Ultimate Communications

Microsoft Unified Communications by Lync MVP Tommy Clarke

Main menu

Skip to primary content
Skip to secondary content
  • HOME
  • LYNCSTUFF
    • PSM “PowerShell Master”
      • PSM: PowerShell Master Standard for Office 365
      • PSMicro: PowerShell Master Micro for Office 365
    • BY LyncStuff
  • MY LABS
    • LYNCLAB
    • OFFICE 365 HANDS ON LAB
    • WEBCASTS, LABS & VIDEOS
      • YOUTUBE VIDEOS PRESENTED BY LYNCSTUFF.COM
  • DOWNLOADS
    • Knowledge Base
      • Top Microsoft Lync & OCS from Microsoft Support
      • Most Recent KBs for Lync 2010
      • Most Recent KBs for Lync Server
      • Most Recent KBs for Lync Server 2010
      • Top Office 365 Solutions from Microsoft Support
      • Most Recent KBs for Office 365 for enterprises
      • Most Recent KBs for Office 365 for education
    • LATEST LYNC SERVER UPDATES
    • LATEST OCS UPDATES
    • LINKS
    • LYNC BUDDY
  • ABOUT
    • LINK & CONNECT
    • CERTIFICATIONS & NOMINATIONS

Post navigation

← Previous Next →

Is proprietary technology really the problem with Lync? – #Lync

Posted on 2011/07/21 by Tommy Clarke

From what I have seen and heard over the 8-9 months in terms of negative feedback towards Lync (Microsoft Lync Server 2010), almost all of the negativity comes from either misunderstandings or fear from the competition.

So in direct answer to Teotech´s blogpost The Problem With Lync: Proprietary Technology and as I find more and more flaws and misunderstood nonflaws. I will follow them up in a series titled “The Problem with Lync” I plan to explore these details and how they REALLY affect you, as a customer.

Remember, this blog is my own thoughts and the answers might not always fit in around the world, there are a lot of cultural and technical differentia’s out there…

Well in this first post by Thomas Beck it reads:

“One of Lync’s major problems is the fact that it doesn’t play well others, only compatible with a select number of phones and devices. This “anti-social” behavior leaves you with fewer choices, essentially backing you into a technology investment corner. “

Really, I mean is this really true? Well to start with its true that Lync uses proprietary protocols which means that you can not just connect your old phone and make a call. I suspect that the problem is actually that Teotech is sad about this because they cant sell their phones to customers that can use them with Lync?
(well actually they can, just like Snom does for example in the OIP program )

Personally I have never ever heard anyone on a Cisco IP-PBX complaining about that they can not buy Avaya phones and use, or take Aastra phones and use them with their Avaya PBX. Or someone that wants to connect their Cisco directly with their Avaya PBX to see presence. Or did I miss out on something?

But with Microsoft everyone wants to connect everything to Lync, just because its Microsoft and so that they can complain on something when its not possible out of the box. But really, this is just what the OIP program lets you do and I didn’t see a OIP site on TeoTechs web Winking smile

The thing is that Lync is built to work in 2011 and not in 1897. The power of software… well I think you’ve read it all before if you have followed my blog for a while.

image

If not, can your phone do this? What we see in the picture above is an incoming phone call and a connection to a XRM system. The customer data is shown before the call is answered. This works-wherever you work.

One other problem with not using proprietary technologies is the Internet, and the way we do our work in 2011+.

image

Personally I work at customers, home, on the buss, in the train, on the airport, on the beach, in my winter “office” in Thailand and in a coffee shops more than I work from the Office. And some companies just won’t understand this (hej skatteverket).

The point is that Lync works flawless over the internet, IT JUST WORKS and its always secure and easily managed. For example I can take my phone (Polycom CX600) and plug it in to my computers network port then share my 3G connection I have in my PC, go find somewhere to work and just do it. Just like “in the Office”
Work is something I do, not where I go. Ill try to hold this post on a 200 level so I wont go in to technical details so much other than this, but your always welcome to leave a comment if you want to know more.

Microsoft’s believe is in an ecosystem approach with partners

image

image

The two pictures above show some of the devices there is from partners that have certified them for Lync 2010.

