Cisco Unity vs. Other Voice Mail Systems

Discussion in 'VOIP' started by jneiberger@, Jun 21, 2005.

  1. jneiberger@

    jneiberger@ Guest

    My company is currently deciding between VoIP systems from Cisco,
    Nortel, Avaya, and Mitel. (Yes, this has been going on for a while and
    it will continue until we make up our minds. <g>)

    I'm curious to find out how Unity compares with other VM systems. I've
    heard some say that Unity is a good product, but I've heard a few
    others say that it's an awful piece of trash compared to "real" voice
    mail or messaging systems.

    Any thoughts?

    Thanks,
    John
    jneiberger@, Jun 21, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> schrieb im
    Newsbeitrag news:...
    > My company is currently deciding between VoIP systems from Cisco,
    > Nortel, Avaya, and Mitel. (Yes, this has been going on for a while and
    > it will continue until we make up our minds. <g>)
    >
    > I'm curious to find out how Unity compares with other VM systems. I've
    > heard some say that Unity is a good product, but I've heard a few
    > others say that it's an awful piece of trash compared to "real" voice
    > mail or messaging systems.


    You might also take into consideration, that there are independend UMS
    system vendors, which will also run in the Cisco VoIP-environment,
    so you are really not "stuck" with Unity there.

    Our company has developed a middleware-solution which allows
    UMS-applications which were developed for TDM-networks,
    to run seamless in the VoIP-environment (Cisco and Avaya for
    example).

    I don't know if you have the requirement of fax-support, but this would
    also work out there...

    Tobias
    Tobias Erichsen, Jun 21, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. jneiberger@

    Mitel Lurker Guest

    Only my personal opinions here John, but we presently have 3 different
    systems, Unity among them, so I do feel qualified to comment. On a scale
    of 1~10, with 10 being best, I would personally rank Unity about a 6,
    Mitel's 'in-the-skins' flavor of Express Messenger somewhere between a 6
    and a 7, and the Octel (Avaya) Overture 250/350 product around 8½ to 9.
    The Octel would inarguably be close to being a solid 10 if it offered
    unified messaging. I understand now there's an aftermarket software
    product that comes very close to emulating this feature for the Octel.
    Jungle Drums are strongly suggesting we may hear some announcement later
    this year about possible End Of Sale. R&D and software development already
    ended a couple (or more) years ago. What a shame.

    For me I think the big strike against Unity is the fact that it's based on
    a Microsoft Windows Server platform. This may well be the future standard
    for all new telecom technology coming down the pike, but not on my watch
    you won't.

    Mitel's Express Messenger (all iterations of it) I find suffers from
    occasional 'talk-off' which in this day and age of modern technology is
    inexcusable.

    Avaya's "Octel Overture" line, (Overture 250 and 350) running Aria rls 3.x
    software, although becoming a little long in the tooth, is bulletproof. I
    have 3 Overtures in operation and they just plain work and keep on working
    day after day, year after year. The ripoff is their maintenance agreement.
    Very expensive and you're very unlikely to ever need it.

    Just my own personal 2¢ worth.

    In article <>
    "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> writes:

    >My company is currently deciding between VoIP systems from Cisco,
    >Nortel, Avaya, and Mitel. (Yes, this has been going on for a while and
    >it will continue until we make up our minds. <g>)
    >
    >I'm curious to find out how Unity compares with other VM systems. I've
    >heard some say that Unity is a good product, but I've heard a few
    >others say that it's an awful piece of trash compared to "real" voice
    >mail or messaging systems.
    >
    >Any thoughts?
    >
    >Thanks,
    >John
    Mitel Lurker, Jun 23, 2005
    #3
  4. jneiberger@

    jneiberger@ Guest

    Thanks for your response, that's very useful information. I share a
    disdain for Microsoft Windows. I certainly wish Cisco had embraced
    Linux, at least, but I just don't think they're going to move that
    direction any time soon.

