asterisk users - Jul 2005 - SoftPhones: Bad, or just bad QoS?

Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and  
elsewhere that softphones are generally not considered good enough  
for hardcore business use. Can someone point me to where I can find  
more detail on this debate?

Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on the  
computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a poorly  
designed network?

Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure that  
I have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it appropriately,  
will that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize) problems with soft  
phones?

I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move  
to gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use  
the single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer  
and the phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a  
small gig hub in every office, no?

Actually, most phones come with an ethernet port for the PC as well, so
1 in and 1 out, as to the Gigabit though, that may be a problem, as I'm
not sure of any phones with a gig phy, maybe Cisco?  Broadcom is making
the chips, but I don't know if they are shipping in anything at this
time...

The main issue with the soft phone is that people expect their phone to
work when their PC doesn't...  Kinda hard to call tech support that
way... Also, I think that unless you are an early adopter, it will
probably seem like more of a pain.  

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Ed Pastore
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 12:50 PM
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: [Asterisk-Users] SoftPhones: Bad, or just bad QoS?

Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and elsewhere
that softphones are generally not considered good enough for hardcore
business use. Can someone point me to where I can find more detail on
this debate?

Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on the
computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a poorly
designed network?

Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure that I
have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it appropriately, will
that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize) problems with soft phones?

I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move to
gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use the
single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer and the
phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a small gig hub
in every office, no?
_______________________________________________
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

> Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and
> elsewhere that softphones are generally not considered good enough
> for hardcore business use. Can someone point me to where I can find
> more detail on this debate?
Search the list. there is been a lot of talk on this subject.
Try google (with "site:lists.digium.com")
 
> Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on the
> computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a poorly
> designed network?
YMMV. I like the portability of a softphone, but sound may jitter
because of other apps running on the computer.
 
> Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure that
> I have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it appropriately,
> will that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize) problems with soft
> phones?
If you are on your LAN, it can help. But remember that when you get on
the net, you don't control the equipment.
 
> I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move
> to gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use
> the single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer
> and the phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a
> small gig hub in every office, no?
Lots of VoIP phones come with 2 LAN ports : 1 for the LAN and the
other to connect the computer. So no need to have a hub. And, avoid
hubs, better use a switch.

hth

Hi!
> Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and  
> elsewhere that softphones are generally not considered good enough  
> for hardcore business use. Can someone point me to where I can find  
> more detail on this debate?
- you comp needs to have its speakers turned on in order to transmit the 
ringing sound; if instead folks use a headset (which they should) then 
the ringing will most likely be directed to the headphones, and if the 
user is not constantly wearing his/her headset the incoming call will go 
un-noticed --> headsets are only good for very frequent callers that wear 
their headset 8 hours/day. If that is so you want to purchase GOOD 
headsets, by the way.

- you very much depend on the quality of the soundcard and the mic; 
misconfiguration of the soundcard mixer or a cheap soundcard with extra 
latency, static, noise from the IDE controller/HDD in the audio etc will 
make your users unhappy resulting in the statement "voip has bad
quality"
> Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on the  
> computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a poorly  
> designed network?
No, it's not that. However you need to manage the softphone 
configuration, install new releases & bug fixes. Soundcards can sometimes 
introduce echo due to cheap hardware or a bad sound config.

And, probably this is the most important point, everyone knows how to use 
a phone, at least the basic functionality, no need to teach & train 
people on that. With a softphone, however, that is different. And, as 
others have pointed out, it only works when your comp is a) on, b) 
doesn't show a bluescreen, and c) is successfully connected to the 
network.
> Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure that  
> I have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it appropriately,  
> will that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize) problems with soft  
> phones?
Within your LAN you don't really need QoS if your maximum LAN usage is at 
around 50% of its capacity. On your Internet router QoS can be a good 
thing, though, to make sure that your outgoing VoIP traffic is given 
priority.
> I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move  
> to gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use  
> the single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer  
> and the phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a  
> small gig hub in every office, no?
Except for the recent announcement of 3com to incorporate a Gigabit 
switch into their IP phone you'd have to have a 100 Mbit/s switch in 
every office in order to connect the hardware phones. By the way it 
appears that the 100 Mbit/s switched that are integrated in the hardware 
phones aren't exactly high quality, so if you need a _fast_ link for your 
workstation that don't put it behind a hardware voip phone, even if that 
means more cables.

Your other option is, of course, to keep your old PBX with its phones and 
instead put Asterisk between your PBX and the Internet & Telco. That way 
you save the money for the hardware phones and you have no trouble to 
convince management to spend money on new phones - because you won't. 
Anyway, you should only walk that way if your current PBX can deal with 
digital lines, i.e. PRI (or BRI, which I understand is very uncommon in 
the US where you appear to be located) so that it can be hooked up to 
Asterisk.

Cheers, Philipp

Ed,

There are two main drawbacks to the softphone, as I see it:

1.) User interface - The interface to the softphones is really less  
than ideal. This includes the problem mentioned earlier about not  
hearing ringing unless you have your headset on, dialing with the  
mouse, not having telephone service if your PC isn't on, etc. The  
traditional telephone "interface" of handset, dialpad, etc. is  
utterly pervasive and very simple and user-friendly. You lose that  
with a softphone.

