Seems like the number of poor implementors is surging up again, or is that just my impression? Is it more BP's getting into IPO without training maybe, or what do you think it is? Am I the only one who seems to see this trend? Has Avaya dropped the two implement PA techs requirement for a BP to implement the IPO, or just not enforcing it?
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 Mike Lewis on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Is there a new surge of IPO implementors/Sellers? 2
- Thread starter aarenot
- Start date
Don't throw it in the trash, get someones number here to find a quality vendor. It's experiences like yours that give the IPO a bad name and that bothers me to no end. The IPO is great as long as you have someone good putting it in. Find a better vendor and you will grow to love the system.
kwing112000
Vendor
Klubar,
I am in the boston area and may be able to help you. please if you are interested reply here and i will get you my info.
I am in the boston area and may be able to help you. please if you are interested reply here and i will get you my info.
kwing112000
Vendor
Ron i can not agree with you more. we have so many customers we pick up that are so unhappy. we then usually will blow it away and set it up right and then they love the system. it makes us all look so bad when things are not done right.
@Klubar, i told you on the avaya community already
It is not a bad system, it is bad installed !!!
Take kwing112000 advise and get a good working system
ACA - Implement IP Office
ACS - Implement IP Office
ACA - Voice Services Management
______________
Women and cats can do as they please and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea!
It is not a bad system, it is bad installed !!!
Take kwing112000 advise and get a good working system
ACA - Implement IP Office
ACS - Implement IP Office
ACA - Voice Services Management
______________
Women and cats can do as they please and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea!
groundedagain
IS-IT--Management
The PA process for Avaya is positively awful.
This is not a reflection on my trainers!!!!!!!
The Avaya training materials do not cover anywhere near what is required in the real world of the IP Office.
The courses should be re-written, the theory should be online and should be passed prior to walking into a truly practical workshop.
There should also be input from the trainer as to if the tech is competent or not.
My experience was I put off my PA exams because I didn't think I knew enough. When I finally did the workshop exam it was a breeze and I was stunned at how little real world implement stuff was included.
In saying that I am not an ACE
Jason Wienert
Brisbane, Australia
GoldMine, Avaya, ACCPAC CRM
Please remember to thank preople for their valuable input.
This is not a reflection on my trainers!!!!!!!
The Avaya training materials do not cover anywhere near what is required in the real world of the IP Office.
The courses should be re-written, the theory should be online and should be passed prior to walking into a truly practical workshop.
There should also be input from the trainer as to if the tech is competent or not.
My experience was I put off my PA exams because I didn't think I knew enough. When I finally did the workshop exam it was a breeze and I was stunned at how little real world implement stuff was included.
In saying that I am not an ACE
Jason Wienert
Brisbane, Australia
GoldMine, Avaya, ACCPAC CRM
Please remember to thank preople for their valuable input.
The big mistake I think most people make is thinking that Gold or even Platinum BP status is in some way equal to saying "we know everything about everything Avaya" when in fact I know many Gold and some of the few Platinum dealers that know little to nothing about IP Office but are experts at CM and have built their business around that. When these guys sell and implement an IP Office we end up with situations like klubar's.
Kyle Holladay
ACA-I, ACA Call Center, ACS-I, ACS-M, TIA-CTP, MCP/MCTS Exchange 2007
ACE Implement: IP Office
"If it worked the way it should you wouldn't need me
Kyle Holladay
ACA-I, ACA Call Center, ACS-I, ACS-M, TIA-CTP, MCP/MCTS Exchange 2007
ACE Implement: IP Office
"If it worked the way it should you wouldn't need me
We've tried to escalate our problems to avaya (and have spoken to the field rep for avaya), but they don't seem very interested in directly talking to customer.
Just a general rant about IPO -- it's clear that avaya doesn't understand PC UIs. What were they thinking with Phone Manager? Why doesn't it look like any other Windows application? Even skinned it doesn't pick up windows colors, look, etc. From the end-user perspective, IPO isn't very polished.
What's up with softphone for IPO? The client is just wierd (and why does it require a VPN?). Also has anyone gotten softphone to work with hotdesk extensions. Avaya says it can't be done. (Who is going to need softphones the most--hot deskers.) Duh.
Just a general rant about IPO -- it's clear that avaya doesn't understand PC UIs. What were they thinking with Phone Manager? Why doesn't it look like any other Windows application? Even skinned it doesn't pick up windows colors, look, etc. From the end-user perspective, IPO isn't very polished.
What's up with softphone for IPO? The client is just wierd (and why does it require a VPN?). Also has anyone gotten softphone to work with hotdesk extensions. Avaya says it can't be done. (Who is going to need softphones the most--hot deskers.) Duh.
Klubar, all of your complaints still point back to an obviously inept business partner not properly positioning nor understanding the solution being provided to you.
It should be noted that Avaya does not work directly with the customer as this is part of the business partner model and it is the requirement of the BP to provide Tier 1 support and escalation. If your BP isn’t doing this then they are not doing their job and should be immediately replaced by someone who will actually invest time in maintaining your business relationship.