    Since you have so much experience with multiple vendors, I will pose a
    question to you that I posed to someone else in a similar position.
    Let's say that you were starting your own business and you immediately
    had a number of brand new sites that needed phone systems that needed
    to be networked together. Let's assume that you're considering systems
    from Cisco, Mitel, and Avaya, and let's throw in Nortel if you have any
    experience with them.

    If, magically, the cost of each solution came out to about the same
    amount, which solution would you most likely pick for your own business?
    jneiberger@, Jun 23, 2005
    #4
  5. jneiberger@

    Mitel Lurker Guest

    In article <>
    "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> writes:

    >Thanks for your response, that's very useful information. I share a
    >disdain for Microsoft Windows. I certainly wish Cisco had embraced
    >Linux, at least, but I just don't think they're going to move that
    >direction any time soon.
    >
    >Since you have so much experience with multiple vendors, I will pose a
    >question to you that I posed to someone else in a similar position.
    >Let's say that you were starting your own business and you immediately
    >had a number of brand new sites that needed phone systems that needed
    >to be networked together. Let's assume that you're considering systems
    >from Cisco, Mitel, and Avaya, and let's throw in Nortel if you have any
    >experience with them.
    >
    >If, magically, the cost of each solution came out to about the same
    >amount, which solution would you most likely pick for your own business?
    >


    It certainly would have to be magic because there's no way Cisco's TCO
    could ever be brought in line to be competitive. Anyway since you asked
    and hypothetically assuming otherwise equal costs I'd vote for Cisco for
    the data network and Mitel for the voip piece.

    No denying Cisco can't be beat for data networking know how, but are
    relative newcomers in the voice business, having only been in that side of
    the business a few short years and even acquired that piece in a
    takeover/merger from a small company few had ever before heard of. I think
    you'll find there's more bang for your buck and better suite of voice
    features in the Mitel. Mitel has been in the voice business since the
    early 1980s and the fellows who started that company came from AT&T
    (pre-divestiture). It so happens the Nortel Meridian uses a DX matrix chip
    designed & built for them by Mitel Semiconductor (prior to Mitel spinning
    off that segment of their business). Not many people know that little
    tidbit.

    Cisco's voice deal is too damned expensive when the gloves come off and
    you're looking at your total cost of ownership. There's no way they could
    ever price match. They might cut you a deal in order to land the sale, but
    a year into it and I think you'll find your TCO is hemorrhaging compared
    to any of your other alternatives, including Nortel. Remember Cisco's
    warranty is 90 days whereas Mitel is 1 yr. Of course Cisco will be only
    too happy to sell you a Smartnet contract on it all (adding to your TCO).
    Cisco's Call Manager is also not a "PBX" in the literal sense, rather it
    is an assortment of software applications running under SQL on a Win2K
    server. I believe Cisco's 911 application may require an additional
    server. The server O/S for the call manager, Unity, 911 and all other
    pieces is a Cisco proprietary hack, meaning you'll have to get your
    critical patches and O/S service packs from Cisco. Look at the balance of
    any Cisco data network and you'll see they also like to EOL their hardware
    at the 5-yr point. No legacy PBX vendor has ever done that.

    Last year Cisco was rumored to have a *NIX version of their Call Mgr in
    the works, but I never heard whether it was going to be Unix, Linux or for
    that matter, BSD, nor has there been anything but the rumor and only then
    from one source. Mitel's 3300 runs on VXWorks from Wind River Systems and
    their underlying call control is the exact same SX2000 call control that's
    been running all of their big TDM systems for years.
    Mitel Lurker, Jun 24, 2005
    #5
  6. jneiberger@

    jneiberger@ Guest

    "Look at the balance of
    any Cisco data network and you'll see they also like to EOL their
    hardware
    at the 5-yr point. No legacy PBX vendor has ever done that."

    This is true, but if you're data network is Cisco, you're replacing
    your routers every 3-5 years anyway. :) You also may have SmartNET on
    them so it's not really an additional expense specifically related to
    their VoIP solution.

