[cisco-voip] QoS and Microsoft OCS

[Scott Voll]

Nick--

I don't think I understand the "Cisco voice mail earns its keep"?  What
other factors am I missing?

Scott

On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Nick Matthews <matthnick at gmail.com> wrote:

> <marketing>
>
> FWIW in regards to the 'free' licensing from Microsoft - the general
> response is that the licensing is a smaller percentage of the TCO than
> you might expect, and the pricing isn't that much different.  After
> other factors are added is where the Cisco voicemail earns its keep.
>
> </marketing>
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Scott Voll <svoll.voip at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Agreement with Ed.
> > In education (maybe more verticals) people are (we included) moving from
> > Unity to Exchange 2010 for UM.  Exchange 2010 is really cool with the
> speech
> > to text feature.  and I get most of it covered under my Microsoft Site
> > licensing vs huge maintenance cost from Cisco.  I've been screaming at
> Cisco
> > since one of my schools moved to UM exchange 2007 about 3 years ago about
> > costs...... Cisco has not moved so we are in the process of moving.
> > as for CUPS vs OCS we have been using OCS (again largely covered under M$
> > site licensing) for IM / presence and loving it.  we will be looking at
> > adding the cisco Cookie - moc (or however they spell it) to integrate
> cisco
> > CM with OCS.  From my understanding...... most people like OCS better
> then
> > CUPS for features.  YMMV.
> > as for Call control I still like CM for the price (haven't had the talk
> with
> > my AM about UCL) and Contract center express has helped us with all the
> > reporting.  CER is a good product also.  If price were no object thou, I
> > would go with 911enable.  but since price is...... CER works fine.
> > just my 2 cents
> > Scott
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Jeffrey Ollie <jeff at ocjtech.us> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Matt Slaga (US)
> >> <Matt.Slaga at us.didata.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > With this said, the next release of OCS (now called ‘MCS’) will be a
> >> > much closer peer-level with Cisco on the voice side.  For now though,
> the
> >> > best of both worlds can be found in integration of the two.
> >>
> >> I'm curious... we have had CallManager/Unity/Contact Center Express in
> >> use for several years (although we don't take advantage of as many
> >> features as we could).  We also have Exchange (2003, soon to be 2010)
> >> for our main mail system (our Unity server is in a separate AD
> >> forest/exchange store although that's likely to change).  There's been
> >> some push by our Exchange people to implement some of the OCS
> >> functionality for our users.
> >>
> >> Is there really a benefit to going with OCS vs using what we have with
> >> Cisco and maybe adding a CUPS server?  The promised XMPP integration
> >> in CUPS 8 looks very interesting to me.  I also need to implement
> >> Cisco Emergency Responder soon too.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jeff Ollie
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-voip mailing list
> >> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-voip mailing list
> > cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20100406/9b72fdcb/attachment.html>