The Phone Manager skins are the same color and such as other Avaya applications. They are designed to make the IP Office applications look like the other Avaya applications for their other platforms. It would seem common and in fact obvious that a manufacturer would create a proprietary "feel" for their suite of applications. For example all Office 2007 applications look very similar but look nothing like previous versions of any Microsoft application I have ever seen.
So far as Soft Phone requiring a VPN. This isn't an Avaya nor a Soft Phone limitation. This is an H.323 limitation and the requirement would be exactly the same regardless of the vendor selected when using H.323. This will be addressed by the H.460 family of standards but is not commonly adopted. Outside of an implementation of H.460 only those Soft Phone applications that utilize SIP can properly transverse a Firewall/NAT. A pretty good document can be found here:
Kyle Holladay
ACA-I, ACA Call Center, ACS-I, ACS-M, TIA-CTP, MCP/MCTS Exchange 2007
ACE Implement: IP Office
"If it worked the way it should you wouldn't need me
It should be noted that Avaya does not work directly with the customer as this is part of the business partner model and it is the requirement of the BP to provide Tier 1 support and escalation. If your BP isn’t doing this then they are not doing their job and should be immediately replaced by someone who will actually invest time in maintaining your business relationship.
The Phone Manager skins are the same color and such as other Avaya applications. They are designed to make the IP Office applications look like the other Avaya applications for their other platforms. It would seem common and in fact obvious that a manufacturer would create a proprietary "feel" for their suite of applications. For example all Office 2007 applications look very similar but look nothing like previous versions of any Microsoft application I have ever seen.
So far as Soft Phone requiring a VPN. This isn't an Avaya nor a Soft Phone limitation. This is an H.323 limitation and the requirement would be exactly the same regardless of the vendor selected when using H.323. This will be addressed by the H.460 family of standards but is not commonly adopted. Outside of an implementation of H.460 only those Soft Phone applications that utilize SIP can properly transverse a Firewall/NAT. A pretty good document can be found here:
Kyle Holladay
ACA-I, ACA Call Center, ACS-I, ACS-M, TIA-CTP, MCP/MCTS Exchange 2007
ACE Implement: IP Office
"If it worked the way it should you wouldn't need me
Klubar:
Why don't you start a tread with your issues and let the guys here start to help you out.
We have all gone into to previously installed customers and been told about the IPO being rubbish. It is simply not true. We generally walk away with happy customers and a signature on a Maint contract with us and a snotty letter to the installer.
Jamie Green
ACA:Implement - IP Office
ACS:Implement - IP Office
Fooball is not a matter of life and death-It is far more important!!!!
Why don't you start a tread with your issues and let the guys here start to help you out.
We have all gone into to previously installed customers and been told about the IPO being rubbish. It is simply not true. We generally walk away with happy customers and a signature on a Maint contract with us and a snotty letter to the installer.
Jamie Green
ACA:Implement - IP Office
ACS:Implement - IP Office
Fooball is not a matter of life and death-It is far more important!!!!
- Thread starter
- #51
Klubar,
I have installed myself dozens of IPO's with not a single one unwilling to write me a letter of recomend on their implementation experience. When I look in my IPO configuration back ups I see over 100 IPO's I have supported, or at least that I bothered to make back ups for. I have had customers return to have 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th sites implemented with IPO's as well, so that says how great the IPO is.
I understand that your experience may not be the same as mine, and I can explain the reason for that difference in no uncertain terms.
YOU DID NOT HAVE ME INSTALL YOUR IPO, IF YOU HAD, YOU WOULD PROBABLY NOT EVEN HAVE FOUND THIS FORUM, OR IF YOU DID YOU WOULD BE DRINKING MY IPO KOOL-AID AND OFFERING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS, AND PEOPLE IN YOUR NETWORK.
I have not one little lick of doubt in this matter as it has been the case for every one I have done. I am not saying that I am the only one who can do this, but obviously your BP is not one of us.
kwing offered his services, and he is good enough I would bet he would get you drinking the IPO kool-aid as well, so give him a try, and stop blaiming the IPO, or your poor choice of BP's on the IPO. You are the one that chose a bad BP when it comes to the IPO, get over it, move on, and stop blaiming the IPO it makes you look foolish.
I have installed myself dozens of IPO's with not a single one unwilling to write me a letter of recomend on their implementation experience. When I look in my IPO configuration back ups I see over 100 IPO's I have supported, or at least that I bothered to make back ups for. I have had customers return to have 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th sites implemented with IPO's as well, so that says how great the IPO is.
I understand that your experience may not be the same as mine, and I can explain the reason for that difference in no uncertain terms.
YOU DID NOT HAVE ME INSTALL YOUR IPO, IF YOU HAD, YOU WOULD PROBABLY NOT EVEN HAVE FOUND THIS FORUM, OR IF YOU DID YOU WOULD BE DRINKING MY IPO KOOL-AID AND OFFERING IT TO YOUR FRIENDS, AND PEOPLE IN YOUR NETWORK.