Lync is not a phone!

If you want just a phone. use your mobile, keep your old desk phone. Buy a new pbx from TeoTech or another company or whatever. Or wait, well actually you could use Lync as a just a “dumb phone” as well. Because the way Microsoft license it, now you can just buy the Server and then a Standard CAL & a Plus CAL for every employee that needs a phone and it will be just a “smarter” “dumb phone” system, add to that some devices from the pictures and you will have dialtone and can make phonecalls just as you did a hundred years ago.

What I mean with Lync is not a phone is that its so MUCH more; presence, desktop sharing, conferencing, online meetings well some calls this Unified Communications. And its really not fair to put Lync up to some of the competition since Lync will put them years behind in the development and in productivity.

Lync does in fact play VERY well with others

To start with there is a long list at the OIP page with others that Lync plays well with, and I would say that Lync is one of the UC platform’s that actually try to hit on everyone, there are even guides on how to get them to sleep with each other.

Qualified Services and Infrastructure

The qualification program for enterprise telephony services and infrastructure ensures that customers have seamless experiences with setup, support, and use of qualified telephony infrastructure and services with Microsoft’s unified communications software.

But my PBX or phone or thing is not on that list?

Nope but you will in 99% of the cases find a gateway that will play along and work as a marriage consular.

And then there is federation for the rest.

Lync can federate with other OCS / Lync servers as well as Lync Online and Live Messenger/Yahoo/AOL. Federation support with Skype has been announced and then there is a XMPP gateway and some other ways to federate with the rest this will add up t
o a coverage of like 99% of the IM/P market.

 

Conclusion

The flaws that are described in TeoTechs post are FALSE! And if you go Lync its really not stepping in to a technology investment corner. Rather the other way around if you see it from a UC perspective.

This entry was posted in The Problem With Lync and tagged lync-aastra-phone-software, lync-contacts-photo-desktop-phone, lync-federation-feedback, lync-feedback, lync-phone-pictures, lync-picture-on-phone, lync-proprietary, microsoft-lync-customers-negative, microsoft-lync-negatives, negative-feedback-about-using-lync, negative-feedback-on-microsoft-lync, ocs-aol-federation-not-work, phones-locked-in-lync, polycom-cx600-doesnt-conenct-to-lync, polycom-cx600-osx-audio-glitch, problems-with-lync, skype-microsoft-unified-communications, The Problem With Lync, what-comes-in-aastra-lync-phone-box, whatdoesanciscoipphoneconnectedtoapclooklike by Tommy Clarke. Bookmark the permalink.
Logging In...

Comments are closed.

  • 37 Replies
  • 37 Comments
  • 0 Tweets
  • 0 Facebook
  • 0 Pingbacks
Last reply was 5 months ago
  1. Anonymous
    View 2011/07/21

    Asterisk does not require customers to give up on SIP and interoperability to take advantage of Unified Communications. Try any SIP phone you like with Asterisk-powered Switchvox to see the same features without the vendor lock-in.

    • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
      View 2011/07/21

      The same features? I wasn’t aware Asterisk offered federation to XMPP, Live, AOL, Yahoo and soon Skype. I wasn’t aware Asterisk offered desktop sharing and many-multi-party ad-hoc conferencing with internal and external parties. I wasn’t aware Asterisk had a compelling unified voicemail solution.
      Saying Asterisk is = to Lync is like saying XMPP is = to Lync. It’s not JUST the IM (XMPP) or JUST the voice (Asterisk) or JUST the web conferencing (WebEx) – it’s all of the above integrated into existing Office applications (Outlook being the big one) and Sharepoint.
      That, and anyone with a MSFT skillset can administer (maybe not deploy perfectly, thats what SI’s are for!). Most organizations have a MSFT guy, not all have someone that can stare Asterisk config files in the face and not feel daunted.

      • Anonymousreplied:
        View 2011/07/22

        Asterisk has had XMPP and Jingle support for years now. Skype for Asterisk allowed the deepest integration into Skype available, until Skype decided not to continue the product (shortly before the Microsoft acquisition announcement). Multi-party ad-hoc conferencing? Check. Wideband/HD audio? Check. Standards-based (IMAP) unified voicemail? Sure. Video support, including voicemail and conferencing? Yup. Integration with MS-Office? Well, as much as TAPI permits…

        As you said, to take full advantage of Lync you need some special training, or a good systems integrator. That sounds about right for most unified communications platforms, including Asterisk. Except Asterisk does it with no vendor lock-in and no licensing fees, much less per-user. A little education goes a long way.

