ask you to post your questions somewhere else where people won't inconvenience you.

It seems people on here are getting on your nerves, so I'm suggesting you go somewhere where that won't happen. Respectfully.

Marty1781 says:

When you call someone a "douchebag," that shows a lack of courtesy and respect. I kept things civil with you and certainly didn't launch any type of personal attacks. You say you don't mind being called out but your actions/response (i.e. your "douchebag" comment) tell a very different and contradicting story. Therefore, before you go lecturing anyone on courtesy and respect, you may wish to revisit your own comments.

Furthermore, I don't know how taking someone else's thread/topic and changing the subject so that you can selfishly get the answers YOU want is not "wrong" or rude at the very least. But hey, I guess if its been done before, its ok to keep doing it again, especially if one other person agrees with you. Therefore, no apologies needed (or expected).

And finally, I'm not being inconvenienced by anyone nor is anyone getting on my nerves (though judging from your "douchebag" comment and your request for me to post elsewhere, it seems like that may not be true for you). It is a shame, however, that you feel that selfish online behavior and name calling are nothing more than an "inconvenience." Just like I would never interrupt someone's conversation in person and change the subject, I don't believe in calling other people a "douchebag," especially someone I don't know. I fail to see why simple, basic respect like this that we extend to each other in person shouldn't be followed when interacting with others online.

mattchew86 says:

I fail to see anything civil or courteous in any of your replies.

If you would've been "Excuse me, but I would appreciate it if you might consider posting a new comment. If can get quite hectic around here, and it might be better for both of us if we kept our questions separate to avoid confusion", then that would've been fine.

I would've apologized and been on my way. No harm done.

Instead you accuse me of deliberately "hijacking" your thread and spurring other people on to post more questions not related to your topic, pretty much insinuating that all I came on here to do was cause trouble and piss you off.

Just because you didn't call me a name doesn't mean you didn't take a shot at me.

No respect. No courtesy. Just you mad that someone hit reply instead of posting a new comment.

If that's the case then.....oops.

But you could have handled it better.

You lashed out in anger and, as such, received an angry response in return.

That happens anywhere. Online or offline.

Next time, think about what tone you're using, especially when not talking with someone face-to-face, to see how it comes across.

You seem like an intelligent guy. Use your brain.

Marty1781 says:

Because you seem unable to properly interpret my comments from the plain english they were written in, I'm going to spell out for you exactly what any reasonable person would have taken away from them: "[What you did was inappropriate. This is why. This is how to start your own topic.]" Any additional "insinuat[ions]" or "tone[s]" of "anger" you have inaccurately chosen to interpret from my original comments are 100% false, and only support the increasingly accurate perception that you are blindly grasping at ways to try and justify your rude and inappropriate actions while being unable or unwilling to accept valid criticism for your own selfish behavior.

You are clearly familiar with messaging threads like these and are seemingly "intelligent" enough to know what is and is not considered appropriate and respectful. For whatever reason, you have chosen to ignore those guidelines of basic respect both when hijacking my topic and then by calling me a "douchebag." Yet, for whatever reason, you expect a response such as the one you suggested above instead of the neutral matter of fact manner I originally responded to you with. "Use your brain." If you knowingly act rudely or selfishly, you should expect to receive valid criticism in response. "That happens anywhere. Online or offline."

mattchew86 says:

So, what you're basically saying is that it doesn't matter what you said, or what tones you used, or rather what I "interpreted", I said "douchebag", so I'm automatically in the wrong?

What's funny is that with that attitude, you expect me to be apologectic.

That's fine. No matter what I say, or what you say, I will still automatically be at fault because I called you a name.

Nothing to do with the way you responded.

Ok.

As for "any reasonable person" taking your comments the way YOU did, check below. There are a couple people who share my "selfish" thoughts.

Marty1781 says:

I'm saying that any "tones" or "interpret[ations]" you perceived from my original comments are of your own making and appear to be ways you have seemingly invented to justify your own selfish and rude behavior. I've already spelled out for you in the most basic English I am capable of the appropriate meaning of my original comments. I don't see how it is possible to be any more clear than that. And yes, when you act selfishly then proceed to call someone a "douchebag," most reasonable people would logically conclude that puts you in the "wrong."

I no longer expect you to be apologetic. That actually stopped a long time ago when you made it clear that despite your behavior, you feel an apology would be asking too much. I would hope though that you could conduct yourself in an adult-like manner and show some basic respect to other members by not hijacking their thread and not calling anyone a "douchebag."

Finally, there is one single person that shares your "thoughts," the other post is a completely separate issue where I have offered my apologies to the affected person. Again, one (or even two) random internet user(s) agreeing with your position doesn't make what you did appropriate.

mattchew86 says:

....hmmm.....I guess I was being pretty ridiculous.

You're right. Seriously. What I did was uncalled for.

It's probably too late, but I would like to sincerely offer my apologies. I'll think before I go off on someone again.

