Cisco, Avaya, Asterisk, Infinity - choose VOIP for your favorite boss
Hello, dear habralum!
I wanted to briefly share my observations in comparing the VOIP giants of our market: Cisco, Avaya, Infinity and Asterisk . To help those who are determined, like me, with software for their office. My opinion may not coincide with the majority opinion, then it is my opinion. In addition, the comparison is carried out more for beginners who want to increase their horizons in this area. And also for those who would like to recommend one of the VOIP systems to the head, but do not find the necessary and simple words to describe.
Let's start ...
Cisco is a promoted brand, and brands want everything. Not all of them have the means, but this fact only fuels the interest in Cisco from business structures. So suddenly, Cisco becomes an indicator of the ranking of companies. Cisco provides an end-to-end solution that includes computing, network, storage, security, and L4-7 services. In addition, they provide a large number of options and many possibilities for scaling data centers.
Cisco provides FEX (Fabric Extenders) for Gigabit Ethernet, unified ports. Using DCB (Data Center Bridging) allows Ethernet-based networks to transport LAN / SAN traffic.
However, the setup will cost a decent amount. Plus, even with instructions on hand, not every guru can figure out the stuffing. To administer this system, you must purchase a license, as well as pay for the training of your specialist, or call a Cisco specialist for commissioning, which is also far from cheap.
Adding new users, expanding the number of ip-phones, etc. worth the investment, with which, incidentally, the same Asterisk will not have problems. You can add as many subscribers as you like, if you had enough skills or ingenuity to ask more knowledgeable on the Internet. I tried several times to ask the gurus of Cisco or Avaya how and what to do, but other people immediately intervened in the dialogs to somehow note that they think something different. This is basically a problem in finding an answer for any forum, but in the complicated and confusing stuffing of Cisco and Avaya, when people are exchanging codes and terms in elevated tones, you get completely lost.
They say that you need a specialist only if you want to integrate Cisco, which means you will need. And to install additional VOIP, FANSO interface modules or other boards, you will again need licenses.
Cisco manufactures its own equipment, so if the company does not have the budget for a fully equipped PBX with the appropriate marking, the opportunity to install software also disappears.
Cisco work adequately with any PBX, but with Cisco PBXs, not all ip-phones work. Cisco offers a complete set of virtualized products: Cisco Nexus 1000V Series Switches, Virtualized Security Gateway (VSG), virtual network access module (vNAM) and Virtual Wide Area Application Services (vWAAS). But Cisco software extensibility is severely limited when it comes to integrating single carriers.
Avaya has not much left Cisco in terms of services. This is the same finished PBX with equipment of its own production. Reliability here, as a rule, comes from the cost, because most executives find it expensive = reliable, and explaining the opposite to them will cost you tremendous effort. A trained specialist can configure it if she understands the same intricate instructions.
The Avaya Call Center employs human voice recognition technology, which with outgoing calls increases the number of connections with a person, rather than with IVR, fax or voice mail. Avaya works with the Communication Manager system, which in turn quit MutiVantage. Because of what, in my opinion, there are many essentially unnecessary functions, settings, etc. For example, the same quality of documentation suffers greatly.
Avaya equipment produces very good. You can work on it. But, of course, if you already have Cisco, it is better to install Cisco. Your poor admin just learned the instructions on how to retrain. Do not interfere with these two platforms together, if you are, of course, not a guru with extensive experience.
Infinity wins convenience and simplicity: it has great functionality for statistics, for collecting information from IVR. The same Asterisk is just as easy to use and can do it all, but you need a person who would set it all up. Unlike other platforms with a predominantly tree-like IVR menu, Infinity tried and made it graphical. It is well visualized, and it is not only pleasing to the eye, but also convenient.
A huge minus in my eyes is that Infinity works on Windows, while the rest prefers more reliable Linux. Should I explain where there will be more bugs?
Again, there are similar interfaces for Asterisk, but they come in the form of separate modules, including OpenSource. If there is a desire and a little time, then you can put and figure it out.
Asterisk most of all stands out from this group by one significant indicator: Asterisk software does not require additional licenses, both when connecting additional SIP numbers and when integrating with plug-ins.
Moreover, anyfool system administrator can google and find relevant topics in the forums for setting up Asterisk . And the instructions are much more understandable and more convenient if the specialist is really a specialist, and did not come to you from the street. This means that you do not need to spend extra money on training or calling tech support.
Malfunctions do happen, but they are easier to eliminate and they do not cause such a stormy panic as when working with brands. Well, Asterisk is a less promoted platform. Although many people know about her, most perceive him as a Muscovite resident of Kostroma. And all because in theory Asterisk can perform all the functions no worse than the given analogues, if only there would be a specialist developer.
To summarize:
And again, a little of my personal and deeply subjective opinion. Having studied the options, and while not having prices from suppliers for turnkey implementation, I give preference to Asterisk. The price consists of 3 components: the cost of equipment (IP-telephones, gateways) + the cost of the telephone platform and software + the cost of configuration.
The cost of equipment, in fact, will not play a role, because it can be selected for use with all VOIP systems, so the cost of the telephone platform + configuration becomes the main one. Therefore, you can buy equipment and try to raise the Asterisk. If everything goes smoothly, I'm sure the management will like this option. Better to save money in the form of a bonus to our IT department.
In this article I tried to achieve utmost clarity and visibility. But this is only the first part. In the next I’m going to directly compare the cost of services of these companies, if you support, of course.
I wanted to briefly share my observations in comparing the VOIP giants of our market: Cisco, Avaya, Infinity and Asterisk . To help those who are determined, like me, with software for their office. My opinion may not coincide with the majority opinion, then it is my opinion. In addition, the comparison is carried out more for beginners who want to increase their horizons in this area. And also for those who would like to recommend one of the VOIP systems to the head, but do not find the necessary and simple words to describe.
Let's start ...
Cisco
Cisco is a promoted brand, and brands want everything. Not all of them have the means, but this fact only fuels the interest in Cisco from business structures. So suddenly, Cisco becomes an indicator of the ranking of companies. Cisco provides an end-to-end solution that includes computing, network, storage, security, and L4-7 services. In addition, they provide a large number of options and many possibilities for scaling data centers.
Cisco provides FEX (Fabric Extenders) for Gigabit Ethernet, unified ports. Using DCB (Data Center Bridging) allows Ethernet-based networks to transport LAN / SAN traffic.
However, the setup will cost a decent amount. Plus, even with instructions on hand, not every guru can figure out the stuffing. To administer this system, you must purchase a license, as well as pay for the training of your specialist, or call a Cisco specialist for commissioning, which is also far from cheap.
Adding new users, expanding the number of ip-phones, etc. worth the investment, with which, incidentally, the same Asterisk will not have problems. You can add as many subscribers as you like, if you had enough skills or ingenuity to ask more knowledgeable on the Internet. I tried several times to ask the gurus of Cisco or Avaya how and what to do, but other people immediately intervened in the dialogs to somehow note that they think something different. This is basically a problem in finding an answer for any forum, but in the complicated and confusing stuffing of Cisco and Avaya, when people are exchanging codes and terms in elevated tones, you get completely lost.
They say that you need a specialist only if you want to integrate Cisco, which means you will need. And to install additional VOIP, FANSO interface modules or other boards, you will again need licenses.
Cisco manufactures its own equipment, so if the company does not have the budget for a fully equipped PBX with the appropriate marking, the opportunity to install software also disappears.
Cisco work adequately with any PBX, but with Cisco PBXs, not all ip-phones work. Cisco offers a complete set of virtualized products: Cisco Nexus 1000V Series Switches, Virtualized Security Gateway (VSG), virtual network access module (vNAM) and Virtual Wide Area Application Services (vWAAS). But Cisco software extensibility is severely limited when it comes to integrating single carriers.
Avaya
Avaya has not much left Cisco in terms of services. This is the same finished PBX with equipment of its own production. Reliability here, as a rule, comes from the cost, because most executives find it expensive = reliable, and explaining the opposite to them will cost you tremendous effort. A trained specialist can configure it if she understands the same intricate instructions.
The Avaya Call Center employs human voice recognition technology, which with outgoing calls increases the number of connections with a person, rather than with IVR, fax or voice mail. Avaya works with the Communication Manager system, which in turn quit MutiVantage. Because of what, in my opinion, there are many essentially unnecessary functions, settings, etc. For example, the same quality of documentation suffers greatly.
Avaya equipment produces very good. You can work on it. But, of course, if you already have Cisco, it is better to install Cisco. Your poor admin just learned the instructions on how to retrain. Do not interfere with these two platforms together, if you are, of course, not a guru with extensive experience.
Infinity
Infinity wins convenience and simplicity: it has great functionality for statistics, for collecting information from IVR. The same Asterisk is just as easy to use and can do it all, but you need a person who would set it all up. Unlike other platforms with a predominantly tree-like IVR menu, Infinity tried and made it graphical. It is well visualized, and it is not only pleasing to the eye, but also convenient.
A huge minus in my eyes is that Infinity works on Windows, while the rest prefers more reliable Linux. Should I explain where there will be more bugs?
Again, there are similar interfaces for Asterisk, but they come in the form of separate modules, including OpenSource. If there is a desire and a little time, then you can put and figure it out.
Asterisk
Asterisk most of all stands out from this group by one significant indicator: Asterisk software does not require additional licenses, both when connecting additional SIP numbers and when integrating with plug-ins.
Moreover, any
Malfunctions do happen, but they are easier to eliminate and they do not cause such a stormy panic as when working with brands. Well, Asterisk is a less promoted platform. Although many people know about her, most perceive him as a Muscovite resident of Kostroma. And all because in theory Asterisk can perform all the functions no worse than the given analogues, if only there would be a specialist developer.
To summarize:
And again, a little of my personal and deeply subjective opinion. Having studied the options, and while not having prices from suppliers for turnkey implementation, I give preference to Asterisk. The price consists of 3 components: the cost of equipment (IP-telephones, gateways) + the cost of the telephone platform and software + the cost of configuration.
The cost of equipment, in fact, will not play a role, because it can be selected for use with all VOIP systems, so the cost of the telephone platform + configuration becomes the main one. Therefore, you can buy equipment and try to raise the Asterisk. If everything goes smoothly, I'm sure the management will like this option. Better to save money in the form of a bonus to our IT department.
In this article I tried to achieve utmost clarity and visibility. But this is only the first part. In the next I’m going to directly compare the cost of services of these companies, if you support, of course.