Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations strongm on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Cisco VOIP versus Avaya VOIP 6
- Thread starter pelleg
- Start date
-
1
- #2
A lot of it comes back to what do you want to do with VoIP. The current hype on VoIP reminds me of the hype around ISDN in the early 80's. ISDN BRI was going to replace all the POTS lines by the early ninties and ISDN PRI was going to replace all the Analog trunks and the T-1s with DS1 signalling. It didn't happen with BRI because the telcos didn't want to go to the expense of training and large scale updating of their facilities. ISDN PRI has been widely adopted because it provided caller information that was usefull to businesses. VoIP end up filling specialized nitches such as providing telephony services in remote offices or used much like a T-1 mux or D-4 channel bank.
As far as who is better Avaya or Cisco, I think it ends up what the application is. For VoIP switching systems I would lean toware Avaya. It takes a LONG time to develop voice switching features and have them working properly. Avaya knows how to do this, they have been doing it for a long time. The other thing they know how to do is how to develop maintenance routines that constantly check the connections and the hardware components. As far as taking existing voice off of standard switching equipment and converting it to send over an existing LAN/WAN network and then converting it back, Cisco makes some good products.
Leo V. Brown
As far as who is better Avaya or Cisco, I think it ends up what the application is. For VoIP switching systems I would lean toware Avaya. It takes a LONG time to develop voice switching features and have them working properly. Avaya knows how to do this, they have been doing it for a long time. The other thing they know how to do is how to develop maintenance routines that constantly check the connections and the hardware components. As far as taking existing voice off of standard switching equipment and converting it to send over an existing LAN/WAN network and then converting it back, Cisco makes some good products.
Leo V. Brown
- Thread starter
- #4
Well I would have to say Cisco would be the clear choice. If your really not concerned about the company your investing hundreds of thousands of dollars into going under then go for Lucent, Avaya, or whatever their name changes to next week.
-
3
- #6
Well,
Coldcrush really knows his stuff.....
Typicall that the CISCO people never go into reliability and features to defend their solution.
And by the way coldcrush look at the results for CISCO and AVAYA in the lst fiscal year in the US and tell me, who made more money????
If anyone is worried or think Coldcrush might be right, look for what the people from Gartner and Forrester say about AVAYA.
By the way Coldcrush, ask CISCO wat brand of PABX's is in their offices.
Kind regards,
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
Coldcrush really knows his stuff.....
Typicall that the CISCO people never go into reliability and features to defend their solution.
And by the way coldcrush look at the results for CISCO and AVAYA in the lst fiscal year in the US and tell me, who made more money????
If anyone is worried or think Coldcrush might be right, look for what the people from Gartner and Forrester say about AVAYA.
By the way Coldcrush, ask CISCO wat brand of PABX's is in their offices.
Kind regards,
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
well.... very interesting. I suppose if you want a VoIP network that is 2 years behind, with poor quality and 6 digit price tags you could go for Avaya or Cisco. But seeing how their stuff sounds like a bad transatlantic call, I would check out a company by the name of Nextone, out of Rockville, MD. Their iServer and iEdge products are far superior to ANYTHING, especially the AS5800 and 5300 GW's. And they run on a simple, easy to use, stable, Solaris OS. Check it out.
Oh, and Europe, and as far as using a company's publicly released fiscal documents to measure their stability, one word...
Enron
Cheers!
Oh, and Europe, and as far as using a company's publicly released fiscal documents to measure their stability, one word...
Enron
Cheers!
Dear enron,
The remark I made about "the publicly released fiscal documents to measure their stability" I only maee because COLDCRUSH was suggesting that AVAYA 4would be likely to have financial problems.
Clearly you have not heard an AVAYA IP Soft- or Hardphone cause quality wise there are asolutly NO prolems with sound levels ore noise on the line.
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
The remark I made about "the publicly released fiscal documents to measure their stability" I only maee because COLDCRUSH was suggesting that AVAYA 4would be likely to have financial problems.