I have not one little lick of doubt in this matter as it has been the case for every one I have done. I am not saying that I am the only one who can do this, but obviously your BP is not one of us.
kwing offered his services, and he is good enough I would bet he would get you drinking the IPO kool-aid as well, so give him a try, and stop blaiming the IPO, or your poor choice of BP's on the IPO. You are the one that chose a bad BP when it comes to the IPO, get over it, move on, and stop blaiming the IPO it makes you look foolish.
- Thread starter
- #53
Here Here!!!
Jamie Green
ACA:Implement - IP Office
ACS:Implement - IP Office
Fooball is not a matter of life and death-It is far more important!!!!
Jamie Green
ACA:Implement - IP Office
ACS:Implement - IP Office
Fooball is not a matter of life and death-It is far more important!!!!
My BP is a "SMB Expert Business Partner". Where are they in the Avaya rating system?
Also, some of the problems are just fundamental to IP Office, like softphone not working in vista, maximum voice mail lengths not individually configurable, using a nearly obsolete time server protocol (not NTP), etc. See my rant about phone manager on another thread.
Also, some of the problems are just fundamental to IP Office, like softphone not working in vista, maximum voice mail lengths not individually configurable, using a nearly obsolete time server protocol (not NTP), etc. See my rant about phone manager on another thread.
- Thread starter
- #57
Klubar,
Dude, what comes between the "***"'s makes no difference! SMB expert business partner says nothing in particular about the IPO itself. I do not think you even have to meet the product authorization standards for the IPO to even be a platinum BP. Avaya has more than one product, and you do not have to be proficient in all of their products to get a rating of this nature.
If you bought a system from someone who you did not check their references on the specific product you were purchasing from them, I have to say that you did not do your due diligence as a decision maker about such an important decision for your company. I do not understand how someone can buy a system as critical to their business as a telephony system, and not check references of the vendor for the product they are purchasing from them. Requesting references from a vendor takes one email, and following up takes 10 minutes/reference with the refering companies, so maybe an hour if they give you 6 references. If they do not have 6 references on your system, with your applications, or similiar, then let me guess, they are not that experienced, maybe.
Your criticisms of the IPO are more so of your BP. Time server works, and is not an issue, you may not like it, but I have never had an issue with it in all my systems, so that is just a whine. Never had a request, or need for individually configurable voicemail message lengths in my vast experience with the IPO, so that sounds like a whine as well. Although you may make a big deal about it, obviously no one else does since I have 100+ systems, and numerous techs I have had the duty to support in their field ops who have never had issue with it. As far as vista support, LOL, that screams your BP was lame if they did not even ask if you were using vista when you were going to use phone manager.
I understand your frustration, as I have followed the BP 's who birth IPO haters ready to rip it out, but decided to take one shot at another vendor. They ended up liking their IPO, and some of them the other IPO they bought afterwards as well.
The reality is that you were suckered by someone who did not know the product, or you would not even be here looking to take revenge on the IPO for what this BP did to you.
Now do I blame Avaya for letting incompetents install the IPO, yes, but that is not reflective of the product, just the way Avaya authorizes BP's to implement.
Dude, what comes between the "***"'s makes no difference! SMB expert business partner says nothing in particular about the IPO itself. I do not think you even have to meet the product authorization standards for the IPO to even be a platinum BP. Avaya has more than one product, and you do not have to be proficient in all of their products to get a rating of this nature.
If you bought a system from someone who you did not check their references on the specific product you were purchasing from them, I have to say that you did not do your due diligence as a decision maker about such an important decision for your company. I do not understand how someone can buy a system as critical to their business as a telephony system, and not check references of the vendor for the product they are purchasing from them. Requesting references from a vendor takes one email, and following up takes 10 minutes/reference with the refering companies, so maybe an hour if they give you 6 references. If they do not have 6 references on your system, with your applications, or similiar, then let me guess, they are not that experienced, maybe.
Your criticisms of the IPO are more so of your BP. Time server works, and is not an issue, you may not like it, but I have never had an issue with it in all my systems, so that is just a whine. Never had a request, or need for individually configurable voicemail message lengths in my vast experience with the IPO, so that sounds like a whine as well. Although you may make a big deal about it, obviously no one else does since I have 100+ systems, and numerous techs I have had the duty to support in their field ops who have never had issue with it. As far as vista support, LOL, that screams your BP was lame if they did not even ask if you were using vista when you were going to use phone manager.
I understand your frustration, as I have followed the BP 's who birth IPO haters ready to rip it out, but decided to take one shot at another vendor. They ended up liking their IPO, and some of them the other IPO they bought afterwards as well.
The reality is that you were suckered by someone who did not know the product, or you would not even be here looking to take revenge on the IPO for what this BP did to you.
Now do I blame Avaya for letting incompetents install the IPO, yes, but that is not reflective of the product, just the way Avaya authorizes BP's to implement.
- Status