[asterisk-biz] Re: asterisk-biz Digest, Vol 29,
Issue 53 (Out Of Office - on vacation)
Jack McCoy
jack80 at ci.manchester.ct.us
Fri Dec 15 09:34:24 MST 2006
I will be out the office on vacation.
>>> "asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com" 12/15/06 11:34 >>>
Send asterisk-biz mailing list submissions to
asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
asterisk-biz-request at lists.digium.com
You can reach the person managing the list at
asterisk-biz-owner at lists.digium.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of asterisk-biz digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limited!
(Kevin P. Fleming)
2. RE: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limi ted!
(Nathan C. Smith)
3. Re: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limited! (Ron Arts)
4. Re: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limited!
(Kevin P. Fleming)
5. Re: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limited! (Ron Arts)
6. Re: Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities limited!
(bob murphy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:16:33 -0600
From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming at digium.com>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limited!
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID: <4582AE41.40505 at digium.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> The IP650 ulaw sounds better than the 601 ulaw? Damn, I already
consider the
> 501/601's audio high quality, the speakerphone in particular.
Yes, as surprising as that is. We have two of them (early models for
testing) and when I replaced my 601 with the 650, connected to an
Asterisk 1.2 server that most definitely does not have G.722 support, I
still noticed a rather significant improvement in audio quality.
Unfortunately, what that really means is that every phone you've ever
owned before _could_ have sounded better, but didn't because
manufacturer used cheaper parts :-) When you think about it, though, it
does make some sense... if the frequency range of a G.711 call is just
under 4KHz, then the manufacturer will choose mics and speakers that can
just _barely_ handle that frequency. Since a G.722 call has a range of
8KHz, they have to use better parts, and if the cheaper parts couldn't
really handle 4KHz as well as they should have, the 8KHz parts will, so
suddenly sounds that were always there can now be heard.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 09:33:19 -0600
From: "Nathan C. Smith" <smith at ipmvs.com>
Subject: RE: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limi ted!
To: 'Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion'
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID: <E10143BCF174D211BB2E00805FCBDD23057241A6 at DSMEXCH>
Content-Type: text/plain
It isn't if you are dropping nearly that much on a Proprietary Nortel
phone
set.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dean Collins [mailto:Dean at cognation.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2006 5:47 PM
> To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
> Subject: RE: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now -
> quantities limited!
>
>
> Does anyone know if these prices are going to drop a little?
>
> Bit hard to justify $350 per user at the moment.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Dean
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com
> [mailto:asterisk-biz-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of
> Kevin P. Fleming
> Sent: Thursday, 14 December 2006 6:20 PM
> To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now -
> quantities limited!
>
> Darren Nickerson wrote:
> > 2. Support for Polycom's new HD Voice / G.722 wideband codec
>
> I can also say from personal experience that the better
> quality sound hardware in the IP650 makes even non-HD Voice
> calls sound noticeably better than they did on previous
> Polycom phones (and on other phones). The speakerphone is
> really awesome, even compared to previous Polycom
> speakerphones (which are obviously quite good).
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 16:46:39 +0100
From: Ron Arts <ron.arts at neonova.nl>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limited!
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID: <4582C35F.20202 at neonova.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Kevin P. Fleming schreef:
> Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>> The IP650 ulaw sounds better than the 601 ulaw? Damn, I already
consider the
>> 501/601's audio high quality, the speakerphone in particular.
>
> Yes, as surprising as that is. We have two of them (early models for
> testing) and when I replaced my 601 with the 650, connected to an
> Asterisk 1.2 server that most definitely does not have G.722 support,
I
> still noticed a rather significant improvement in audio quality.
>
We have recently done a speakerphone audio quality test, where we
(subjectively) compared audio quality of many of VoIP the phones that
are on the market today.
We lined up all models of Aastra, Grandstream, SNOM, Polycom, Cisco
(79xx and 790x), Thomson, Linksys and Sipura.
What we found was that the Polycom range stood with head and shoulders
above the rest, the best Cisco (7960) was comparable to the Polycom 501,
and the absolute best phone was the Polycom 601. Altough you might
naively expect the Polycom phones to sound the same, there is a
noticeable jump from the Polycom 301 to the 501, and then again to the
601.
