Cisco, Avaya, Asterisk, Infinity - choose VOIP to your favorite boss
Hello, dear habrakrady!
I wanted to briefly share my observations in comparing the VOIP giants of our market: Cisco, Avaya, Infinity and Asterisk . To help for those who are determined, like me, with software for their office. My opinion may not coincide with the opinion of the majority, for that it and 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 to the head one of the VOIP systems, but cannot find the necessary and simple words to describe.
Let's start ...
')
Cisco is a popular brand, and brands want everything. Not everyone has the money for them, but this circumstance only stirs up interest in Cisco from business structures. So suddenly Cisco is becoming an indicator of company rankings. Cisco provides a complete solution that includes computing, network, storage network, security, and L4-7 services. In addition, they provide a large number of options and many opportunities 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 setting will cost a decent amount. Plus, even with the instruction in 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 specialist from Cisco to set it up, which is also not cheap.
Adding new users, expanding the number of ip-phones, etc. worth the investment, with which, by the way, the same Asterisk will have no problems. You can add as many subscribers as you like, it would be enough skills or ingenuity to ask more knowledgeable people on the Internet. I tried several times to ask the guru of Cisco or Avaya how and what to do, but other people immediately interfered in the conversations in order to somehow note that they think something different. This is basically a problem in finding an answer for any forum, but in the complex and confusing stuff of Cisco and Avaya, when people are exchanged with codes and terms on high tones, you lose yourself completely.
They say that you need a specialist only if you want to integrate Cisco, which means you will need it . And to install additional interface modules VOIP, FANSO or other cards, you will need licenses again.
Cisco manufactures its own equipment, so if a company lacks the budget for a fully equipped PBX with the appropriate labeling, it’s also impossible to install software.
Cisco adequately works with any PBX, but with Cisco PBX, not all ip-phones work. Cisco offers a full suite 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 unified communications providers.
Avaya has n't left much of Cisco in terms of services provided. This is the same finished PBX with its own production equipment. 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 efforts. It can be configured by a trained specialist, if you understand the same intricate instructions.
The Avaya Call Center uses human voice recognition technology, which during outgoing dialing increases the number of connections with a person, not with IVR, fax or voice mail. Avaya works with the Communication Manager system, which in turn came out of MutiVantage. Because of what, my opinion, there are many unnecessary in fact functions, settings, etc. For example, the same quality of documentation suffers considerably.
Avaya equipment produces very good. You can work on it. But, naturally, 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 a lot of experience.
Infinity wins convenience and simplicity: it has a great functionality on statistics, on collecting information from IVR. The same Asterisk is also easy to use and it can do everything, but you need a person to set it 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 pleasant to the eye, but also convenient.
A huge disadvantage in my eyes is that Infinity runs on Windows, while others prefer more reliable Linux. Should I explain where the bugs will be more?
Again for Asterisk there are similar interfaces too, 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 understand.
Asterisk is the most prominent of this group: One does not need additional licenses for Asterisk software, both when connecting additional SIP numbers and when integrating with plug-ins.
Moreover, googling and finding relevant topics in the Asterisk configuration forums can be anyfool of a system administrator. And the instruction is much clearer and more convenient if the specialist is really an expert, and has not come to you from the street. So, it is not necessary to spend extra money on training or calling technical support.
There are failures, but they are easier to eliminate and they do not cause such a violent panic as when working with brands. Well, Asterisk less untwisted platform. Although many people know about her, the majority perceive him as a Moskvich of a Kostroma resident. And all because, in theory, Asterisk can perform all the functions as well as the above analogs, as long as there is a development specialist.
Let's sum up:
And again a little of my personal and deeply subjective opinion. Having studied the options, and while not having prices from suppliers for the implementation of "turnkey", I prefer Asterisk. The price is made up of 3 components: Equipment cost (IP phones, gateways) + cost of the telephone platform and software + cost of setting.
The cost of equipment, in fact, will not play a role, since It can be selected for use with all VOIP-systems, so the cost of the telephone platform + tuning becomes the main one. Therefore, you can purchase equipment and try to raise Asterisk. If everything goes smoothly, I am sure the management will like this option. Let it be better that the saved money in the form of a bonus will be given to our IT department.
