PBXtech.info - View Single Post - IP-Avaya Vs. Cisco

cascadia · October 4th, 2005, 09:17 AM

I just went through this for my company, and we ended up going with an Avaya IP Office 412 system. My company is in the financial services business, so they are highly dependant on phones and internet/email. For this reason I wanted something that was rock solid and would not crash/reboot/be offline ever. We also considered the Nortal BCM, but ultimately went with Avaya for a reliable solution. The BCM and IPO are more on part for sizing, while the Cisco can scale a lot larger. Note these settings are per site, not nation/system wide limits. I suggest you talk to NetVersant about IPO and Nortel, and engage Cisco to show you their system. Both look great. I can tell you law firms spend a lot of money on IT and they use Cisco, while a lot of more moderately budgeted firms buy something else. Choose the right size/scale/solution for your company. Below are some of my Pros/Cons for both systems, and why I went Avaya.

Avaya Pros:

DTM Phones on the desk (solid phone quality in office)
IP softphones/hardphones for remote offices, specific users, or road warriors.
Simple conference bridge integrated (people dial a number, enter a pin, and you join a conference)
Can use 4 PRIs all within the system
Cheaper by far. Our IPO412, 90ports, 8analog, 60 handsets, with install, was roughly 48k

Avaya Cons:

No video conferencing
Not SIP based
phone extension limit (I think either 200 or 300)

Cisco Pros:

Virtually unlimited number of phones
great desktop software
tandemburg video conferencing
Fancy looking phones

Cisco Cons:

Phone LCDs are hard to read in various light settings and don't alert users very well while on a call
Nearly impossible to use 1 system for 2 seperate organizations
PoE can be expensive, in order to have centralized power
All phones are required to boot, hence have a delay before being usable
Servers run Win2000 not 2003 and use Cisco Security Agent
Requires more servers than 1 for voicemail
Requires VoIP QoS on all ports to keep quality high
If you seperate voice and data switches for reliability, your cost just went through the roof.

October 4th, 2005, 09:17 AM	#2 (permalink)
cascadia PBXtech SILVER 25+ posts Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 33	Re: IP-Avaya Vs. Cisco I just went through this for my company, and we ended up going with an Avaya IP Office 412 system. My company is in the financial services business, so they are highly dependant on phones and internet/email. For this reason I wanted something that was rock solid and would not crash/reboot/be offline ever. We also considered the Nortal BCM, but ultimately went with Avaya for a reliable solution. The BCM and IPO are more on part for sizing, while the Cisco can scale a lot larger. Note these settings are per site, not nation/system wide limits. I suggest you talk to NetVersant about IPO and Nortel, and engage Cisco to show you their system. Both look great. I can tell you law firms spend a lot of money on IT and they use Cisco, while a lot of more moderately budgeted firms buy something else. Choose the right size/scale/solution for your company. Below are some of my Pros/Cons for both systems, and why I went Avaya. Avaya Pros: DTM Phones on the desk (solid phone quality in office) IP softphones/hardphones for remote offices, specific users, or road warriors. Simple conference bridge integrated (people dial a number, enter a pin, and you join a conference) Can use 4 PRIs all within the system Cheaper by far. Our IPO412, 90ports, 8analog, 60 handsets, with install, was roughly 48k Avaya Cons: No video conferencing Not SIP based phone extension limit (I think either 200 or 300) Cisco Pros: Virtually unlimited number of phones great desktop software tandemburg video conferencing Fancy looking phones Cisco Cons: Phone LCDs are hard to read in various light settings and don't alert users very well while on a call Nearly impossible to use 1 system for 2 seperate organizations PoE can be expensive, in order to have centralized power All phones are required to boot, hence have a delay before being usable Servers run Win2000 not 2003 and use Cisco Security Agent Requires more servers than 1 for voicemail Requires VoIP QoS on all ports to keep quality high If you seperate voice and data switches for reliability, your cost just went through the roof.