As well, look into the hardware requirements in the case of a wan failure at a branch site. From what I understand it requires a server at each site, where in the Cisco design it's a single router. <br><br>From what I remember, their presence isn't standards based and may have to pay for another server to interoperate. As mentioned, how comfortable are you with a third party requirement for support of a contact center? I think they needed another server even for MWI, not sure if that's been fixed. E911, probably another server. <br>
<br>Microsoft also believes you don't need QoS because of their adaptive codec. As someone who used to troubleshoot voice quality problems on a daily basis, I whole heartedly disagree. I'm also not fond of requiring stability in my operating system to have a stable voice platform.<br>
<br>-nick<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Andrew Dorsett <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vtadorsett@gmail.com">vtadorsett@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
You didn't specify if you were a multi-site operation or not. But have you considered QoS, CAC, and perhaps RSVP when integrating with existing room based VTC? Do you have a requirement for VTC? I would ask Microsoft about their support for multiple codecs and how they handle integrating to a traditional TDM provider. What about e911? How do you handle a situation where an entire office is Lync clients and the power goes out, what about 911 functionality? Or how about the cleaning crew at night...What if one of them has a heart attack, where's the physical phone to dial 911 since they don't have a laptop/desktop? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for soft-clients in the right environment, but there are still requirements for hard-phones that are often overlooked until someone is running around looking for the medics...<div>
<br></div><div>Andrew</div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 7:12 AM, JA Colmenares <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sforcejr@yahoo.com" target="_blank">sforcejr@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;"><div><div></div><div class="h5">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td style="font: inherit;" valign="top"><font face="monospace" size="4"><span style="font-size: 14px; line-height: 16px;"><span style="font-family: Arial,hevetica,sans-serif; line-height: 18px; font-size: 12px; color: rgb(55, 75, 91);"><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; width: 576px;">
<div style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px 0px 9px; clear: none; background-color: transparent;">
<h2 style="margin: 0pt 0pt 6px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; color: rgb(47, 102, 128); font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; width: auto; text-decoration: none; font-family: Arial,sans; line-height: 22px; text-shadow: none;">
<span style="color: rgb(55, 75, 91); font-family: Arial,hevetica,sans-serif; line-height: 18px; font-size: 12px;">If you were asked why choosing CUC 8.X over OCS/Lync 2010 when the costs of setup and licensing for the MIcrosoft solution are much cheaper?. Please take my word about being cheaper due to particular circumstances in our company.</span></h2>
</div></div><div style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 3px; overflow-x: auto; overflow-y: hidden;"><div style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 2px; overflow: visible; clear: both; width: 570px;">
<p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;"> </p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">
What would your reply be? , I need help justifying the CISCO option. I read this document:</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;">
</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;"><a href="https://webmail.duckcreektech.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=7d9a2103295c47799dacf3a191228bc1&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.cisco.com%2fen%2fUS%2fsolutions%2fcollateral%2fns151%2fC11-604516-00_Evaluating_UC_Solutions_WP.pdf" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-decoration: underline;" target="_blank"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns151/C11-604516-00_Evaluating_UC_Solutions_WP.pdf</span></a></p>
<p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;"> </p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">
I need a more objective and unbiased resource. If you believe you can still take a "jab" on the cost aspect, elaborate on it. But I am looking more on the benefits and robustness of the solution. A Hybrid solution is not an option. Either all CISCO or all Microsoft.</p>
<p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;"> </p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">
Not even CISCO partners in my area have been able to provide solid answers to this question.</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;">
</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Thanks</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; min-height: 8pt;">
</p><p style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">John</p></div></div></span></span></font></td></tr></tbody></table><br>
<br></div></div><div class="im">_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
cisco-voip mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br>
<a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>