TAPI Driver Vista

[CIDCrane]

I cannot get the Tapi driver to work on Vista Ultimate, somebody told me that I needed the 3.2.54 and 4.1.something version to get it to work, however Avaya doesn't offer these versions for download on their webpage, is it possible somebody could email me the Tapi driver or let me know of some way around this

 

[amriddle01]

Is it 64 bit vista? If so it will never work
tlpeter's site may help you out, if so find one of his posts and give him a star

https://tlpeter.homeserver.com/IPOffice/UserCD.htm

ACS - IP Office Implement

"I'm just off to Hartlepool to buy some exploding trousers

 

[Westi]

according to the 4.2 matrix the TAPI is compatible with Vista Ultimate SP1 which means you could download the latest 4.2 User software and it would work.
I can't see old versions work and new ones not at least not if they have it listed as OK.

Joe W.

FHandw., ACS

If you can't be good, be good at it!

 

[BurgerBen]

Try this.
Goto C:\Program Files\Avaya\IP Office\Phone Manager and remove PhoneManager.exe.manifest

good luck

Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm.Or is that another upgrade?

ACA - Implement IP Office

 

[CTPM]

amriddle01 =>

Are you sure that there will never be a 64 bits version compatible with Vista?

Thanks

 

[teletechman]

Never say never but according to Avaya no plans in the works.
Mike

 

[tlpeter]

It has nothing to do with Avaya
It is Microsoft that does not make it !

ACS - Implement IP Office
ACA - Implement IP Telephony -- ACA - Design IP Telephony
ACA - Voice Services Management
______________
Women and cats can do as they please and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea!

 

[TelcoAdy]

I think there was an issue with early 4.1 user installs where if the TAPI driver was installed in the same install as phone manager the TAPI installation would fail.

To get around it you had to install phone manager on its own and then run the TAPI setup on its own (there is a tapi folder which contains it's own installer)

Beleive this was rectified in 4.2 though