        If you’re a dyed-in-the-wool Microsoft shop, there’s obviously only one “right choice” for you. For everyone else, Asterisk offers tremendous value, and typically can work with the phones the customer already has, no special gateway or license required.

        • Tommy Clarkereplied:
          View 2011/07/22

          Roderick could you please talk more or post a link to some more info on the video support.

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Hi Tommy, Asterisk can handle basic video calls and voicemail today, and the next version — Asterisk 10 — will expand significantly on that. As far as I know, the most interesting video integration on Asterisk right now is being done with DiaStar, Dialogic’s open source project that interoperates with Asterisk.

            There was a webinar on DiaStar just last week. Hopefully this archive link will work for you: http://w.on24.com/r.htm?e=323035&s=1&k=AB81E9621C8E54FBDDE4CC6862DE2871

            You can find more info at ProjectDiastar.org and Asterisk.org.

        • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
          View 2011/07/22

          The crux of your argument is “standards based”, but most enterprises use lots of proprietary stuff. For example, given that Exchange/Outlook combo is pervasive in the >200 seat enterprise (nobody cares about the <200 seat Google Apps fanatics), why would said organisation choose IMAP injected MP3 files over the 'rich' integration of Outlook + Exchange UM.

          Multi party audio conferencing is very 2000. There is a reason GoToMeeting and WebEx are part of the corporate vernacular. Meetings today demand video/desktop sharing (or at the VERY LEAST, the ability to display Powerpoint presentations, a feature Lync does better than any of its competitors).
          Similarly, assuming your implied "Skype for Asterisk was pulled because corporate relationships eg MSFT buyout are more profitable".. thats how the world works. We do not live in nirvana where everything is open source and standards based and Windows talks AFP as well as OSX talks SMB. If/when Lync talks to Skype and its millions of users (+AOL, GTalk, MSN, Yahoo) this is a huge advantage over "standards based/open" offerings like Asterisk. 

          I'm surprised you havent mentioned Silverlight or the "hassle" of transcoding to and from RTAudio/Video. Clearly HTML5 and G.711 are better choices.. open standards et all.. 

          I don't ride a unicorn to work. Reality is king :)

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Preferring open standards isn’t riding unicorns or making religious arguments: it’s simply the freedom to choose among competitive vendors. Proprietary technology erects artificial barriers to entry, which reduce competition. How does this benefit customers?

            And if you’re claiming that Microsoft has conceded the <200 seat SMB market to Google, you're simply mistaken.Web/desktop/presentation conferencing is available in dozens of apps, even softphones — WebEx and GoToMeeting have nary an edge in that space. And the loss of Skype for Asterisk just goes to show the danger of relying on proprietary solutions from Skype and Microsoft: they may not be available tomorrow.If there's sufficient demand to transcode Microsoft's encodings, someone will get it done… just as was done with Nellymoser for Flash/RTMP. Even Digium offers the proprietary G.729 codec for Asterisk in response to end user demand. I only hear about Silverlight and RTAudio/Video, on the other hand, from Microsoft and their close partners.You're free to xenophobically label those outside the Microsoft zone as unicorn riders, but many of us have learned to avoid proprietary traps where feasible.

          • Tommy Clarkereplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            The way I see it is that open standards is great and
            all but they were not so ultimate 3-4 years ago. They are starting to grow
            better now though as its implemented more and more.
            I mean how well does Asterisk really work over just the internet. Is it secure?
            Can I just take a phone device and put it on my internet at home and make phone
            calls as I where at the office and trust that it’s going to be great quality
            and be secure and just work when I plug it in? As an end user?
            However Microsoft has done a great work on connecting its “closed”
            system to a lot of other systems and in my opinion they have succeeded better
            with this then their competition. So even though its proprietary and all it
            still play well with others using these open standards. And it’s easy to use, secure
            and works great over the internet.