Clearly you have not heard an AVAYA IP Soft- or Hardphone cause quality wise there are asolutly NO prolems with sound levels ore noise on the line.
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
-
1
- #9
Sigh!! Typical bashing that I seem among the AVAYA croud. I work for a very large nationally based telecommunications company. We sell both AVAYA and CISCO.. I try to have unbiased opinions on things but I can tell you this from my experiences.
There are a few ways of looking at whether to chose AVAYA or CISCO.. 1. If you're looking for a system that is proven in the field, rock solid, tons of features, then choose AVAYA. 2. If you're looking for something that has the ability to do remote site capabilities with local PSTN and remote site survivability then choose CISCO (R300 doesn't count) 3. If you're looking for a system that has tons of potential and the ability to have custom apps written for it choose CISCO. 4. If you're looking to get into the future of telephony systems, choose CISCO. Granted thats not a great reason, but its where companies are going, even AVAYA is doing it, even after bashing CISCO for doing this.
Then there are a few other things. I personally like the CISCO company. We as a reseller of AVAYA, they don't care about the customer nor the vendor. Their support is horrible. Their rates are rediculous. To me support is a big concern. I want backing on a product.. Support is where CISCO shines above most companies.
On a few other things I've read on this post, to the person who speaks about reliability, with a IP telephony system, you could build a system so redundant that it would make a traditional PBX look pitiful. I can cluster servers, I can setup multiple voice gateways, I can setup multiple paths between endpoints and gateways. There are so many things you can do with IP that you can't do with traditional systems. It has its downfalls too. I think AVAYA knows these reasons and thats why they're going to a Server based platform instead of the IP enabled PBX which has 1 processor, 1 power supply (unless you spend the money on the larger switches). The system is not redundant unless you fork out huge amounts of cash.
Oh and a comment to the person about AVAYA's hardphones and Softphones, I don't know if you're deaf or something, but their softphone sounds horrible, I don't care at what codec, their phones aren't that impressive either, this I can say that CISCO's voice quality is far superior to AVAYA's..
Let it be known that AVAYA does have the best PBX out there, nothing can touch its capabilities as of yet. And no one can discredit them in the traditional PBX market, but as for their IP solutions as of yet are not very good.
But once again back to the original question, it all depends on what you need the system to do, and what you can afford. To do 18 sites with DEFINITY would be alot more expensive than to do 18 sites of a Callmanager solution. For this being you'd have to put in at least a DEFINITY ONE or PROLOGIX at each site, where as with a Callmanager I could put in powered ethernet switches, and a voice gateway and be done with it. But then again, it might be worth it if you need those extra functions that only DEFINITY can provide at this point and time.
There are a few ways of looking at whether to chose AVAYA or CISCO.. 1. If you're looking for a system that is proven in the field, rock solid, tons of features, then choose AVAYA. 2. If you're looking for something that has the ability to do remote site capabilities with local PSTN and remote site survivability then choose CISCO (R300 doesn't count) 3. If you're looking for a system that has tons of potential and the ability to have custom apps written for it choose CISCO. 4. If you're looking to get into the future of telephony systems, choose CISCO. Granted thats not a great reason, but its where companies are going, even AVAYA is doing it, even after bashing CISCO for doing this.
Then there are a few other things. I personally like the CISCO company. We as a reseller of AVAYA, they don't care about the customer nor the vendor. Their support is horrible. Their rates are rediculous. To me support is a big concern. I want backing on a product.. Support is where CISCO shines above most companies.
On a few other things I've read on this post, to the person who speaks about reliability, with a IP telephony system, you could build a system so redundant that it would make a traditional PBX look pitiful. I can cluster servers, I can setup multiple voice gateways, I can setup multiple paths between endpoints and gateways. There are so many things you can do with IP that you can't do with traditional systems. It has its downfalls too. I think AVAYA knows these reasons and thats why they're going to a Server based platform instead of the IP enabled PBX which has 1 processor, 1 power supply (unless you spend the money on the larger switches). The system is not redundant unless you fork out huge amounts of cash.
