<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Bill Hackensack wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1a36ca380803230203k45353d74u458ace74c9aa7363@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Philipp
Kempgen <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:philipp.kempgen@amooma.de">philipp.kempgen@amooma.de</a>>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
</div>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=5014" target="_blank">http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=5014</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<div>The response on that issue from Russell is the kind of response
that really ticks me off. No, no, no, we don't want any real features
that users want, we want basic, boring features. Asterisk is a call
center system, not for regular, everyday business users.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It could be so much more, though...</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Works great as an advanced IVR as a front end to a real phone
system, though.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
While his basic point makes sense (we want to get away from channel
specific implementation stuff) what he seems to be ignoring is that
this patch actually provides no benefit at <i>all</i> to non-SIP
channels, since the Snom phones don't support any technology <i>other</i>
than SIP.<br>
<br>
I still think Asterisk is more than just a front-end to a "rea"l phone
system. What you can achieve with Asterisk is vastly beyond <i>anything</i>
you can achieve with most other PABX systems without spending an utter
fortune.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>