            The thing with Asterisk though (and all other open
            sourced technologies) again in my opinion, is that it doesn’t feel serious, if
            we want integration with something we have to wait until someone do it for fun,
            let’s say we want to do video with Google, ok when someone has made it work,
            you can buy that add on from X and if we later want integration with Facebook
            we have to wait until someone else fixes that and then we buy that from Y.

            So at the end we will end up with a drink that tastes
            like when we were 15 years old and stole alcohol from the parents, mixing it
            all in one bottle and added some cola to it and some lemon if we wanted to be
            classy.
            While buying Lync is more like walking in to a 5 star restaurant and order a
            nice cocktail. The price tag may be different at first but we all remember
            those 14 year old girls that either ended up alcohol poisoned at hospital or
            got lifted home by the police. So what I’m saying is that we know what we get
            with Lync while it’s more uncertain what the end result will be if we go with Lego
            I mean open sourced standard things… (I know it’s getting boring but I have
            fun and I just can’t stop talk in riddles)

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Security is always a concern, and Asterisk supports SRTP/TLS for secure media streams. Handset vendor Snom (also a MSFT partner) includes OpenVPN support, which is an interesting approach.

            When you buy a homogenous closed system, you are entirely reliant upon that vendor for future updates and costs. The tradeoff is that a single vendor (and their close partners) attempt to make the end-to-end experience as seamless as possible. When you buy/build an open system, you are in control of those things, and are free to choose from competing services and solutions.
            With due respect, the “science project” argument reflects a lack of understanding of the broad community behind Asterisk. Some of the organizations making significant use of Asterisk include UPenn, La Poste, Yahoo!, City of Amsterdam, NTT, BT, and numerous others. Even some of Microsoft’s largest competitors in this space have incorporated Asterisk into their products. Many of these organizations support Asterisk with funding and/or code contributions. It’s quite the virtuous circle.Asterisk pioneered the communications-as-software revolution, and continues to lead the market with a massive installed base, many times that of Lync and OCS. If you lay off the MSFT sauce for a moment, then you may notice how widespread Asterisk truly is.

          • Tommy Clarkereplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Thanks for your reply, and yes you’re probably right
            that I lack understanding of the broad community behind Asterisk. Mostly
            because I not see it so often and my reflections are partly because of that and
            when we have moved away customers from Asterisk to Lync the problems they have
            had are the things I listed so you sure have a lot of marketing to do in that
            case.

          • VoIPNormreplied:
            View 2011/07/23

            Roderick, you keep saying vendor lock in but I am not sure that I see it. With multiple vendors coming onbaord to support Lync with devices or system interoperability where is the vendor lock in. Yes some of the phones require firmware from Microsoft but others do not such as SNOM. Yes you are required to get patches from Microsoft for Lync but isnt that the same as when you buy a PBX from Diguim you will need to get updates from Diguim regardless if its Asterick code base? I think the vendor lock in story is old hat and just doesnt fly any more. I am sure Asterisk supports a bunch of great UC features as does every vendor but the whole lock in arguement doesnt stop customers from seeing and wanting Lync over open source. The fact is the people that fret over open source dont always see that to gain true productivity from software its more than just RFC’s that make a product.

            Lync has the best end user expereince on the market, regardless of the protocols driving it. I am sure the arguement of proprietary over open source will never end and dont get me wrong, there is lots of good stuff that comes from open source. But its time for a new arguement. If all Asterisk has to compete is the same old vendor lock in story that people keep yelling over and over again but no one is listening to. Why? BecauseLync is offering a more complete and better end user experience. This what companies are getting with Lync and Microsoft and why its going to be the next billion dollar business for them.

            BTW, I work for Microsoft, so yes I am biased.

    • Tommy Clarkereplied:
      View 2011/07/21

      Looking at the out of the box feature set of Asterisk at http://www.asterisk.org/featur…
      its more of an IPPBX then a Unified Communications platform i don’t see
      video, desktop sharing, coauthoring of documents and so on in that
      list.
      And most of my customers that have had Asterisk and gone Lync
      have had a separate  video system and a separate email system and voice
      mail and mobile voicemail, but they have been happy with Asterisk as a
      PBX that i must say. Its great and all for Voice, but its not really
      Unified Communications.
      But i must admit i know to little of Asterisk but im happy to know more if you can guide me to something good.

