I agree with everything said here. All of these are the reasons that we stopped using Polycom completely unless a customer specifically request it. There is some confusion on what speakerphone quality means here. If the speaker itself sounds good to the user that is all that we need for the vast majority of users who simply use it as a way to dial. When I mentioned the speakerphone quality earlier I was referring to how it sounds to the far end. The GXP-21xx sound great to the user. Sent from my iPhone On Aug 17, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Ryan Delgrosso <ryandelgrosso at gmail.com> wrote:
I agree with polycom on the speakerphone quality front, BUT they are an absolute nightmare in most other aspects.
The time required to reboot a polycom is measured on a calendar, which can be infuriating when your support team is working remotely with a non-savvy customer.
Their web interface is notoriously riddled with security holes (customers do, against our advice place their polycoms bare to the internet and are always surprised when the sip credentials are harvested)
The provisioning settings for them are ONLY configurable from the device dialpad, meaning remote configuration is nightmarish. If you have ever listened to a support engineer try to talk someone non-technical through typing out a provisioning URL on that device dialpad you know that it is most certainly one of Dantes levels of hell.
I will sacrifice some speakerphone functionality to not place my support engineers in that kind of purgatory, especially compared to devices with reasonably decent management like the Cisco devices. Now if only they could get on board with a solution like Innomedia's DMS product which provides out of band management that punches through NAT, THEN you would have a slam-dunk.
-Ryan
From a support perspective On 08/17/2012 11:26 AM, Scott Berkman wrote:
If you care about speakerphone quality and clarity, you should be using Polycom as they destroy everyone else, especially on the models that support HD voice and therefore have the big speaker baffle and better microphones. This is pretty clear when you see that all of Cisco's conference models are just rebranded Polycom's with SCCP firmwares. I'm a big Polycom fan in general, but the Cisco 7940/60 is a close second (just wish it supported more features like subscribe on the 3rd party SIP images). The Cisco's do have some problems with the speakerphone (and handset) at high volume, such as sound still coming out the handset when it shouldn't and clipping.
It's been a long while since I touched a Grandstream, but I like using the feel and weight of the handset as an indicator of build quality, and the older Grandstreams failed that test miserably.
-Scott
-----Original Message----- From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Alex Balashov Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 1:06 PM To: voiceops at voiceops.org Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Grandstream VoIP phones
It's been a while, but my issue with Grandstream has always been:
1) SIP interoperability & stack problems.
2) Low-end speaker phone hardware, thus bad echo cancellation and duplex handling.
I mainly judge phone hardware by the quality of its speakerphone, since I'm a very heavy user, so it may be a personal bias. However, by that metric, the Cisco 79xx's and Polycoms win, and Grandstreams, Snoms and Aastras lose.
On 08/16/2012 08:07 PM, Carlos Alvarez wrote:
Who else on the list is using them, particularly in a hosted environment? We've just decided to transition to them as our primary recommendation instead of the Cisco SPA series. We did it because of the value and feature set, like having an inexpensive phone with a small BLF, which a lot of customers asked for. I'm wondering if others have tips they've learned along the way, or any advice they want to offer. Also anyone using the advanced features like the browser for anything useful?
For those who haven't tried them, or who like us, didn't like their older models, take another look. We have been surprised at the value they give us. The prices are low, but the functionality and quality are high. They aren't Polycom 600s to be sure, but they are nice phones that have a huge set of features for a great price. Customers are liking them a lot.
Has anyone used the new DECT phone? We currently use the Panasonic DECT phones but they are a nightmare to configure.
If anyone wants to get in touch with them, our Grandstream contact is Dennis Ryan, dryan at grandstream.com <mailto:dryan at grandstream.com> .
-- Carlos Alvarez TelEvolve 602-889-3003
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
-- Alex Balashov - Principal Evariste Systems LLC 235 E Ponce de Leon Ave Suite 106 Decatur, GA 30030 Tel: +1-678-954-0670 Fax: +1-404-961-1892 Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.alexbalashov.com/ _______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops