RE: microsoft lync 2010 Vs Call manager

You know something John?

So save 60% of the costs....

I think I would go with Microsoft if I was your boss.

1. Do you need special codecs?

2. Third party apps do - many lawfirms are already using FEAC with MS OCS 2007 R2.

3. MS has contact center, Team Viewer and Roundtable which are FAR better than webex...
Please read http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/41653

4. I think you need to read up on Microsoft a little more - http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb894539%28office.12%29.aspx

The Cisco product is great for very rich companies that don't want the hastle of co-mingling the Server and the Voice worlds - but any sane company would use the
MS solution for no other reason than $$$.. 400 users with UCM is about $250,000 (not including PoE switches)

I just priced this out in November 2010.

-Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of John Haddad
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11:41 AM
To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: microsoft lync 2010 Vs Call manager

Hi to everyone,

i am searing since a week for a good reason to convenience our management to
go with call manager instead of Microsoft Solution, but i couldn't the only
thing which i found is the following

1-MS doesn't support special type of video codex
2- MS doesn't support the Forced Authorization Code
3-MS doesn't offer contact center solution, and also webex
4-MS solution is layer 7 application which deals with voice like any other
programs it will not treat it as priority traffic !!!

On the other hand
MS will give us
1- unlimited number of softphones which will reduce the cost of the comparison
a lot
2-MS will support Voice messaging, auto attended feature as well

we are planning to go with 400 users, but till now i cannot convince the
management and convince myself regarding MS product.

If you can help me to judge which product is better and why that will be
great.

Thx,

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Tue Jan 11 2011 - 18:57:18 ART