[asterisk-users] Cisco vs Asterisk

[asterisk]

Twat. How long have you been using CCM? By your comments, I suspect less
than 24 hours!! Either that or you work for Cisco's PR department.

-----Original Message-----
From: asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com
[mailto:asterisk-users-bounces at lists.digium.com] On Behalf Of Al Baker
Sent: 25 July 2008 17:54
To: Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] Cisco vs Asterisk

Quote

"Yet amazingly (if this is, indeed, a source of amazement for you), CCM 
and other Cisco software can be just as buggy as anything OSS, if not 
worse. "

This is simply NOT TRUE and shows a complete lack of understanding of modern
software development.
CISCO software is developed in a CMM environment.
It has a formal test methodology and uses Automated Testing on EACH new
release to ensure that 100% of the software that functioned in the Last
Release, actually works in this release.
Further, there is mandatory "soak-testing"  for all new software.
Sorry, anyone who wants to compare Professional TELCO GRADE software
development with Open Source is just Completely and Totally freakin
clueless.


Alex Balashov wrote:
> T G wrote:
>   
>> I'm a CCIE and CCVP. I have worked in the Cisco TSBU on both CCM and 
>> Telepresence systems I have two IP patents for the VoiP Lite protocols 
>> and have been designing and building OSS IPBXs for companies including 
>> Google going back to 2001.
>>  
>> I'm not mentioning any of that to be jerk I mentioned it to say I'm as 
>> qualified as anyone to to compare the CCM and OSS servers.
>>  
>> The only fair way to compare the two is a list of weights features, for 
>> example if cost is your biggest feature then OSS is better, if support 
>> is your biggest feature than Cisco wins.
>>  
>> When a customer is comparing the costly (TCO) and best supported systems 
>> in the world with hundreds of thousands installed systems for the large 
>> global companies on the planted backed by 54,000 employees and over $25b 
>> in the bank vs, a FREE system with one layer of support maybe two layers 
>> of support, the features don't even come in the evaluation in my opinion.
>>  
>> I once asked a manager why did you buy the CCM and he said no one ever 
>> got fired for buying Cisco if anything wrong, If push the OSS and it 
>> goes I could loose my job.
>>  
>> I would get a list of the important features, because there is no answer 
>> to your question of which is better.
>>     
>
> Yet amazingly (if this is, indeed, a source of amazement for you), CCM 
> and other Cisco software can be just as buggy as anything OSS, if not 
> worse.  Depending on how critical the bugs or other support exigencies, 
> the TCO can be driven way up.
>
> Except with the OSS community, you report the bug, and usually get a 
> quick fix - even if it's a significant issue for you, not necessarily 
> most of the installed base.  If by chance that proves not to be the 
> case, the source code is available, and you can fix it yourself.
>
> With Cisco, you pay for expensive support and get to file some complaint 
> with the TAC.  Yay.
>
> There are many, many angles from which onec an look at this in one's TCO 
> / OPEX formula.
>
>   

_______________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

AstriCon 2008 - September 22 - 25 Phoenix, Arizona
Register Now: http://www.astricon.net

asterisk-users mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users