Oh and a comment to the person about AVAYA's hardphones and Softphones, I don't know if you're deaf or something, but their softphone sounds horrible, I don't care at what codec, their phones aren't that impressive either, this I can say that CISCO's voice quality is far superior to AVAYA's..
Let it be known that AVAYA does have the best PBX out there, nothing can touch its capabilities as of yet. And no one can discredit them in the traditional PBX market, but as for their IP solutions as of yet are not very good.
But once again back to the original question, it all depends on what you need the system to do, and what you can afford. To do 18 sites with DEFINITY would be alot more expensive than to do 18 sites of a Callmanager solution. For this being you'd have to put in at least a DEFINITY ONE or PROLOGIX at each site, where as with a Callmanager I could put in powered ethernet switches, and a voice gateway and be done with it. But then again, it might be worth it if you need those extra functions that only DEFINITY can provide at this point and time.
I can provide tons of information that compares both brands as far as functionality goes and Avaya comes out on top evry single time. Avaya is years ahead in regards to features and functionality. And don't forget the adjuncts that Avaya supports, call centre features, CTI plust if you're looking for a hybrid switch, Avaya is probably your ONLY real choise.
But then again, I'm probably a little biased here but at this stage, I don't see Cisco as a serious competitor for functionality. The reason Cisco does well is because of their already established 'Cisco aligned IT professionals' that are used to their products and believe in them plus their fantastic marketing machine of course.
But then again, I'm probably a little biased here but at this stage, I don't see Cisco as a serious competitor for functionality. The reason Cisco does well is because of their already established 'Cisco aligned IT professionals' that are used to their products and believe in them plus their fantastic marketing machine of course.
Dear Buckweet,
In response to you remark:
Buckweet says:
Oh and a comment to the person about AVAYA's hardphones and Softphones, I don't know if you're deaf or something, but their softphone sounds horrible, I don't care at what codec, their phones aren't that impressive either, this I can say that CISCO's voice quality is far superior to AVAYA's
I have not had customers we installed AVAYA VoIP complaining, now this is from the CISCO Callmanager forum:
stevew123 (MIS) Feb 18, 2002 says:
We just installed Call manager with about 40 7940 phones. At first the quality of sound was great. However, now there is an annoying hum of line noise when the other party is not talking. The other end does not hear this noise. The noise goes away while they are talking and instantly comes back when they stop. Thanks for any information.
mikebryan (MIS) Feb 18, 2002 says:
We had an office that complained about that too. To fix it we modified the analog voice-ports, removing the "comfort noise".
No such problems with AVAYA's Comfort Noise
Wavesg (TechnicalUser) Oct 26, 2001 says:
I currently have 2 PRI line for my voice over ip setup. I have 50 PHONES (7960 model). From time to time we get an echo sound as though you were speaking on bad cell phone connections. Any ideas?
munsonbrown (Vendor) Oct 28, 2001 says:
My guess is that you are using a HDV instead of a dt-24+
I have run into this alot. Echo at the beginning of a conversation, but fading within the first couple of seconds, is common (and according to Cisco, working as designed). I the echo is persiting, here is what you can do to make it better. T1s are usually brought to the demark at 0db. This is too hot for an HDV. Get the circuit provider to come back out and lower the level on the smartjack to -15db. Next set the output attenuation to six (you may need to tweak this). Keep it as close to 0 as you can. Raising the output attenuation on the voice port will lesson your output level decreasing the level of echo coming back. Next, crank the echo cancellation coverage to 32. Placing calls after that, you may hear an echo just when the call is placed, but it should fade quickly as the echo canceller learns the rythm of the echo.
I mentioned in an earlier post that there are some issues with this system. This is probably the most common, and most annoying to customers. Good luck.
