atcomsystems.ca/forum Forums General General Telephone & Systems Information Why NOT to buy an IP system

This sounds like a political smear campaign. Let’s not talk about our strengths, let’s just talk about their faults.

1. How often do you have to reboot your Computer Based Network? We hardly ever have to reboot any network device. This includes routers, switches, and servers.

2. How often must you upgrade your computer/network software? Aside from security patches there’s not a whole lot of upgrading going on.

3. When the lights go out, so do the phones? Huh????? If a TDM system is installed without any power protection what happens when the lights go out?

4. With analog, you always have a phone up with digital and PFT, you always have a phone up. There’s so many things wrong with this I don’t know where to start. Always have a phone up????? Yes, if the system is properly designed and implemented. Same can be said for any IP system.

5. IP phone guys (i.e. phone guys who have trained on IP) are usually better at troubleshooting a TCP/IP network than the in-house IT guy? This one makes me laugh. Usually better? I might not want to go around using this line too many times because you will eventually be challenged and end up with poo on your face.

6. Another gripe of mine is you need expensive Cat 5 backbone with QOS, POE switches just to run a phone? Most places have some sort of network in place don’t they? You don’t always need QOS and you don’t always need expensive POE switches.

There shouldn’t be a US vs. Them or IP vs. TDM debate. Both TDM and IP have their place and time. If I was quoting an IP system to a customer and any of these arguments was used against me I would love it because it would make my sale so much easier. A customer should be proposed the best SOLUTION for their need. This is going to vary depending on the situation and there’s so many variables that we simply cannot say IP or TDM is the "best". We are their telephone vendor and as such we should know just as much as IP as we do about TDM systems. IP is not going away so grin and bear it. The more time you spend fighting the system the more time you’re spending falling behind. Embrace the technology, educate yourself, and be prepared to make intelligent arguments as to the pros and cons of any system.

Telephone systems are different from data networks in one very important way; User Experience.

When you configure a telephone system, everything is driven by the user experience. Someone who primarily deals with telephone systems will consult with the user to find out what their needs are. You also need to anticipate their needs based on experience and keep them on the right path. Anything that you change is going to have some impact on the user experience. You don't make changes simply because it suits your fancy or because you want to play with a new technology. You don't swap one type of phone for another just because it's easier for you to manage the phones without considering the needs of the user.

People who manage networks are often more concerned with the technologies they manage and much less so with the user experience. You can change your routing or replace your Baystack switch with a Cisco switch without your users noticing anything.

As a phone installer you do what's right for the end users. The IT guy will often do what's right for the network. Funny thing about that, the network doesn't care.

It isn't always about the technology, it's about the philosophy of the person managing that technology. There are plenty of IT people who are very concerned about the user experience, and their role in enabling users to do their jobs. There are some IT people who act like the network is the most important thing in the company and the users should feel lucky that they get to use it at all.

Though I'm not down on VoIP systems, two selling points against traditional TDM that I can't make sense of are:

1) "You mean to tell me that the Merlin 410/820 requires you to use eight conductor wiring? When will AT&T get with the program and support phones over a single pair?" Of course nobody today cares how many pairs a POE IP phone requires.

2) "You mean to tell me that having two autonomous networks--one for voice and one for data--makes any sense?" Meanwhile, cabling for new buildings almost always includes at least two C5e runs...one for voice and one for data (though technically they're the same). And how many times do you see each side of the house go through two distinct switches "to better manage traffic"?

Things that make you go "Hmmmmm".

I'd like to address these points if I may...

3. NEC systems are built to accept off-the-shelf batteries for keeping the system up and running during a brief power outage. I have one hotel with a car battery powering their backup power (installed using NEC-supplied connectors). Bet it stays up longer than the UPS on a Cisco system lasts... Also... Got analog CO trunks on those pure IP systems, or do they turn into expensive intercoms while the power's out?

4. I have yet to see an IP system with PFT. Would you care to name one and provide a link, please? Avaya Partner has PFT built-in, for example, and most other TDM systems allow PFT.

5. Yes, usually better. You tell me how many times you've explained to a Phone Guy that the phones don't work because the UDP port's not open, and I'll match it with how many times I've explained it to the FCGs. And let's add a bonus for each time that they said, "What's UDP?"