      What
      i do know is that the oob experience of Lync wont allow you to connect
      any SIP phone i like but with a cheap lets say Ingate box as a gw i am
      able to bridge them in to Lync so if the customers REALLY want to use
      any SIP phones of they’re choosing, they can.

      • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
        View 2011/07/21

        Or SmartSIP from NET (a VM that connects SIP phones to a mediation server). We’ve deployed this with great success to clients wanting to move off Asterisk and onto Lync but continue to use their Linksys/Cisco handsets.

        • Tommy Clarkereplied:
          View 2011/07/21

          Thats right, they even support Aastra DECT phones now. So there are alot of options…

  2. Anonymous
    View 2011/07/21

    Asterisk does not require customers to give up on SIP and interoperability to take advantage of Unified Communications. Try any SIP phone you like with Asterisk-powered Switchvox to see the same features without the vendor lock-in.

    • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
      View 2011/07/22

      The same features? I wasn’t aware Asterisk offered federation to XMPP, Live, AOL, Yahoo and soon Skype. I wasn’t aware Asterisk offered desktop sharing and many-multi-party ad-hoc conferencing with internal and external parties. I wasn’t aware Asterisk had a compelling unified voicemail solution.
      Saying Asterisk is = to Lync is like saying XMPP is = to Lync. It’s not JUST the IM (XMPP) or JUST the voice (Asterisk) or JUST the web conferencing (WebEx) – it’s all of the above integrated into existing Office applications (Outlook being the big one) and Sharepoint.
      That, and anyone with a MSFT skillset can administer (maybe not deploy perfectly, thats what SI’s are for!). Most organizations have a MSFT guy, not all have someone that can stare Asterisk config files in the face and not feel daunted.

      • Anonymousreplied:
        View 2011/07/22

        Asterisk has had XMPP and Jingle support for years now. Skype for Asterisk allowed the deepest integration into Skype available, until Skype decided not to continue the product (shortly before the Microsoft acquisition announcement). Multi-party ad-hoc conferencing? Check. Wideband/HD audio? Check. Standards-based (IMAP) unified voicemail? Sure. Video support, including voicemail and conferencing? Yup. Integration with MS-Office? Well, as much as TAPI permits…

        As you said, to take full advantage of Lync you need some special training, or a good systems integrator. That sounds about right for most unified communications platforms, including Asterisk. Except Asterisk does it with no vendor lock-in and no licensing fees, much less per-user. A little education goes a long way.

        If you’re a dyed-in-the-wool Microsoft shop, there’s obviously only one “right choice” for you. For everyone else, Asterisk offers tremendous value, and typically can work with the phones the customer already has, no special gateway or license required.

        • Tommy Clarkereplied:
          View 2011/07/22

          Roderick could you please talk more or post a link to some more info on the video support.

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Hi Tommy, Asterisk can handle basic video calls and voicemail today, and the next version — Asterisk 10 — will expand significantly on that. As far as I know, the most interesting video integration on Asterisk right now is being done with DiaStar, Dialogic’s open source project that interoperates with Asterisk.

            There was a webinar on DiaStar just last week. Hopefully this archive link will work for you: http://w.on24.com/r.htm?e=323035&s=1&k=AB81E9621C8E54FBDDE4CC6862DE2871

            You can find more info at ProjectDiastar.org and Asterisk.org.

        • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
          View 2011/07/22

          The crux of your argument is “standards based”, but most enterprises use lots of proprietary stuff. For example, given that Exchange/Outlook combo is pervasive in the >200 seat enterprise (nobody cares about the <200 seat Google Apps fanatics), why would said organisation choose IMAP injected MP3 files over the 'rich' integration of Outlook + Exchange UM.