No such problems with AVAYA, and luckely we don't need support from Service Providers to solve problems that in their opinion is NOT their problem, which will be reflected in their responce time
Casta (TechnicalUser) Feb 22, 2002 says:
Hello everybody,
After my problem of conference, I have a other problem. One per week.
So: When I call an external phone number, for example a GSM, the GSM rings but I heard anything on my IP phone:
When I take down, I heard the tonality. I enter my external phone number (GSM), the GSM rings but I don’t heard the ring on my IP Phone. I answer on the GSM, there’s no sound on the IP Phone and on the GSM.
However when I call an intern phone number, there’s any problem.
I don’t change gateway, server or pattern configuration.
Thanks for your help
munsonbrown (Vendor) Feb 25, 2002 says:
Check gateway of GSM device if its on a different subnet from the phone making the call. Also check codec values for the two endpoints
I think we all know how easy it is to resolve errors that happen ones a week??!!
Now this all was, in my humble opinion about sound quality and reliability of the connections (or the ability to make a connection)
If we talk about features read this:
SkinnyBaldBloke (TechnicalUser) Jan 25, 2002 says:
Hello People,
Wondered whether or not anybody out there has been working on or with a Cisco IPCC, (i.e. CallManager+ICM+IP-IVR). We, (an I&CT consultancy company), have successfully implemented an IPCC for a Call Centre customer. It has provided them with the functionality that they require and, barring one or two momentary glitches, has been fullly operational for a period of nearly 3 months. However, the reporting side of things is proving a little unreliable. When running different types of reports via the Monitor ICM tool, we seem to rarely get the same figures and often the divergance in reports is 10%+. For instance a Call Type report will show X calls handled, a Service report will show Y calls handled and a Skill Group Report will show Z calls handled. In theory all should be identical or within a tolerance of 1% to 2%. If there is anybody out there with any similar issues with the reporting aspect of Cisco's IPCC, I'd love to hear from you.
CiscoICM (Visitor) Feb 13, 2002 sys:
You may want to upgrade to ICM 4.6.2 There have been many improvements to the reporting, and there are new IPCC specific templates.
Good luck!
Now I really wold like to hear what a Call Center Manager would think about unreliable reporting, especially if it would be an outsourced Call Center that has to bill based on handled calls and service levels?
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
In response to you remark:
Buckweet says:
Oh and a comment to the person about AVAYA's hardphones and Softphones, I don't know if you're deaf or something, but their softphone sounds horrible, I don't care at what codec, their phones aren't that impressive either, this I can say that CISCO's voice quality is far superior to AVAYA's
I have not had customers we installed AVAYA VoIP complaining, now this is from the CISCO Callmanager forum:
stevew123 (MIS) Feb 18, 2002 says:
We just installed Call manager with about 40 7940 phones. At first the quality of sound was great. However, now there is an annoying hum of line noise when the other party is not talking. The other end does not hear this noise. The noise goes away while they are talking and instantly comes back when they stop. Thanks for any information.
mikebryan (MIS) Feb 18, 2002 says:
We had an office that complained about that too. To fix it we modified the analog voice-ports, removing the "comfort noise".
No such problems with AVAYA's Comfort Noise
Wavesg (TechnicalUser) Oct 26, 2001 says:
I currently have 2 PRI line for my voice over ip setup. I have 50 PHONES (7960 model). From time to time we get an echo sound as though you were speaking on bad cell phone connections. Any ideas?
munsonbrown (Vendor) Oct 28, 2001 says:
My guess is that you are using a HDV instead of a dt-24+
I have run into this alot. Echo at the beginning of a conversation, but fading within the first couple of seconds, is common (and according to Cisco, working as designed). I the echo is persiting, here is what you can do to make it better. T1s are usually brought to the demark at 0db. This is too hot for an HDV. Get the circuit provider to come back out and lower the level on the smartjack to -15db. Next set the output attenuation to six (you may need to tweak this). Keep it as close to 0 as you can. Raising the output attenuation on the voice port will lesson your output level decreasing the level of echo coming back. Next, crank the echo cancellation coverage to 32. Placing calls after that, you may hear an echo just when the call is placed, but it should fade quickly as the echo canceller learns the rythm of the echo.