6. Sure, you slap the Phone system onto the existing network with no POE and no QOS. Then gently explain to the customer who just paid through the nose for this system why:

... A. You can only provide a limited number of phones, with limited features, because there's not enough power for more or better phones... Or else why you have to have a wall wart and a power cord going into each phone... (didn't people used to B*tch about that on Nortel?)
... B. The system has huge amounts of latency and voice sounds choppy as hell, or echoes like he's in an oil drum, or else the guy across the room's lips move five seconds before he speaks like in a badly dubbed movie...
... C. The phone connections bounce up and down when Phil in Accounting streams a funny You-Tube clip... And then shows it to everyone in Accounting...

BTW, this should demonstrate item 5, as well. I can understand that a CG might not realize how QOS works or how important it is to a clear voice connection, but for a TDM phone guy trained on IP, not understanding latency is nearly unforgivable.

Yes, we need to embrace VoIP and yes, it's the wave of the future. But it needs to be driven by the Phone industry, not the computer industry.

Otherwise, the CG who just got his 6-month Diploma from We-Make-A+-Experts School of Technology will always be over his head and spouting jargon he doesn't understand while he screws up a working voice system.

The only thing I'll say about all this is I've seen many pure IP systems removed because they didn't perform as expected. Can't say that about traditional phone systems.

If you have use for off prem IP phones most new systems will do this, keep it conventional with-in your four walls. You'll get the best of both worlds this way.

Implied here and specifically spelled out by Clinton is the notion of customer service. Having worked on both sides of the fence, I personally have no problem characterizing IT people as being so horribly egocentric about their hardware that it often becomes their focus. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen IT/MIS people blow off a day's worth of support calls while concentrating on getting the newest "Cisco flip-flop macro mini module doohickey with pretty blue lights" to work just the way they want it.

And while I also see phone guys as being so proud and brand loyal that the attitude can border on egotistical (I'm guilty as well), I dare say that the only time a phone guy pulls an all-nighter is to GET A CUSTOMER UP. And while a project like that MAY involve fussy hardware, the goal and the focus will, and has always been, the customer...never the equipment.

If phone systems could be tuned up to optimize our video gaming experience, things may have turned out differently.

Telephone Guy,
I was refuting the general points made and not discussing specifics or manufacturers. We can discuss specifics for months here.

3. If a system is not installed with adequate power protection it won’t matter if its a TDM system or an IP system they will both shut off.
"Got analog CO trunks on those pure IP systems, or do they turn into expensive intercoms while the power's out?" Not sure if I follow you here. Even if you have a PRI it will function with the power off so what do you mean here? If you’re thinking about IP trunks then again were back to the power protection issue. If you have backup power you’ll be fine. Its pretty straightforward.

4. Again with specifics. Do all TDM systems have PFT? No they don’t. Were back to implementation. If the customer says "I need PFT" then you provide them a product that will do it. Even if a system does not have built in PFT its not hard to install jacks on the COs and have a few multiline phones on hand for backup.

5. I’ve had to ask IT guys all the time to open up ports for our phones. I never thought they were idiots for not knowing that. Are they supposed to somehow magically know what ports need to be opened and why? Does that mean a telephone guy who has to call support is an idiot for not knowing everything about their system?

6. Again were back to implementation. My point was simply this. You don’t ALWAYS have to have POE switches and if you do they don’t ALWAYS have to be expensive.

Justbill, We’ve pulled out TDM systems because the customer was not happy with it. It all falls back on the customer’s expectations and what he or she was told they were getting. It happens all the time with both TDM and IP systems.

My gripe with some of the posts is that you can’t just generalize and say IP is better or TDM is better because that’s not the way it works. You provide a solution for a customer’s needs plain and simple. Sometime IP is the right way to go and sometime TDM is the right way to go and sometimes a hybrid setup may be called for. The IP products have their place and you can’t discard them because Joe Blow didn’t know how to install it. We don’t quote IP for everything and we don’t quote TDM for everything. It all depends on the customer's needs.