    I do share your concerns about their feature set in Call Manager. Are
    you aware of any specific features that are missing from Call Manager
    4.0 or 4.1 that people who are used to real PBXs might want?

    Thanks!
    John
    jneiberger@, Jun 25, 2005
    #6
  7. jneiberger@

    Mitel Lurker Guest

    In article <>
    "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> writes:

    >"Look at the balance of
    >any Cisco data network and you'll see they also like to EOL their
    >hardware
    >at the 5-yr point. No legacy PBX vendor has ever done that."


    >This is true, but if you're data network is Cisco, you're replacing
    >your routers every 3-5 years anyway. :)


    but I'm -not- replacing the pbx every 5 nor even every 10 years, nor am I
    anxious to start. It's a phone system for Chrissakes. I'm not against
    merging some technologies here, but the phone system also has to work.
    When the balloon goes up my ass is going to be in a sling if by some
    coincidence our phones are down too. My users are accustomed to their
    phones -always- working. If a hurricane comes through here and flattens
    our corporate office, you better darn well bet that getting the phones
    working again is priority-one ahead of everything else (and I have that
    one in writing).

    >You also may have SmartNET on
    >them so it's not really an additional expense specifically related to
    >their VoIP solution.


    It is, because it's a lot of additional hardware and software with addt'l
    contract costs. Every component and piece of software that goes into a
    Cisco voice system is going to add to the incremental cost of the Smartnet
    contract. If it doesn't then it's not covered.

    >I do share your concerns about their feature set in Call Manager. Are
    >you aware of any specific features that are missing from Call Manager
    >4.0 or 4.1 that people who are used to real PBXs might want?


    Their set-to-set paging is abysmal and last I heard they still did not
    have a central site attendant console capable of handling thousands of
    directory listings. With the size and complexity of what you're planning I
    would think attendant consoles would be de rigueur.

    Common everyday MACS (moves/adds and changes) on the CM are a freaking
    nightmare to administer. Even things like simple key appearance changes
    take numerous steps and most then require rebooting the instrument. How
    absurd. A simple thing like changing a user's last name is burdensome.
    Believe it or not, it's far worse than navigating the CLI of an M1 to
    perform the same task. In peak activity periods we'll perform upwards of
    400 MACS per month, all performed by one non-exempt individual working an
    8-hr shift without incurring 5 minutes of overtime. We'd have to triple
    our staff to do that many on the CM.

    Number of available line key appearances are extremely limited without
    purchasing an alongside adjunct device. I don't know about you but with
    corporate downsizing in recent years we no longer have the luxury of a
    1-to-1 or even 2-to-1 relationship between managers and their admins, not
    even in the executive wing. Todays admins are answering calls for 3~4
    managers and providing backup coverage for each other, requiring cost
    effective instruments with minimum 12~14 line key appearances and this is
    the rule, not merely an abberation or exception.

    Can the Cisco give an Admin in Denver a busy lamp and line key appearance
    of a manager in Green Mountain Falls or Glenwood Springs? A Mitel can.
    Mitel Lurker, Jun 26, 2005
    #7
  8. jneiberger@

    wkearney99 Guest

    > but I'm -not- replacing the pbx every 5 nor even every 10 years, nor am I
    > anxious to start.


    Do the math sometime on what it costs to purchase new hardware with it's
    warranties versus the maintenance contracts on the the older stuff. You'll
    often find the new equipment is more cost effective. Due not only to the
    costs being a wash but also on depreciation. If you've never looked at the
    real numbers you're probably wasting more money that you might realize.

    > If a hurricane comes through here and flattens
    > our corporate office, you better darn well bet that getting the phones
    > working again is priority-one ahead of everything else


    Precisely the sort of reason to be using system that can be supported by a
    wide range of competent professionals. Not just some collection of pc-based
    hacks.