2.) Quality/Cost - For good softphone quality, you HAVE to use a  
headset or external USB handset, etc. This is a pain, because users  
don't always want to use a headset, they want the choice. The other  
problem is that one of the main advantages of the softphone is that  
it is cheap, and paying for a good headset reduces that advantage  
(and you DON'T want to skimp on headsets). The other factor is that  
softphone quality depends on soundcard quality, etc. As a Mac shop,  
this ought to be a smaller problem.

The other thing to keep in mind is that your users, especially your  
boss, are going to be judging the Asterisk system, and you  
performance, based mostly on their interaction with the system. If  
their main interface to the system is a Cisco 7940G or Polycom 501,  
they are likely to be impressed because the new system gives them  
such major benefits, but doesn't require them to use funny computer  
phones, start up their PC to receive or make a call, etc. If they  
have to use X-Lite, then their reaction is likely to be "This system  
works well, but I hate that I have to have my PC on, I have to dial  
with the mouse or numeric keypad, If software update is installing an  
update voice quality goes to hell, etc. This is not to mention that  
if you need Gigabit for the file transfers, etc that your computers  
are doing, then voice quality is likely to go to hell whenever they  
initiate a major file transfer.

To sum up, the common wisdom here seems to be that softphones are  
great in limited situations (traveling, maybe call centers), but that  
once you add a quality headset, they aren't much cheaper, and the  
quality and user experience really suffer. You would be much better  
off with a Polycom 301, which can be had for about $125, especially  
if you are buying 60 at once. Also, in you personal situation, I  
would seriously look to separate your voice LAN from your apparently  
heavily trafficked data LAN, because QOS and sound quality *could*  
become a problem on any network port that is handling a major data  
transfer. Not to mention that you could likely do this on the cheap  
using your existing cat-3 cables. 10-Mbit switched is more than  
enough for your VOIP, especially considering that you can send at the  
very least 24 calls over a 1-Mbit Data T1.

Tom

On Jul 14, 2005, at 3:49 PM, Ed Pastore wrote:
> Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and  
> elsewhere that softphones are generally not considered good enough  
> for hardcore business use. Can someone point me to where I can find  
> more detail on this debate?
>
> Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on  
> the computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a  
> poorly designed network?
>
> Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure  
> that I have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it  
> appropriately, will that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize)  
> problems with soft phones?
>
> I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move  
> to gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use  
> the single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer  
> and the phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a  
> small gig hub in every office, no?
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

Hello all,

Is there an advantage to purchasing a VOIP hard phone with a display for use
with Asterisk versus a hard phone without a display? Are there some creative
uses of the screen or is it pretty generic?

Would anyone have a URL reference for the basics of how the screen works? Is
it a web page and the buttons are independently programmed to match the
screen presentation, or what? I know the question is incredibly basic, but
in my reading of VOIP-INFO.com and other sites, I have not seen much info
about this topic.

Thanks,
--Bill

On Jul 18, 2005, at 7:25 PM, Bill Wesson wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Is there an advantage to purchasing a VOIP hard phone with a  
> display for use
> with Asterisk versus a hard phone without a display? Are there some  
> creative
> uses of the screen or is it pretty generic?
>
> Would anyone have a URL reference for the basics of how the screen  
> works? Is
> it a web page and the buttons are independently programmed to match  
> the
> screen presentation, or what? I know the question is incredibly  
> basic, but
> in my reading of VOIP-INFO.com and other sites, I have not seen  
> much info
> about this topic.
>
> Thanks,
> --Bill
Depends on your definitions and goals.

Yes screens offer flexible soft keys. Yes you may program creative  
applications to use them.
Obviously each manufacturers screens are configured differently and  
have different capabilities. Checkout each vendors support pages for  
admin guides. As a guidline screens add expense to phones so they are  
generally on the better models with additional capabilities. All  
screens are not equal. As an example the Polycom IP600 has a great  
display. The Polycom IP300 running the same software is almost  
unreadable - in my opinion.

On 2005-07-14 12:49:37 -0700, Ed Pastore <epastore@ascp.com> said:
> Hi again, folks. I've been getting feedback from this list and  
> elsewhere that softphones are generally not considered good enough  for 
> hardcore business use. Can someone point me to where I can find  more 
> detail on this debate?
There are some softphones that don't work very well.  There are others that
do.

There are definitely people on the list that use softphones in very 
large call centers. So they must work to a great extent.

I find that JackenIAX on Mac OSX is the best of the bunch.  I also like 
Diax on the PC, although it's kind of cryptic to
setup...
> 
> Is the problem that the technology isn't mature, that the load on the  
> computer is too high, or simply that it doesn't work well in a poorly  
> designed network?
Nothing will work well in a poorly designed network.  I think most 
negative softphone feeling are just based on the poor quality of the 
softphone software that people have used.
> 
> Any time I mention VOIP and network, people tell me to make sure that  
> I have QoS capabilities. If I do, and can tweak it appropriately,  will 
> that eliminate (or at least greatly minimize) problems with soft  
> phones?
THERE IS NOTHING UNIQUE ABOUT SOFTPHONES.  If you have problems with 
QoS, it will screw up hardphones also.
> 
> I am really loathe to rewire my building, and I really have to move  to 
> gigabit for unrelated reasons, so I would like to be able to use  the 
> single gigabit port in every office to serve both the computer  and the 
> phone. That seems to mean either soft phones or putting a  small gig 
> hub in every office, no?
Maybe, there are lots of options though. Try doing some homework ;~)
Good Luck,
Marty