I mentioned in an earlier post that there are some issues with this system. This is probably the most common, and most annoying to customers. Good luck.
No such problems with AVAYA, and luckely we don't need support from Service Providers to solve problems that in their opinion is NOT their problem, which will be reflected in their responce time
Casta (TechnicalUser) Feb 22, 2002 says:
Hello everybody,
After my problem of conference, I have a other problem. One per week.
So: When I call an external phone number, for example a GSM, the GSM rings but I heard anything on my IP phone:
When I take down, I heard the tonality. I enter my external phone number (GSM), the GSM rings but I don’t heard the ring on my IP Phone. I answer on the GSM, there’s no sound on the IP Phone and on the GSM.
However when I call an intern phone number, there’s any problem.
I don’t change gateway, server or pattern configuration.
Thanks for your help
munsonbrown (Vendor) Feb 25, 2002 says:
Check gateway of GSM device if its on a different subnet from the phone making the call. Also check codec values for the two endpoints
I think we all know how easy it is to resolve errors that happen ones a week??!!
Now this all was, in my humble opinion about sound quality and reliability of the connections (or the ability to make a connection)
If we talk about features read this:
SkinnyBaldBloke (TechnicalUser) Jan 25, 2002 says:
Hello People,
Wondered whether or not anybody out there has been working on or with a Cisco IPCC, (i.e. CallManager+ICM+IP-IVR). We, (an I&CT consultancy company), have successfully implemented an IPCC for a Call Centre customer. It has provided them with the functionality that they require and, barring one or two momentary glitches, has been fullly operational for a period of nearly 3 months. However, the reporting side of things is proving a little unreliable. When running different types of reports via the Monitor ICM tool, we seem to rarely get the same figures and often the divergance in reports is 10%+. For instance a Call Type report will show X calls handled, a Service report will show Y calls handled and a Skill Group Report will show Z calls handled. In theory all should be identical or within a tolerance of 1% to 2%. If there is anybody out there with any similar issues with the reporting aspect of Cisco's IPCC, I'd love to hear from you.
CiscoICM (Visitor) Feb 13, 2002 sys:
You may want to upgrade to ICM 4.6.2 There have been many improvements to the reporting, and there are new IPCC specific templates.
Good luck!
Now I really wold like to hear what a Call Center Manager would think about unreliable reporting, especially if it would be an outsourced Call Center that has to bill based on handled calls and service levels?
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
Have worked for Cisco in Europe, they are replacing all Definity with CCM, but certain sites were continuously buggy, to the effect that no Voice available for many days (disastrous)
CCM = Sexy product but features are years behind Avaya
Avaya products more reliable but very proprietary and wheres the support.
CCM = Sexy product but features are years behind Avaya
Avaya products more reliable but very proprietary and wheres the support.
Guys,
this forum should be for us all to share our comments and concerns, but this is ridiculous. People are cutting and pasting messages from other forums and talking about financial success..... We all have our opinions about these two companies, but just answer the person's question. These are two major companies, each is better at certain things.
this forum should be for us all to share our comments and concerns, but this is ridiculous. People are cutting and pasting messages from other forums and talking about financial success..... We all have our opinions about these two companies, but just answer the person's question. These are two major companies, each is better at certain things.
-
1
- #15
I have set up several VoIP demos for customers. The Avaya product took me 2 - 3 days tops to install, train, and turn loose. This inculdes all the whistle and bells, not just simply dial tone to an IP phone. Cisco has come in behind me several times to peddle their wears. Cisco's shortest time to install and have FULLY functional was 4 weeks and counting. Several are still trying at the 8 month time frame to get the system fully functional.