    > Can the Cisco give an Admin in Denver a busy lamp and line key appearance
    > of a manager in Green Mountain Falls or Glenwood Springs? A Mitel can.


    Yes, it often seems genuine PBX vendors like Mitel have a much better grip
    on the complex things real world situations demand everyday.
    wkearney99, Jun 26, 2005
    #8
  9. jneiberger@

    stephen Guest

    "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Look at the balance of
    > any Cisco data network and you'll see they also like to EOL their
    > hardware
    > at the 5-yr point. No legacy PBX vendor has ever done that."


    FWIW you normally get 5 years support after EOL on cisco "stuff" - not
    saying this is what you want, but it isnt quite as bad as the picture you
    are painting.
    >
    > This is true, but if you're data network is Cisco, you're replacing
    > your routers every 3-5 years anyway. :) You also may have SmartNET on
    > them so it's not really an additional expense specifically related to
    > their VoIP solution.


    5 year cycle is fair for a new "greenfield" choice, but the stuff does tend
    to have a longer working life.

    we still run lots of cisco 7513s in the telco network - 10 years or more old
    router design, and the cards are still in production. Mind you, the newer
    10ks we are also using are a lot better, cost less, higher thruput and so
    on.

    the flip side to technology improvements is that when / if you change, then
    you get improvements.
    >
    > I do share your concerns about their feature set in Call Manager. Are
    > you aware of any specific features that are missing from Call Manager
    > 4.0 or 4.1 that people who are used to real PBXs might want?
    >
    > Thanks!
    > John

    --
    Regards

    Stephen Hope - return address needs fewer xxs
    stephen, Jun 26, 2005
    #9
  10. jneiberger@

    DPGumby Guest

    Mitel sells the Nupoint voicemail system that currently uses QNX as an
    operating system but is being migrated to Linux.


    "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thanks for your response, that's very useful information. I share a
    > disdain for Microsoft Windows. I certainly wish Cisco had embraced
    > Linux, at least, but I just don't think they're going to move that
    > direction any time soon.
    >
    > Since you have so much experience with multiple vendors, I will pose a
    > question to you that I posed to someone else in a similar position.
    > Let's say that you were starting your own business and you immediately
    > had a number of brand new sites that needed phone systems that needed
    > to be networked together. Let's assume that you're considering systems
    > from Cisco, Mitel, and Avaya, and let's throw in Nortel if you have any
    > experience with them.
    >
    > If, magically, the cost of each solution came out to about the same
    > amount, which solution would you most likely pick for your own business?
    >
    DPGumby, Jul 13, 2005
    #10
  11. jneiberger@

    Jonathan Guest

    "Mitel Lurker" <wdg@[206.180.145.133]> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>
    > "jneiberger@<google'smailservice>" <> writes:
    >
    >>Thanks for your response, that's very useful information. I share a
    >>disdain for Microsoft Windows. I certainly wish Cisco had embraced
    >>Linux, at least, but I just don't think they're going to move that
    >>direction any time soon.
    >>
    >>Since you have so much experience with multiple vendors, I will pose a
    >>question to you that I posed to someone else in a similar position.
    >>Let's say that you were starting your own business and you immediately
    >>had a number of brand new sites that needed phone systems that needed
    >>to be networked together. Let's assume that you're considering systems
    >>from Cisco, Mitel, and Avaya, and let's throw in Nortel if you have any
    >>experience with them.
    >>
    >>If, magically, the cost of each solution came out to about the same
    >>amount, which solution would you most likely pick for your own business?
    >>

