My company is in the final stages of selecting a new phone system for 35+ locations around the U.S. This would be a 3 - 5 year process, starting with a few smaller locations, and whatever is chosen will have to be appropriate for our headquarters, which has approx. 1k users, and can process upwards of 30k calls a day. Call center applications are relatively simple, but reporting functions are important, and changes are frequent so ease of admin is also important. I come from a voice background, familiar with Siemens/ROLM, Avaya, and Intertel, and know that Siemens and Avaya can process a lot of calls, and have decent Call Center packages, and we don't have to go VOIP right away. Sorry for rambling, just looking any recent experiences.
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 SkipVought on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Who's better , Avaya or Cisco? 2
- Thread starter opg30
- Start date
I think they are the products that are good for the future and are way better as others (also heard nortel is great to).
But you have to look at the feature,s you want and need, that is what make the diffrence.
Make sure you have a list of feature,s you absolutly need and some you want.
Then make sure you get a good demonstrations by your dealers and let them see al these features.
Also get a list installed clients and try to find out there
experiance with it.
Greets Peter
But you have to look at the feature,s you want and need, that is what make the diffrence.
Make sure you have a list of feature,s you absolutly need and some you want.
Then make sure you get a good demonstrations by your dealers and let them see al these features.
Also get a list installed clients and try to find out there
experiance with it.
Greets Peter
-
2
- #3
phoneguy55
Programmer
Do a search there are many posts on this topic. Also, check this out.
98Converter
Technical User
Nice phoneguy55!
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit. ARISTOTLE 384-322 B.C.
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit. ARISTOTLE 384-322 B.C.
youcandoit
Technical User
I work with Cisco CRA,ICM,CCM UNITY etc..... The major draw back currently IMHO is WINDOWS. 
I used to do definity g3r/g3si and intuity.
The Cisco pic is awesome. I like the Avaya products better. but i found a niche in the CIPT world making great money.
Avaya's solutions is more costly too.
I used to do definity g3r/g3si and intuity.The Cisco pic is awesome. I like the Avaya products better. but i found a niche in the CIPT world making great money.
Avaya's solutions is more costly too.
I'd debate that Avaya is more expensive, youcandoit. When we did our transition from a dying Meridian Option 11 a year and a half ago, our analysis showed the Cisco solution to be more costly by about 25%. Of course, this was our specific case, your mileage may vary.
phoneguy55
Programmer
That picture was posted on another board. As soon as I saw it, I had to book mark it.
youcandoit
Technical User
typically avaya cost more than cisco.. i come from really big environments. the pic rocks.
Since I am new to this forum, I will jump in with my two cents, coming from a slightly different angle.
At my previuos job, we decided to look at VoIP for trunk replacement more than anything; we had 83 Notel PBX's all tied together with T1's. We also have a fully meshed MPLS data network, so the cost of the two networks combined was well over $1 million annually. We looked at Nortel first, then decided to expand the scope to include Cisco, Avaya, and Mitel.
We eliminated Avaya and Nortel in the first round, primarily due to customer support for Nortel, and survivability for Avaya. One issue we saw was the time it took for an IP phone to re-register if the primary system was down. We were told this was due to a link-flap timer, and it could be set as low as 90 seconds. For us, that was just too long. Now it is possible that this has changed, but it was a major concern at the time. Ultimatly the company decided on Cisco, and they are in Phase 1 of the rollout, which was ISR gateways at the PBX sites, using Q.SIG to connect the Nortel PBX's to the Cisco routers.
That being said, I just installed 16 IP phones for a new building and could not be happier. The guys love 'em, and we have had no issues in service. I have 3 4630's and 2 4625's going in on Monday (I get one of the 4630's) and our IT Director is very excited about the technology.
Possibly more fodder than desired, but I felt it was important enough to share.
Good luck!!
Scott M.
At my previuos job, we decided to look at VoIP for trunk replacement more than anything; we had 83 Notel PBX's all tied together with T1's. We also have a fully meshed MPLS data network, so the cost of the two networks combined was well over $1 million annually. We looked at Nortel first, then decided to expand the scope to include Cisco, Avaya, and Mitel.
We eliminated Avaya and Nortel in the first round, primarily due to customer support for Nortel, and survivability for Avaya. One issue we saw was the time it took for an IP phone to re-register if the primary system was down. We were told this was due to a link-flap timer, and it could be set as low as 90 seconds. For us, that was just too long. Now it is possible that this has changed, but it was a major concern at the time. Ultimatly the company decided on Cisco, and they are in Phase 1 of the rollout, which was ISR gateways at the PBX sites, using Q.SIG to connect the Nortel PBX's to the Cisco routers.
That being said, I just installed 16 IP phones for a new building and could not be happier. The guys love 'em, and we have had no issues in service. I have 3 4630's and 2 4625's going in on Monday (I get one of the 4630's) and our IT Director is very excited about the technology.
Possibly more fodder than desired, but I felt it was important enough to share.
Good luck!!
Scott M.
98Converter
Technical User
I would personally install (5) 4625's and put the 4630's in the same repository as represented in the Cisco photo...
Kinda confused on your post though - what are the Avaya phones connecting to?
Thanks,
CJH
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit. ARISTOTLE 384-322 B.C.
Kinda confused on your post though - what are the Avaya phones connecting to?
Thanks,
CJH
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit. ARISTOTLE 384-322 B.C.