          Multi party audio conferencing is very 2000. There is a reason GoToMeeting and WebEx are part of the corporate vernacular. Meetings today demand video/desktop sharing (or at the VERY LEAST, the ability to display Powerpoint presentations, a feature Lync does better than any of its competitors).
          Similarly, assuming your implied "Skype for Asterisk was pulled because corporate relationships eg MSFT buyout are more profitable".. thats how the world works. We do not live in nirvana where everything is open source and standards based and Windows talks AFP as well as OSX talks SMB. If/when Lync talks to Skype and its millions of users (+AOL, GTalk, MSN, Yahoo) this is a huge advantage over "standards based/open" offerings like Asterisk. 

          I'm surprised you havent mentioned Silverlight or the "hassle" of transcoding to and from RTAudio/Video. Clearly HTML5 and G.711 are better choices.. open standards et all.. 

          I don't ride a unicorn to work. Reality is king :)

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Preferring open standards isn’t riding unicorns or making religious arguments: it’s simply the freedom to choose among competitive vendors. Proprietary technology erects artificial barriers to entry, which reduce competition. How does this benefit customers?

            And if you’re claiming that Microsoft has conceded the <200 seat SMB market to Google, you're simply mistaken.Web/desktop/presentation conferencing is available in dozens of apps, even softphones — WebEx and GoToMeeting have nary an edge in that space. And the loss of Skype for Asterisk just goes to show the danger of relying on proprietary solutions from Skype and Microsoft: they may not be available tomorrow.If there's sufficient demand to transcode Microsoft's encodings, someone will get it done… just as was done with Nellymoser for Flash/RTMP. Even Digium offers the proprietary G.729 codec for Asterisk in response to end user demand. I only hear about Silverlight and RTAudio/Video, on the other hand, from Microsoft and their close partners.You're free to xenophobically label those outside the Microsoft zone as unicorn riders, but many of us have learned to avoid proprietary traps where feasible.

          • Tommy Clarkereplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            The way I see it is that open standards is great and
            all but they were not so ultimate 3-4 years ago. They are starting to grow
            better now though as its implemented more and more.
            I mean how well does Asterisk really work over just the internet. Is it secure?
            Can I just take a phone device and put it on my internet at home and make phone
            calls as I where at the office and trust that it’s going to be great quality
            and be secure and just work when I plug it in? As an end user?
            However Microsoft has done a great work on connecting its “closed”
            system to a lot of other systems and in my opinion they have succeeded better
            with this then their competition. So even though its proprietary and all it
            still play well with others using these open standards. And it’s easy to use, secure
            and works great over the internet.

            The thing with Asterisk though (and all other open
            sourced technologies) again in my opinion, is that it doesn’t feel serious, if
            we want integration with something we have to wait until someone do it for fun,
            let’s say we want to do video with Google, ok when someone has made it work,
            you can buy that add on from X and if we later want integration with Facebook
            we have to wait until someone else fixes that and then we buy that from Y.

            So at the end we will end up with a drink that tastes
            like when we were 15 years old and stole alcohol from the parents, mixing it
            all in one bottle and added some cola to it and some lemon if we wanted to be
            classy.
            While buying Lync is more like walking in to a 5 star restaurant and order a
            nice cocktail. The price tag may be different at first but we all remember
            those 14 year old girls that either ended up alcohol poisoned at hospital or
            got lifted home by the police. So what I’m saying is that we know what we get
            with Lync while it’s more uncertain what the end result will be if we go with Lego
            I mean open sourced standard things… (I know it’s getting boring but I have
            fun and I just can’t stop talk in riddles)

          • Anonymousreplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Security is always a concern, and Asterisk supports SRTP/TLS for secure media streams. Handset vendor Snom (also a MSFT partner) includes OpenVPN support, which is an interesting approach.

            When you buy a homogenous closed system, you are entirely reliant upon that vendor for future updates and costs. The tradeoff is that a single vendor (and their close partners) attempt to make the end-to-end experience as seamless as possible. When you buy/build an open system, you are in control of those things, and are free to choose from competing services and solutions.
            With due respect, the “science project” argument reflects a lack of understanding of the broad community behind Asterisk. Some of the organizations making significant use of Asterisk include UPenn, La Poste, Yahoo!, City of Amsterdam, NTT, BT, and numerous others. Even some of Microsoft’s largest competitors in this space have incorporated Asterisk into their products. Many of these organizations support Asterisk with funding and/or code contributions. It’s quite the virtuous circle.Asterisk pioneered the communications-as-software revolution, and continues to lead the market with a massive installed base, many times that of Lync and OCS. If you lay off the MSFT sauce for a moment, then you may notice how widespread Asterisk truly is.

