The Web Client vs Classic fat Client question

[joynew68]

Hi,

We are going on Network Symposium upgrade after rel 4.2 to 5.0 upgrade.
As I understand this correctly to utilize Networking enhancements there is also necessary to add Web Client application Server with at least one Web Client for new Networking features access.

As we are quite satisfied with classic client the question is:
Are there any next Web client advantages aginst fat client , is there any reason for “well established old good classic clients “ replacement ?
Or is better install just one, two Web clients for network admin as the main reason for Symposium Network upgrade are Virtual call center, Longest idle agent and Average speed of answer new features ?

Many thanks for your experience info

joynew

 

[cgilmer]

I think you will find the main reason for this was that the "Fat Client" was a nightmare to get installed due to its outdated drivers. One install of Microsoft Office and it blew away the database drivers and the reports started failing.

Then the process of going out and patching all the clients everytime there was an update. They went to this solution to prevent the need for desktop compatibility. As far as I can tell the features are virtually the same although I don't really like the idea of a Web Client Server in order to maintain the system. Much less the offering of the Co-Res on the symposium server by moving to Windows 2003 and the Feature Pack 1 for SCCS.

If you are going to use it remember that certain administrative functions require a terminal services client lisence for each user that would need such privilegdes via the Web Client.

 

[sandyml]

And with networking, yes, there are features that can only be programmed with the Web Client. Nortel stopped developing the "classic" client, and so new features do not appear there, only in the Web Client interface. These are mainly "Virtual Call Center" features; for example, "Local Node Inclusion" and the ability to queue to "longest idle agent" throughout your network.

I agree with cgilmer, some things are easier to do on the good ole "fat" client. Scripting, for example. So I do that with the fat client. Now that you can use Windows 2003 with the coresident Web Client (SCCS Rls. 5.0 Feature Pack 1), you don't need a separate server.

 

[mikeyb123]

there is one thing that's missing from the web client and that's the voice prompt editor....

It's not getting any smarter out there. You have to come to terms with stupidity, and make it work for you.

 

[joynew68]

Thanks for useful explanations !
Yes, I have been stressed many times with Clients 1.5-4.2 installations. Also our IT/PC staff hate this software because of reasons described by cgilmer.
I thought if SCCS rel. 5.0 includes Web Client software there are also all client services licensed. Or terminal and other servises are charged extra ?

joynew

 

[cgilmer]

Terminal Services Licenses are best handled by your Company since they are responsible for dealing with them during an audit.