Assuming the price of an ADSI screen phone (say, Aastra 390) was the same as an IP screen phone (say, Cisco 7960) and someone was setting up an * server for their 20 employees (each of whom would have either an ADSI or IP phone on their desk), would there be advantages to using the ADSI phones over the IP phones, or vice-versa? For discussion, let's assume that the hardware needed to patch the ADSI phones back into * was not a cost concern. I'm looking for differences between the technologies independent of cost.
On Sunday, 18 January, 2004 02:04, Ken Alker wrote:> Assuming the price of an ADSI screen phone (say, Aastra 390) was the same > as an IP screen phone (say, Cisco 7960) and someone was setting up an * > server for their 20 employees (each of whom would have either an ADSI or IP > phone on their desk), would there be advantages to using the ADSI phones > over the IP phones, or vice-versa? For discussion, let's assume that the > hardware needed to patch the ADSI phones back into * was not a cost > concern. I'm looking for differences between the technologies independent > of cost. >Pretty much no. The ADSI specification was crippled from the start to specificly not compete with PBX offerings. It has one advantage of (very limited) programmability, but a phone like the SNOM has an open-source core. It also has the dubious value of being interchangeable with a regular analog phone, but that is about it. You will not get anything near the functionality and feature set of a SIP phone, and it has the further irritation that much of its signalling is both in-band and audible. It is too bad. If it were properly implemented, the concept behind ADSI is great. Unfortunately, Telcordia strikes again. -- Sean C. McCord
> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of > Dustin Goodwin > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 11:18 AM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] ADSI phone vs. IP phone > > > Why wouldn't you just use your existing Ethernet > infrastructure putting > the IP phones inline between the wall jack and the PC? There are a > number of IP phones that have builtin switch/hub that allows > the PC to > daisy chain off the IP phone.Probably because it's well known that these setups are prone to failure of either the PC's connection, the phone's connection, or degredation of one/both. It also breaks switch envirenments where spanning-tree portfast is enabled (not as big of a deal if the deployment is in concert with the infrastructure group, as it should be). Vendors should NEVER have implemented this functionality into phones unless it was working under all conditions. Personal experience shows that it is most definitely not on Cisco and 3Com products. Others have told me their stories with other manufacturer's equipment. None of it was good. It's not a production-stable way to deploy phones. Period. Daryl G. Jurbala BMPC Network Operations Tel (NY): +1 917 477 0468 x235 Tel (MI): +1 616 608 0004 x235 Tel (UK): +44 208 792 6813 x235 Fax: +1 508 526 8500 INOC-DBA: 26412*DGJ PGP Key: http://www.introspect.net/pgp
I've been pretty satisfied with the Aastra PT480. There are some other people that say they don't like them, but I think the $110-$120 ea. Works great for our office and the people I install for. Take it for what you paid for it. Tim Thompson Commercial Sales Engineer http://www.amatechtel.com (806) 722-2227> -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Kohlsmith [mailto:akohlsmith-asterisk@benshaw.com] > Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 12:50 PM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] ADSI phone vs. IP phone > > > Why wouldn't you just use your existing Ethernet infrastructureputting> > the IP phones inline between the wall jack and the PC? There are a > > number of IP phones that have builtin switch/hub that allows the PCto> > daisy chain off the IP phone. > > To quote myself: > > >> True, but I don't have to retool my office and install POE switchesto> >> use ADSI phones, either. No, I will not put a hub/switch at everydesk> >> and then use wall-warts for every phone to get around retooling the > >> office. :-) > > I'm not going to bastardize my network by placing the equivalent of a3-> port > switch or hub at every desk to have the phone system compete with our > heavy > network users (CAD mostly), and I will fight tooth and nail againsthaving> to put a goddamned wall-wart at every station just to power the damnedIP> phones. :-) > > Regards, > Andrew > _______________________________________________ > Asterisk-Users mailing list > Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of PJ > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 5:09 PM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: Re: [Asterisk-Users] ADSI phone vs. IP phone > > > On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, David Gomillion wrote: > > > Andrew wrote: > > > > First, what's wrong with PoE? Is it any worse than > installing tons of > > channel banks? > > Can anybody recommend a good PoE product? I am interested in > getting that implemented.You need to be more specific....PoE isn't all standard. As is par for the Course, Cisco has their own. So If you're talking about 79xx's, I can definitely recommend any of the PoE blased for the Cat 4500 and 6500 series. Just make sure you have enough wattage coming form your power supplies (I had to go to 220v on one after loading it up with PoE blades). For smaller wiring closets, the Cat 3524-PWR-XL works great. And if you also have a Cisco wireless infrastructure (AiroNet 350 and newer) you can power those with the same hardware. Daryl G. Jurbala BMPC Network Operations Tel (NY): +1 917 477 0468 x235 Tel (MI): +1 616 608 0004 x235 Tel (UK): +44 208 792 6813 x235 Fax: +1 508 526 8500 INOC-DBA: 26412*DGJ PGP Key: http://www.introspect.net/pgp
> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-admin@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of > Steven Critchfield > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 1:09 PM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: RE: [Asterisk-Users] ADSI phone vs. IP phone >[...]> > You need to be more specific....PoE isn't all standard. As^^^ [...]> PoE has a standard. But some manufacturers either put their > product out before the standard was fully agreed upon, or ignore it.[...] Yes, note the highlighted section of what I said. When a market-shareholder as large as Cisco has their own implementation, it makes the "standard" not so standard anymore. Daryl G. Jurbala BMPC Network Operations Tel (NY): +1 917 477 0468 x235 Tel (MI): +1 616 608 0004 x235 Tel (UK): +44 208 792 6813 x235 Fax: +1 508 526 8500 INOC-DBA: 26412*DGJ PGP Key: http://www.introspect.net/pgp
On Wed, 2004-01-21 at 03:00, Ken Alker wrote:> --On Tuesday, January 20, 2004 2:28 PM -0500 Andrew Kohlsmith > <akohlsmith-asterisk@benshaw.com> wrote: > > [...] > > I thought you were wrong here, as I have Vista 390 at home and I wassure> > that wasn't the case. Lo and behold one of the biggest reasons formy> > wanting to go ADSI over IP has been shattered. > [...] > > May I ask where you live that you have an ADSI phone "at home"? I'vebeen> involved with CallerID testing since the inception of the idea, andI'd> never heard of ADSI until this week. The entire thing just blows meaway;> can't understand why I've never heard one thing about it. I have toassume> that it never made it to the U.S... despite what all the articles I'm > finding claim (written back in 1993-1999). Either that, or it justnever> made it out to my neck of the wood (Santa Barbara, CA), which isentirely> possible since Verizon/GTE rules the land here and they are always adecade> behind the rest of the country.USwest deployed these phones in the US under the product name "Home Receptionist" went hand in hand with a service package so you could use it. The cost was $99, they would split it over 10 months, I think we bought ours in 1999?