Marty1781 says:

Hey Matt,

No worries, water under the bridge as far as I am concerned. Hope you have a great weekend and a happy Easter!

Best wishes,
Marty

Nirvana328 says:

"I fail to see anything civil or courteous in any of your replies."
When he said, "no offense" he was premising his criticism with a polite warning that he was trying to be courteous. You instead interpreted his comment the EXACT opposite way any normal person would have taken it. And not only that, you replied in a discourteous and rude manner yourself, by calling him "a 4 yr old" and a "douchebag."

Not only were you rude, but you're a hypocrite by refusing to admit or apologize for your mistake, while simultaneously say the opposite of what you're doing.

You're blatantly wrong, and continuing this convo by repeating that he was rude while YOU were the rude one and refusing to admit you're wrong is just wasting everyone's time. Move on.

mattchew86 says:

I guess I didn't perceive it that way. My apologies.

Also, thank you for being blunt and honest. Helped me put things in perspective.

Sorry for all the trouble :-(

Maven454 says:

+1, with the addition of did anyone ever find out how this might affect free mobile to mobile?

Marty1781 says:

Please, as stated above, if you have a separate question that is unrelated to the topic I started, then please, start your own new topic within the comments section, don't hijack mine. Instructions on how to do so are in my post above.

Impulses says:

Don't be so anal dude, news post comments are hardly the most structured (or easy to keep up with) of mediums. If you're that desperate to have your question answered then I encourage you to visit the actual message board for Android Central where people who've been beta testing this have shared their experience. I've partially answered your question below based on the little I read on the subject when beta invites were first sent out.

Maven454 says:

Boo hoo hoo. That's what you sound like. I was indicating that I agreed with your questions and also wanted to know an additional answer. But apparently agreeing with your question makes you want to wet yourself.

Marty1781 says:

My apologies. I overlooked your "+1" when I initially read your post. Sorry.

Impulses says:

Pretty sure it's just an error in the chart, and yes, for visual voicemail you'd need to use the GV app. I believe you can set it up so that SMS (and even MMS) are still received on the phone by the native app, though you might get dual notifications in some instances (GV+ native app)... Not sure if they've sorted that out, there was a thread on the subject at the AC boards where a beta tester was sharing his experience.

1. You are correct, your voicemail will no longer got to the Sprint VM app, it will be directed to GV.

2. You can access it by holding down "1" to call VM and it will reteive your GV Voicemails. You can also download the GV app to your phone and this will transcribe and also download the messages to your phone just like the Sprint VM app does. So, you can do it either way you would like.

3. Yes, you can use the HTC messaging app, this is one reason i did not change at first, i was worried about not being able to use this. (note; you will have to enable Text Messages for the specific phone you want them to go to) So, how it works is that you will get the text in your GV inbox as well as on the HTC stock app.

4... SWITCH TO ALL DATA PLAN --- Sprint does not offer one of these ....

5 .... MOBILE TO MOBILE ---- As far as i know (99% Sure) it will still be mobile to mobile. I read something about this and they said it will basically stay the same as it was w/o GV.

mattchew86 says:

Ok. Thank you.

I wasn't sure if there was a way to get on an all data plan, or at least cut down on minutes to save a little money.

No point in paying for minutes and texts I provably wont use.

mattchew86 says:

Ok. Thank you.

I wasn't sure if there was a way to get on an all data plan, or at least cut down on minutes to save a little money. Ill double-check with Sprint

No point in paying for minutes and texts I provably wont use.

Maven454 says:

Nifty, #5 was the one that a number of people had been worried when this grand plan had been first announced. Thanks.

As someone who is in the beta (didn't know it, thought they had just released it) I can answer a few of these.

1. I don't know if its currently like this only because I'm in beta but my voicemail is now handled by google. In fact I seem to remember that when I was setting it up it specifically warned me that I would be having my voicemails handled by google instead of sprint from now on.

2. You can do one of two things. You can call your voicemail same as before and you will be redirected to you google voice voicemail. You can also download and install the GV app which will give you easy access to your GV inbox. All voicemails and texts are stored in this inbox. Your GV inbox can also be accessed online.

3. By default all texts will NOT go to your phone. GV will receive them and you can only access them through the GV app or the web app. However GV gives you the option to receive messages on your phone as well you need only check the option

Also in reference to the other peoples question, in theory you could probably drop voice and texting however I do not know if the GV app receives calls, I only know that it makes them. Plus I don't think sprint would allow you to just have a data plan...especially if you signed up for this

jarobusa says:

Is still cell to cell free (I assume so)? And in my case 450 to call land lines? What would be nice if GV calls were cell based, so we would have unlimited phone calls on the $79 plan.

jm9843 says:

Google Voice is cell based for calls. The only time that it utilizes data is for sms or voip calls using the GV Gmail client in a desktop browser.