    >
    > It certainly would have to be magic because there's no way Cisco's TCO
    > could ever be brought in line to be competitive. Anyway since you asked
    > and hypothetically assuming otherwise equal costs I'd vote for Cisco for
    > the data network and Mitel for the voip piece.
    >
    > No denying Cisco can't be beat for data networking know how, but are
    > relative newcomers in the voice business, having only been in that side of
    > the business a few short years and even acquired that piece in a
    > takeover/merger from a small company few had ever before heard of. I think
    > you'll find there's more bang for your buck and better suite of voice
    > features in the Mitel. Mitel has been in the voice business since the
    > early 1980s and the fellows who started that company came from AT&T
    > (pre-divestiture). It so happens the Nortel Meridian uses a DX matrix chip
    > designed & built for them by Mitel Semiconductor (prior to Mitel spinning
    > off that segment of their business). Not many people know that little
    > tidbit.
    >
    > Cisco's voice deal is too damned expensive when the gloves come off and
    > you're looking at your total cost of ownership. There's no way they could
    > ever price match. They might cut you a deal in order to land the sale, but
    > a year into it and I think you'll find your TCO is hemorrhaging compared
    > to any of your other alternatives, including Nortel. Remember Cisco's
    > warranty is 90 days whereas Mitel is 1 yr. Of course Cisco will be only
    > too happy to sell you a Smartnet contract on it all (adding to your TCO).
    > Cisco's Call Manager is also not a "PBX" in the literal sense, rather it
    > is an assortment of software applications running under SQL on a Win2K
    > server. I believe Cisco's 911 application may require an additional
    > server. The server O/S for the call manager, Unity, 911 and all other
    > pieces is a Cisco proprietary hack, meaning you'll have to get your
    > critical patches and O/S service packs from Cisco. Look at the balance of
    > any Cisco data network and you'll see they also like to EOL their hardware
    > at the 5-yr point. No legacy PBX vendor has ever done that.
    >
    > Last year Cisco was rumored to have a *NIX version of their Call Mgr in
    > the works, but I never heard whether it was going to be Unix, Linux or for
    > that matter, BSD, nor has there been anything but the rumor and only then
    > from one source. Mitel's 3300 runs on VXWorks from Wind River Systems and
    > their underlying call control is the exact same SX2000 call control that's
    > been running all of their big TDM systems for years.


    CallManager 5 (due out in February 2006) is a Red Hat Enterprise appliance.
    All configuration is done through a web browser, and the shell is completely
    locked down.

    And it is bloody fast.


    Jonathan
    Jonathan, Aug 22, 2005
    #11
  12. jneiberger@

    Mitel Lurker Guest

    In article <> "Jonathan"
    <> writes:


    >CallManager 5 (due out in February 2006) is a Red Hat Enterprise appliance.
    >All configuration is done through a web browser, and the shell is completely
    >locked down.


    >And it is bloody fast.


    No surprise there. Everything about Linux is fast compared to its MS
    counterpart running on the same platform.

    And the upgrade path is.... ?
    and will cost ..... ?
    The info I've heard was that a database conversion utility to transition
    the existing MS-based CM users is in the works for 5.1 (not 5.0) but might
    require new hardware. Any truth to this?

    No doubt this is a step in the right direction for Cisco. I'm sure they've
    taken quite a beating from those who are loathe to put their phone system
    on anything Microsoft. However, I don't think I'd want jump on board with
    release n.0 of anything. We retail customers don't always appreciate the
    anomalies discovered in a "wide beta" as much as those whose system was
    full or partially comp'd to them. >>smile<<

    Thanks for the update!
    Mitel Lurker, Aug 23, 2005
    #12
  13. "Jonathan" <> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:...

    > CallManager 5 (due out in February 2006) is a Red Hat Enterprise
    > appliance. All configuration is done through a web browser, and the shell
    > is completely locked down.
    >
    > And it is bloody fast.


    You don't happen to know whether this new version actually supports
    supplementary services like call-transfer etc. for SIP (or possibly H.323) -
    do you?

    Tobias
    Tobias Erichsen, Aug 24, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sven Holm
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,499
    Sven Holm
    Sep 7, 2003
  2. Sven Holm
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,411
    Sven Holm
    Sep 9, 2003
  3. Sven Holm
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    4,496
    Arnold Ligtvoet
    Sep 12, 2003
  4. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    6,259
  5. Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,174
Loading...

Share This Page