> -----Original Message----- > From: asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com > [mailto:asterisk-users-bounces@lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of > Wolf Paul > Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 6:34 PM > To: asterisk-users@lists.digium.com > Subject: [Asterisk-Users] Re: Benjk's Question "Why FXS" > > How about a school strapped for cash, with around 60 POTS phones on > hand and an almost free source of another 60? Versus a cost (here in > Austria) of $99 for the cheapest VoIP phone (the cheapest Grandstream > model). Of course that also means that FXS is only of interest if > I can get it for under around $50-60/port -- if things cost more it > becomes easier to argue early replacement of these POTS > phones by IP phones. > >I may be wrong, but from what I've seen so far, an FXS port will run you about $100/port anyway, plus the cost of the analog device. At this price, I can't see any reason not to dump the analog and go with a cheap VOIP device. Even the lowest end (i.e. Grandstream) will give you more functionality than most analog phones at the same price. Now if you have a source for cheap or free channel banks, that's another story.
On October 25, 2004 07:15 pm, Reid A. Forrest wrote:> I may be wrong, but from what I've seen so far, an FXS port will run you > about $100/port anyway, plus the cost of the analog device. At this price, > I can't see any reason not to dump the analog and go with a cheap VOIP > device. Even the lowest end (i.e. Grandstream) will give you more > functionality than most analog phones at the same price. Now if you have a > source for cheap or free channel banks, that's another story.You are clearly smoking something. Adit600 fully loaded (48 FXS) off ebay for US$500. That's about $11/port, plus the cost of any old phone. Hell throw in a pair of T100Ps and it's STILL $32/port. IP Phones require massive rewiring of your network infrastructure -- throwing those phones with the built-in switches in the mix is just asking for trouble. -A.
Reid A. Forrest <reid@cvtelecom.com> wrote:> > I may be wrong, but from what I've seen so far, an FXS port will run > you about $100/port anyway, plus the cost of the analog device. At > this price, I can't see any reason not to dump the analog and go with > a cheap VOIP device. Even the lowest end (i.e. Grandstream) will give > you more functionality than most analog phones at the same price. Now > if you have a source for cheap or free channel banks, that's another > story. _______________________________________________Sipura 200 ATA is $40/port Linksys PAP2-NA is $25/port Jim James H. Thompson jht@lj.net
On Mon, 2004-10-25 at 16:15, Reid A. Forrest wrote:> I may be wrong, but from what I've seen so far, an FXS port will run you > about $100/port anyway, plus the cost of the analog device. At this price, I > can't see any reason not to dump the analog and go with a cheap VOIP device. > Even the lowest end (i.e. Grandstream) will give you more functionality than > most analog phones at the same price. Now if you have a source for cheap or > free channel banks, that's another story.The cheapest VoIP phone won't get you PoE. I expect my phones to be powered when the AC power is out. The only way to do that is with PoE or FXS and channel banks, and good UPS in your closet. Putting a UPS on each user's Grandstream just is not effective. Anyone that does not include power calculations in the VoIP projects is not doing their homework. I would love to see a good cheap phone with 802.3af, but they have yet to come out. We have been looking at the Zip 4x4, as it's about the best of the lot. We tried to look at the UIP200, but it was not even readily available. I could go for a $100 granstream with PoE VS a $65 Grandstream without it. Harry> _______________________________________________ > 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-- Harry McGregor, Computing Manager Tucson Support Group - U.S. Geological Survey University of Arizona - Environment and Natural Resource Building 520-670-5574 (office) - hmcgregor@espri.arizona.edu 520-661-7875 (Cell) - hmcgregor@usgs.gov The opinions/statements expressed herein are my own and should not be taken as a position, opinion, or endorsement of the University of Arizona or the U.S. Geological Survey.