Would really like input on a comparison amongst Cisco, Avaya, and Shoretel. Pro's and con's and more bang for the buck.
It really depends on what your are trying to do. Is this a single site deployment? Do you need remote survivability? How many users will you have? Do you need unified messaging? What type of hardware is currently installed?
We are facing the same dilema, the choice between a cisco solution and a Shoretel solution. We currently have sever sites totally about 90 phones, unified messaging is wanted, and remote survivability is a must. Currently all our routers and switches are cisco and we run under a Windows evironment.
From everything I've heard Shoretel is definitely the way to go. It is more of an intuitive and familiar experience than Cisco.
Look at the NEC UX5000 series VOIP...very slick cost effective system.
www.ux5000.com
What you have now would also come into consideration. If you have a Siemens system it could be beneficial to look at the new systems from them (OpenOffice or HiPath 4000), likewise if you have NEC, or any other manufacturer it makes sense to look at them. Cisco is the big name in VoIP, but they are by no means the easiest to use, or the most cost effective. What you wrote you are looking for is supplied by most major manufacturers.
Steve
If you're looking for a cost effective, easy to install and use, full featured IP based solution, you may want to look at IPitomy for a fraction of the cost!
big part of our decision to go ShoreTel was the high cost of Cisco support. in retrospect, very satisfied that we did.
48 sites, 1200 IP phones
Another choice is Interactive Intelligence. It can be a very feature rich system. The system can use some models of Cisco phones if you all ready own some. Most new systems are sold with Polycom IP Phones. This phone system cut its teeth in large call centers.
IMO - if you are a large enterprise or a large SMB then I think you can afford a proprietary IP system from a major player instead of an Asterisk based system which I feel is for small SMB's looking for low cost bells and whistles.
(I am sure that will upset a few members).
We have done some with Cisco, Ericsson and soon Siemens Open Ofice and 4000 - Open office is really nice. I have heard good things about Shoretel - the only issue I have with Shoretel is I believe it is server driven and anything you have to ctrl-alt-delete to keep running is an issue in a large, larger enviroment etc.
The purpose of the server with ShoreTel is for Voice Mail, AA, desktop tools, & the management of the system. All the call processing is done on the switches (transfer, conference, etc) If you lose your server you are still able to make and receive phone calls.
Shore Tel is it a hosted IP service? Wasnt they going broke at one time?
No, ShoreTel is not a hosted IP service. And all the big players are server-based. (need someone smarter than me to address a larger base.) Whiteywhite is correct in that most of the call processing is done locally, and DR (disaster recovery) is not difficult to engineer-in.
Originally posted by Coral Tech:
Look at the NEC UX5000 series VOIP...very slick cost effective system.
www.ux5000.com The real one is the SV8100. lol. Both the same, NEC Nitsiko division.
No good NAT transversal yet
Cisco UC520 the best Unified Communications system on the market.
None better for quality, price, client growth and margins!
It will be the future of SMB telephony, networking, security, video and IP applications.
Originally posted by Mike Bardsley:
Originally posted by Coral Tech:
[b] Look at the NEC UX5000 series VOIP...very slick cost effective system.
www.ux5000.com
No good NAT transversal yet [/b]What? The UX5000 has had both software and hardware NAT translation for some time now. Both I have had working flawlessly.
The UX and SV are great for any solution. We deploy the Asterisk on our Hosted service we offer clients. If you want the bells and whistle PC attdt, etc. UX or SV is the way to go for a smart price. Shortel did not go broke, they changed their name to Shortel and borrowed a BUTTLOAD of money, still aren't doing very well.
Shoretel is a great system if you want to pay $1000+ a seat for MGCP stations... They do have a great call manager application but the licensing is insane and you have to pay for support on a yearly contract. Shoretel does have remote survivability which the NEC products really don't have. With the UX and Cygnilink or the SV and Netlink both can only have one voicemail for a distributed system. Kind of sucks but the price point is hard to beat for networking. oh and Mike don't kid yourself.. the UX and the SV are the EXACT SAME SYSTEM..i have two networked together right now. same hardware different voicemails and phones.. i think the only appreciable difference is the UX phones have a call 1 and call 2 key on the phone so you don't have to burn up real estate for CAP keys.. SV has better voicemail.. thats about the only difference.
How does the Shoretel handle call routing via the auto attendant if the Voicemail server goes down? I would think that would effect call routing if the voicemail handles the AA, and it goes down, even if the system is set up to route calls in the event of the voicemail being down.
I have worked installs on ESI, panasonic, toshiba, shoretel, and avaya, plus others, and I like the avaya reliability, scalability, and the huge network of support which shoretel simply does not have considering it is so much smaller company with so greatly fewer authorized dealers, and support engineers.