Speakerphone quality really makes a difference. It's hard to believe
the Polycom 601 quality can be topped, but apparently it can...
Another conclusion was that established brands sounded better than
newer ones.
Ron
> Unfortunately, what that really means is that every phone you've ever
> owned before _could_ have sounded better, but didn't because
> manufacturer used cheaper parts :-) When you think about it, though,
it
> does make some sense... if the frequency range of a G.711 call is just
> under 4KHz, then the manufacturer will choose mics and speakers that
can
> just _barely_ handle that frequency. Since a G.722 call has a range of
> 8KHz, they have to use better parts, and if the cheaper parts couldn't
> really handle 4KHz as well as they should have, the 8KHz parts will,
so
> suddenly sounds that were always there can now be heard.
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
--
NeoNova BV, The Netherlands
Professional internet and VoIP solutions
http://www.neonova.nl Kruislaan 419 1098 VA Amsterdam
info: 020-5628292 servicedesk: 020-5628292 fax: 020-5628291
KvK Amsterdam 34151241
The following disclaimer applies to this email:
http://www.neonova.nl/maildisclaimer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3295 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url :
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20061215/2d56922d/smime-0001.bin
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 10:06:29 -0600
From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming at digium.com>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limited!
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID: <4582C805.20603 at digium.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Ron Arts wrote:
> What we found was that the Polycom range stood with head and shoulders
> above the rest, the best Cisco (7960) was comparable to the Polycom
501,
> and the absolute best phone was the Polycom 601. Altough you might
There have been rumors for quite some time that the speakerphone
technology in the Cisco 7940/7960 (and maybe also the newer models) is
actually licensed from Polycom... that would explain the similarity :-)
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:32:37 +0100
From: Ron Arts <ron.arts at neonova.nl>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limited!
To: Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID: <4582CE25.80600 at neonova.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Kevin P. Fleming schreef:
> Ron Arts wrote:
>> What we found was that the Polycom range stood with head and
shoulders
>> above the rest, the best Cisco (7960) was comparable to the Polycom
501,
>> and the absolute best phone was the Polycom 601. Altough you might
>
> There have been rumors for quite some time that the speakerphone
> technology in the Cisco 7940/7960 (and maybe also the newer models) is
> actually licensed from Polycom... that would explain the similarity
:-)
Sure enough their conference phone is just a relabeled Polycom.
Ron
--
NeoNova BV, The Netherlands
Professional internet and VoIP solutions
http://www.neonova.nl Kruislaan 419 1098 VA Amsterdam
info: 020-5628292 servicedesk: 020-5628292 fax: 020-5628291
KvK Amsterdam 34151241
The following disclaimer applies to this email:
http://www.neonova.nl/maildisclaimer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3295 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url :
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20061215/bf647ec7/smime-0001.bin
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 08:34:14 -0800
From: "bob murphy" <springsource at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Polycom IP 650 available now - quantities
limited!
To: "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk Discussion"
<asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Message-ID:
<897d38590612150834r46ba6a3xdc3936b183bb286f at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That makes sense. Cisco's 7936 conference phone is a Polycom with the
Cisco
logo on it so they have a relationship already. And have for some time.
On 12/15/06, Kevin P. Fleming <kpfleming at digium.com> wrote:
>
> Ron Arts wrote:
> > What we found was that the Polycom range stood with head and
shoulders
> > above the rest, the best Cisco (7960) was comparable to the Polycom
501,
> > and the absolute best phone was the Polycom 601. Altough you might
>
> There have been rumors for quite some time that the speakerphone
> technology in the Cisco 7940/7960 (and maybe also the newer models) is
> actually licensed from Polycom... that would explain the similarity
:-)
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>
--
Bob Murphy
Principal
Arreva Communications
www.arrevausa.com
949-334-2022-SIP Connect
949-842-8450-Wireless
949-349-0209-Fax
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20061215/e074806c/attachment.htm
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
End of asterisk-biz Digest, Vol 29, Issue 53
********************************************
More information about the asterisk-biz
mailing list