We have a medpro card and CLAN installed on our system. We are currently running software release 2.1 (I believe that is the right was to express it). I have a Director and IS Manager who are both big fans of technology. Between the two of them, I think I have seen about 6 new PDA/BlackBerrys/etc in the 2.5 months I have been here.
I appreciate the input on the phones, it will be interesting to see how they work.
I appreciate the input on the phones, it will be interesting to see how they work.
srmega
The Avaya equipment is substantially better at fail over times. This is not my opinion it is somthing that has been tested by third partys in BCR (Businesss Communications Review) and the results are announced each year and reviewed at voice con.
I have continuously watched these tests and Cisco has been outperformed in EVERY ip failover test from phones to gateways and in fact bowed out of the test this year.
I am not drinking one companies kool aid over anothers but I really have a hard time understanding how you came up with this.
Avaya is better at fail over and has continuously proven as much.
The Avaya equipment is substantially better at fail over times. This is not my opinion it is somthing that has been tested by third partys in BCR (Businesss Communications Review) and the results are announced each year and reviewed at voice con.
I have continuously watched these tests and Cisco has been outperformed in EVERY ip failover test from phones to gateways and in fact bowed out of the test this year.
I am not drinking one companies kool aid over anothers but I really have a hard time understanding how you came up with this.
Avaya is better at fail over and has continuously proven as much.
srmega41,
yeah, i see your case is classic. it managers who love shining funky gadgets, fall in to cisco salesmen' fairy tales and beautiful songs and decide to shed proven equipment down the pipe and turn everything into cisco. then, after several years struggling with this false spell, lose their job.
how much of this we've seen, how much is there yet to see...
yeah, i see your case is classic. it managers who love shining funky gadgets, fall in to cisco salesmen' fairy tales and beautiful songs and decide to shed proven equipment down the pipe and turn everything into cisco. then, after several years struggling with this false spell, lose their job.
how much of this we've seen, how much is there yet to see...
In August of 2005, we were at a vendors site and watched it happen. We had two 8500's; one in active mode and the other in standby, or failover, or whatever the term was (My Avaya terminology is coming along slowly). We pulled the patch cable to the primary controller and picked up the phone; NO DIAL TONE. We waited and watched the phone for about 90 seconds. All it did was say "tring to connect to 192.168.X.X. After about 4 minutes, it registers with the secondary controller and we were able to make calls again.
We did the exact same test on Cisco sets, and once we pulled the plug on the primary Call Manager, we picked up the set, it immediatly registers to the secondary Call Manager and gave us dial tone.
As I said, that was almost a year ago, so I reserve the right to be wrong on todays functionality. The expanation provided was as stated above; a link-flap timer. I have asked our current vendor to provide updated information on this, so far with no response.
I did read that configuring the S8500 units as LSP's vs. ESS does help in switchover from the primary server to the backup (BCR March 2006). Our concern was when you do not have a server at the same location as your phones, or you lose a local link, so that connectivity may go down totally, then reroute (i.e. a WAN link with DSL for backup).
Hope this helps explain where I got this, and I would love to hear any updates on this issue. As I continue down this road of VoIP with my current employer, I want to be as informed as possible, and make the right suggestions and proposals for my company.
Thanks,
Scott M.
BTW, do you remember when they announced the results of the tests? I was at VoiceCon this year and last, and I don't remember a workshop they discussed that. This would be good info to have as well.
We did the exact same test on Cisco sets, and once we pulled the plug on the primary Call Manager, we picked up the set, it immediatly registers to the secondary Call Manager and gave us dial tone.
As I said, that was almost a year ago, so I reserve the right to be wrong on todays functionality. The expanation provided was as stated above; a link-flap timer. I have asked our current vendor to provide updated information on this, so far with no response.
I did read that configuring the S8500 units as LSP's vs. ESS does help in switchover from the primary server to the backup (BCR March 2006). Our concern was when you do not have a server at the same location as your phones, or you lose a local link, so that connectivity may go down totally, then reroute (i.e. a WAN link with DSL for backup).
Hope this helps explain where I got this, and I would love to hear any updates on this issue. As I continue down this road of VoIP with my current employer, I want to be as informed as possible, and make the right suggestions and proposals for my company.
Thanks,
Scott M.
BTW, do you remember when they announced the results of the tests? I was at VoiceCon this year and last, and I don't remember a workshop they discussed that. This would be good info to have as well.
Cisco bailed on the tests this year claiming they were waiting to test with their latest release which was not available at the time. So you would not have seen the results this year. The previous year when Cisco did test the announcement was made during the Large PBX best in test results which I attended.
I will try to dig up a link.
This has the overall test results and methodologies.
I will try to dig up a link.
This has the overall test results and methodologies.
CISCO being rolled out where I am. That picture sums it up for me.
CISCO is up and down like a yo-yo. I neved had the same problems with Avaya. I can honestly say 100% uptime.
When your looking at solutions make sure you ask the right questions.
From what I hear and integration of the 2 technologies seems a better idea! Especially if you have proprietry avaya kit anyway
CISCO is up and down like a yo-yo. I neved had the same problems with Avaya. I can honestly say 100% uptime.
When your looking at solutions make sure you ask the right questions.
From what I hear and integration of the 2 technologies seems a better idea! Especially if you have proprietry avaya kit anyway
- Status
Similar threads