No great words of wisdom here, just some random thoughts:

My recent foray into VoIP has been an eye opener. What has floored me is the cost. Doing VoIP right is really expensive. Way more than TDM by a huge margin. From that aspect alone it should be the main consideration in the final decision. Unfortunately, we are seeing the big vendors moving away from TDM and at best developing some fancy hybrid systems that still revolve around VoIP. Plus, VoIP is an amazingly easy sell despite the fact that installing and keeping one running smoothly is way more expensive and technologically challenging than any TDM system I know. It's all about villifying the PG. Sound familiar? I know of a lot of businesses who would be an easy sell for an expensive VoIP system if just to jettison their PG who they feel is more of a sorcerer than a technician.

At this time VoIP is much more expensive to install and maintain. All that said, do we really have much of a choice? I mean it's all going VoIP. Avaya no longer has a TDM offering for example. Ditto many others. So is this really just a moot discussion?

At one time in this country we had arguments of whether whale oil was better than natural gas. There is no stopping technology. Like it or not VoIP is here to stay. I'm not digging it so much to be honest. And I am a CG guy. I am wary of getting in deep with VoIP until I can guarantee the same quality of service as I can with a TDM.

The bulk of my experience has been with traditional telephony. I posted this back in 2006. Not much has changed. Since then I can't think of any major issues since the initial problems experienced and addressed. As an end user the IP service has been satisfactory. There are still some issues such as the ability to forward only the line on button #1.

A few months ago I asked some questions about Cisco VOIP versus a standard phone system. The decision had already been made to go with Cisco. I wasn’t a part of the decision. Basically I was an end user.
Someone had asked that I get back to the forum once we cut to the new system. That happened about 3 weeks ago. Below are my thoughts as an end user and as someone with 30 plus years in the telephone business.
Ø Thus far the system seems to meet most of the needs of the business. I can’t speak about the initial or recurring costs since I’m not in that part of the business.
Ø It was different to see someone come in and plug the phone into the data network. No wirework to do, everything was plug and play.
Ø In a previous job I was exposed very briefly to the Call Manager and I had the chance to do some provisioning in a small demo system. My exposure was limited. All I can say is that the terminology used to build extensions, routes, etc. was different from typical telephone terminology. Once you got past that it did not seem that difficult to work in. Again, my exposure was limited.
Ø The actual phones seem functional. I saw and used some Cisco phones about a year and a half ago. The instruments that were installed for our new system were much superior to them. They were comparable to phones on other systems that I have used.
Ø We did experience echo at times on calls in and out of the PSTN. This appears to have been fixed by a software upgrade to the Call Manager. (As I was typing this someone in the office just had an echo problem on an internal call. Maybe there is still a problem.)
Ø You can only forward the line or extension that appears on button one of the phone. This has caused a problem. We’re looking for a “work around”.
Ø My main problem with the whole process was the lack of testing by the vendor and by the division responsible for the phone system. Too much trust was put on the “plug and play”. I wasn’t brought up that way. The instruments were on the desks for a month prior to cutover. They were functional for calls to the PSTN and you could make and receive calls within the system. I did testing on my division’s lines. I uncovered several problems that would have had a major negative impact not just on my division but also on the whole organization. Things like Auto Attendants not being set up. There were problems with the number of incoming calls allowed per extension being incorrect. The same was true with total number of calls allowed per extension. There were extensions that weren’t set up to forward to voice mail. These were things that the people responsible for the job should have been picked up by testing. The end user should not have had to find them by testing.

This is why you should read the book I am writing.

Its for you guys.

My book will explain that all this jibberish is for the most part absolutely true...what are ya gonna do about it?

Hybrid=The neo phone guy that is responsible for the evolution of field engineering success.

You guys fail to see how valuable your perspective is.

WE are the answer.
WE are the ones with the perspective the companies need to succeed with their clients.

dtmf and dagwood nailed it.

Dont you see that becoming the IT guy is the solution?

Everything you have said should make you realize the truth in what I have been saying all along.

Its easier for the phone guy to become the IT guy than the other way around.

My book will at least make you think about it.
I even lay out a few scenarios and methods.
I describe my path in relative detail illustrating decisions that had to be made without all the data. (No pun intended)

YOU guys are the future if you embrace it.
YOU guys will be the elite in the future if you will be a part of it.

YOU would never do the stupid things the data guy does.

Besides...there is a whole chapter on what the IT guy does and like many of you, I dont want to go deep in their world and I already know that i dont have to to know what they know.

Its not a slam on them.
Its the truth.