A data connection used to be needed to initiate the call (then handing it over to cell) when using the native GV app on Android. However, I believe that this tight integration with Sprint alleviates that requirement. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

In fact, the native GV app for Android wouldn't be needed at all anymore. The compelling reason to still use it is for the convenient visual voice mail, playback, transcription, and not having to enable SMS to phone in the GV settings. Your voicemail/sms would "sit" together within the native app.

From where I stand, the great thing about the Sprint integration:

  • Only 1 number. There's no reason to maintain two numbers like the old way because Google Voice's filtering options are far better than manually "filtering" people by only giving certain numbers to certain people.
  • Calls placed using Google Voice are treated like mobile-to-mobile calls and shouldn't count against your minutes anymore.
  • Calls can be placed from your Google Voice number without requiring an app.
  • Partial MMS support in Google Voice for the first time. Despite the MMS showing in your default messaging app and not saved to the cloud anywhere, it's better than MMS messages to your GV number just being lost down a black hole.
  • This is a precursor to Google rolling out SIP support (voice over IP data calls) to all GV users. Sprint customers, in particular, will be set up from day #1 to utilize the feature without having to configure anything. That is, assuming they've adopted Google Voice.
  • mattchew86 says:

    I can vouch for GV accepting calls. The way it is now, if you call someone with your GV number and not your sprint number, you can receive calls through GV.

    Also thanks for the heads-up. As far as I know GV will work over a stable data connection, so I figures maybe this would be a good way of saving some money.

    Edit: Sorry for the double-posts. Posted these yesterday on my baby. Oops.

    mattchew86 says:

    I can for GV accepting calls. The way it is now, if you call someone with your GV number and not your sprint number, you can receive calls through GV.

    Also thanks for the heads-up. As far as I know GV will work over a stable data connection, so I figures maybe this would be a good way of saving some money.

    amateurhack says:

    Can anyone provide a link to a sprint or google website were that image is located?

    No one else is picking up this story, except those that just refer back to this article. I think I'm smelling something fishy.

    chefkeyser says:

    I got this up and working and it pretty much cements Sprint as the best Android carrier. Google Voice now acts as a central base of operations for my phone. I can use it as the SMS app exclusively (with the exception of MMS, which requires stock). With great HTC phones and the official Google dev phone, I would think the only reason to not use Sprint is if your helplessly deep into another contract (or if you want a Droid.) But with rooting and now this, my old ass Hero is now a Google phone with Gingerbread that also uses Google to manage my number.
    Sprint hit it out of the park with this, and it will only get better. The Sprint Nexus S with Google Voice will be the new ultimate Android device.

    mattchew86 says:

    So sounds like it went off without a hitch. You think it's worth the jump over?

    pattavino says:

    Alot of the answers people are giving is what the gv application already does. I have been doing all of this for close to a year now. Sprint is just adding the option to use your cell # as your gv number. I use both, i live in one state and use gv as the main number there and I use my original cell number for the state im from and visit frequently. I choose, which is what sprint is offering, to keep both separate and use gv as a second phone. What sprint is hoping for is the majority of gv users will jump to Google to offload some of their resources. very brilliant on sprints part if you ask me.

    One possible disadvantage, assuming you are on the $69.99 plan whereby you have unlimited any mobile to any mobile and you have 450 anytime minutes. In addition you use Sprint @home with that one number thing for $5. If you use that Sprint @home one number currently as your google voice number, wouldn't you then lose the ability to call unlimited landlines, 800 numbers, to Canada, (all by straight manual dial) etc, if you port your current Google voice number over to Sprint? Admittedly, that would be a lot of non mobile to mobile talking, but wouldn't that occur. For those on unlimited calling, of course, it wouldn't matter anyway.

    crichton007 says:

    Any word on whether this will support mms?

    gmbrown says:

    Glad to see that MMS still works with the Sprint number -- if you send an outgoing MMS, does it still display the Sprint number?

    Also, any luck using SMS short codes with this? I know they still don't work with "regular" GV.

    gmbrown says:

    Hmmm. So far, not so much on the roll-out. Of course, April 26 isn't over yet, either, but...

    yep I've heard nothing either. Hopefully it will roll out in the next few hours

    phelms says:

    Funny thing is I was at the Sprint store today and the store manager knew nothing of this. Sadly there is no update here, and the day is almost over on the east coast. We will mark this one up as bogus information....

    gmbrown says:

    Yeah. April 27 now, and nothing.

    gmbrown says:

    Aaaaand now it's finally set up for my GV account...

    Still no GV for me. Oh well I'll find something else to get somewhat excited about.

    gmbrown says:

    MMS for me is really weird. I used my existing Sprint number to replace GV. I seem to be able to send MMS no problem. Receiving is really kind of hit-and-miss. Not sure what that's about.

    tennisfan#AC says:

    Oh well the 26th has come and gone. I have tried everything to get an invite to sign up for this new Sprint/Google service. I've called Sprint on several occasions and they kept trying to help but finally told me I just have to wait until I receive "the email" from Google telling me it is my "appointed" time to be blessed with this new offering.