Business Phone Systems

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#568774 03/21/14 01:29 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
So, what is the report from the field? Is anybody having any success with these?


Never blame on malice, what can be adequately attributed to STUPIDITY!!
reataylor #569119 03/26/14 03:32 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,112
Member
*****
Offline
Member
*****
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,112
Anyone? I'm curious as well.

reataylor #569210 03/27/14 01:27 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
Our we the only ones installing these?
My experience so far:
The redundancy seems to work great. The PI is a lot more friendly then CVD although I am still a fan of command line. Converting IPX to gateways is simple and a good cost savings on upgrading.
That's the pros, as to the cons.
DID handling is the worst I've ever seen. If you are dealing with less than 200 or have the luxury of matching DID to extension, it is tolerable. I routinely deal with over a 1000 DIDs and the programming is ridiculous.
On MOH, from the web I get the feeling a lot of the new IP solutions are moving to WAV files which is ok, but I have a lot of customers still what some kind of stream capabilities. And to have to reset the hold system to chance the music/message is unacceptable. I deal with security central stations. This is life and death phone calls. They can't be down 5 minutes just to change the MOH.
The labeling of calls that made the IPX so nice is not available. Where we used to be able to label a DID through out the system and pop a name on the phones display as to which DID the call came in on is gone. I am not sure rather to blame Tadiran or SIP in general, but I miss the labels.

Those are my complaints off the top of my head. I was just trying to get a feel for what my fellow techs thought.


Never blame on malice, what can be adequately attributed to STUPIDITY!!
reataylor #569220 03/27/14 04:37 PM
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,112
Member
*****
Offline
Member
*****
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,112
Good info. From what I saw I was underwhelmed. The new Tadiran execs are really pushing this when 95% of their revenue is in the digital/hybrid side still. The redundancy is nice but you give up WAY too much IMHO. The other thing are the phones. Why didn't they make a Tadiran phone for this thing? I don't see us picking up this product until there is some major revisions. My question, besides redundancy, why wouldn't I go with Asterisk if you think the whole world is going to 3rd party phones? And using rebranded Yealink and Polycom phones..really?

reataylor #569227 03/27/14 05:39 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 348
By my unsderstanding, Polycom is out the door except for conference phones. As to Asterisk, I haven't played with it, but I heard it is too flexible and the guy who programmed it has to be the guy that fixes it.
I also agree, don't abandon the IPX yet. Digital phones are just too dependable.


Never blame on malice, what can be adequately attributed to STUPIDITY!!

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums84
Topics93,735
Posts636,399
Members49,615
Most Online5,661
May 23rd, 2018
Popular Topics(Views)
Today's Birthdays
BroadcastEngineer, itrains, James Walker, Mpp1994, rockie, sarah1klein, thomas TES-824
Newest Members
AMS Technology C, Chrontel, RonZ1971, Michael1948, lllDez
49,615 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
jsaad 7
Toner 6
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 9 guests, and 20 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Contact Us | Sponsored by Atcom: Business Phone Systems | Terms of Service

Sundance Communications is not affiliated with any of the above manufacturers.
©Copyright Sundance Communications 1998-2022
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5