In this article, I tried to achieve the utmost clarity and visibility. But this is only the first part. In the next I am 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 for those who are determined, like me, with software for their office. My opinion may not coincide with the opinion of the majority, for that it and 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 to the head one of the VOIP systems, but cannot find the necessary and simple words to describe.
Let's start ...
')
Cisco
Cisco is a popular brand, and brands want everything. Not everyone has the money for them, but this circumstance only stirs up interest in Cisco from business structures. So suddenly Cisco is becoming an indicator of company rankings. Cisco provides a complete solution that includes computing, network, storage network, security, and L4-7 services. In addition, they provide a large number of options and many opportunities 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 setting will cost a decent amount. Plus, even with the instruction in 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 specialist from Cisco to set it up, which is also not cheap.
Adding new users, expanding the number of ip-phones, etc. worth the investment, with which, by the way, the same Asterisk will have no problems. You can add as many subscribers as you like, it would be enough skills or ingenuity to ask more knowledgeable people on the Internet. I tried several times to ask the guru of Cisco or Avaya how and what to do, but other people immediately interfered in the conversations in order to somehow note that they think something different. This is basically a problem in finding an answer for any forum, but in the complex and confusing stuff of Cisco and Avaya, when people are exchanged with codes and terms on high tones, you lose yourself completely.
They say that you need a specialist only if you want to integrate Cisco, which means you will need it . And to install additional interface modules VOIP, FANSO or other cards, you will need licenses again.
Cisco manufactures its own equipment, so if a company lacks the budget for a fully equipped PBX with the appropriate labeling, it’s also impossible to install software.
Cisco adequately works with any PBX, but with Cisco PBX, not all ip-phones work. Cisco offers a full suite 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 unified communications providers.
Avaya
Avaya has n't left much of Cisco in terms of services provided. This is the same finished PBX with its own production equipment. 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 efforts. It can be configured by a trained specialist, if you understand the same intricate instructions.
The Avaya Call Center uses human voice recognition technology, which during outgoing dialing increases the number of connections with a person, not with IVR, fax or voice mail. Avaya works with the Communication Manager system, which in turn came out of MutiVantage. Because of what, my opinion, there are many unnecessary in fact functions, settings, etc. For example, the same quality of documentation suffers considerably.
Avaya equipment produces very good. You can work on it. But, naturally, 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 a lot of experience.
Infinity
Infinity wins convenience and simplicity: it has a great functionality on statistics, on collecting information from IVR. The same Asterisk is also easy to use and it can do everything, but you need a person to set it 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 pleasant to the eye, but also convenient.
A huge disadvantage in my eyes is that Infinity runs on Windows, while others prefer more reliable Linux. Should I explain where the bugs will be more?
Again for Asterisk there are similar interfaces too, 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 understand.
Asterisk
Asterisk is the most prominent of this group: One does not need additional licenses for Asterisk software, both when connecting additional SIP numbers and when integrating with plug-ins.
Moreover, googling and finding relevant topics in the Asterisk configuration forums can be any
There are failures, but they are easier to eliminate and they do not cause such a violent panic as when working with brands. Well, Asterisk less untwisted platform. Although many people know about her, the majority perceive him as a Moskvich of a Kostroma resident. And all because, in theory, Asterisk can perform all the functions as well as the above analogs, as long as there is a development specialist.
Let's sum up:
And again a little of my personal and deeply subjective opinion. Having studied the options, and while not having prices from suppliers for the implementation of "turnkey", I prefer Asterisk. The price is made up of 3 components: Equipment cost (IP phones, gateways) + cost of the telephone platform and software + cost of setting.
The cost of equipment, in fact, will not play a role, since It can be selected for use with all VOIP-systems, so the cost of the telephone platform + tuning becomes the main one. Therefore, you can purchase equipment and try to raise Asterisk. If everything goes smoothly, I am sure the management will like this option. Let it be better that the saved money in the form of a bonus will be given to our IT department.
In this article, I tried to achieve the utmost clarity and visibility. But this is only the first part. In the next I am going to directly compare the cost of services of these companies, if you support, of course.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/141396/
All Articles