I am also enjoy when they talk about relability. Like BuckWeet stated above:
" On a few other things I've read on this post, to the person who speaks about reliability, with a IP telephony system, you could build a system so redundant that it would make a traditional PBX look pitiful. I can cluster servers, I can setup multiple voice gateways, I can setup multiple paths between endpoints and gateways. There are so many things you can do with IP that you can't do with traditional systems."
Avaya
Lets pretend we want the system to have the "standard" relabilty the Avaya solution provides, 99.999 uptime. Doen
Supports and can provide multiple gateways. Provide me multiple paths between end points and I will use them.
Cisco
Add the equipment BuckWeet mentions above, I wonder if this adds any complexity to the Cisco solution? Are we close to a 99.999 reliability system yet?
Neither system is perfect, but from my experiences the Avaya solution is FAR superior. I can get lan trace information on the "status station" form that you can usually only get from a sniffer. Jitter, lost packets, last ten interval stats for packet loss and jitter based on percentage. Hows that for functionality!
Chris
I am also enjoy when they talk about relability. Like BuckWeet stated above:
" On a few other things I've read on this post, to the person who speaks about reliability, with a IP telephony system, you could build a system so redundant that it would make a traditional PBX look pitiful. I can cluster servers, I can setup multiple voice gateways, I can setup multiple paths between endpoints and gateways. There are so many things you can do with IP that you can't do with traditional systems."
Avaya
Lets pretend we want the system to have the "standard" relabilty the Avaya solution provides, 99.999 uptime. Doen
Supports and can provide multiple gateways. Provide me multiple paths between end points and I will use them.
Cisco
Add the equipment BuckWeet mentions above, I wonder if this adds any complexity to the Cisco solution? Are we close to a 99.999 reliability system yet?
Neither system is perfect, but from my experiences the Avaya solution is FAR superior. I can get lan trace information on the "status station" form that you can usually only get from a sniffer. Jitter, lost packets, last ten interval stats for packet loss and jitter based on percentage. Hows that for functionality!
Chris
Thanks Clausen.
cwarren:
We all shared our concerns here, VoIP is a the hype in this market for the last 18 months. What people should really talk about is Telephony over IP, cause tranmitting the voice is just one thing. Companies and their employees want features and feature buttons !!!!!
No think of an emergency (fire, power outage), we ALL want to be able to dail 911 (or 112 in Europe)
About our comments:
Some people here who now theit stuff well have made commenst that are VERY usefull to people not that knowledgable.
What you have seen are comments from people that are working with IP, from people that compared both systems in
a working enviroment. Not just a suit and tie that comes by in his company car trying to meet the target.
What I'm trying to say is that people will read the information that has been provided here and benefit from this.
And maybe your right some info here does not address the technical issue.
But whe people are advertising the Cisco solution here as perfect, I think it is only fair to inform people about the weakpoints in the Cisco solutions as well.
Avaya's solution might not be perfect, but up till now most people still find it a better solution.
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
cwarren:
We all shared our concerns here, VoIP is a the hype in this market for the last 18 months. What people should really talk about is Telephony over IP, cause tranmitting the voice is just one thing. Companies and their employees want features and feature buttons !!!!!
No think of an emergency (fire, power outage), we ALL want to be able to dail 911 (or 112 in Europe)
About our comments:
Some people here who now theit stuff well have made commenst that are VERY usefull to people not that knowledgable.
What you have seen are comments from people that are working with IP, from people that compared both systems in
a working enviroment. Not just a suit and tie that comes by in his company car trying to meet the target.
What I'm trying to say is that people will read the information that has been provided here and benefit from this.
And maybe your right some info here does not address the technical issue.
But whe people are advertising the Cisco solution here as perfect, I think it is only fair to inform people about the weakpoints in the Cisco solutions as well.
Avaya's solution might not be perfect, but up till now most people still find it a better solution.
Please let me know if the information that was provided is helpfull.
Edwin Plat
A.K.A. Europe
- Status