          • Tommy Clarkereplied:
            View 2011/07/22

            Thanks for your reply, and yes you’re probably right
            that I lack understanding of the broad community behind Asterisk. Mostly
            because I not see it so often and my reflections are partly because of that and
            when we have moved away customers from Asterisk to Lync the problems they have
            had are the things I listed so you sure have a lot of marketing to do in that
            case.

          • VoIPNormreplied:
            View 2011/07/23

            Roderick, you keep saying vendor lock in but I am not sure that I see it. With multiple vendors coming onbaord to support Lync with devices or system interoperability where is the vendor lock in. Yes some of the phones require firmware from Microsoft but others do not such as SNOM. Yes you are required to get patches from Microsoft for Lync but isnt that the same as when you buy a PBX from Diguim you will need to get updates from Diguim regardless if its Asterick code base? I think the vendor lock in story is old hat and just doesnt fly any more. I am sure Asterisk supports a bunch of great UC features as does every vendor but the whole lock in arguement doesnt stop customers from seeing and wanting Lync over open source. The fact is the people that fret over open source dont always see that to gain true productivity from software its more than just RFC’s that make a product.

            Lync has the best end user expereince on the market, regardless of the protocols driving it. I am sure the arguement of proprietary over open source will never end and dont get me wrong, there is lots of good stuff that comes from open source. But its time for a new arguement. If all Asterisk has to compete is the same old vendor lock in story that people keep yelling over and over again but no one is listening to. Why? BecauseLync is offering a more complete and better end user experience. This what companies are getting with Lync and Microsoft and why its going to be the next billion dollar business for them.

            BTW, I work for Microsoft, so yes I am biased.

    • Tommy Clarkereplied:
      View 2011/07/22

      Looking at the out of the box feature set of Asterisk at http://www.asterisk.org/featur…
      its more of an IPPBX then a Unified Communications platform i don’t see
      video, desktop sharing, coauthoring of documents and so on in that
      list.
      And most of my customers that have had Asterisk and gone Lync
      have had a separate  video system and a separate email system and voice
      mail and mobile voicemail, but they have been happy with Asterisk as a
      PBX that i must say. Its great and all for Voice, but its not really
      Unified Communications.
      But i must admit i know to little of Asterisk but im happy to know more if you can guide me to something good.

      What
      i do know is that the oob experience of Lync wont allow you to connect
      any SIP phone i like but with a cheap lets say Ingate box as a gw i am
      able to bridge them in to Lync so if the customers REALLY want to use
      any SIP phones of they’re choosing, they can.

      • Harry Falkenmirereplied:
        View 2011/07/22

        Or SmartSIP from NET (a VM that connects SIP phones to a mediation server). We’ve deployed this with great success to clients wanting to move off Asterisk and onto Lync but continue to use their Linksys/Cisco handsets.

        • Tommy Clarkereplied:
          View 2011/07/22

          Thats right, they even support Aastra DECT phones now. So there are alot of options…

  3. Tommy Clarke
    View 2011/07/22

    Looking at the out of the box feature set of Asterisk at http://www.asterisk.org/features its more of an IPPBX then a Unified Communications platform i don’t see video, desktop sharing, coauthoring of documents and so on in that list.
    And most of my customers that have had Asterisk and gone Lync have had a separate  video system and a separate email system and voice mail and mobile voicemail, but they have been happy with Asterisk as a PBX that i must say. Its great and all for Voice, but its not really Unified Communications.
    But i must admit i know to little of Asterisk but im happy to know more if you can guide me to something good.

    What i do know is that the oob experience of Lync wont allow you to connect any SIP phone i like but with a cheap lets say Ingate box as a gw i am able to bridge them in to Lync so if the customers REALLY want to use any SIP phones of they’re choosing, they can.

  4. Anonymous
    View 2011/07/24

    Just a sidenote: Great guide provided by Microsoft: ”

    Uninstalling Microsoft Lync Server 2010 and Removing Server Roles”

    http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=18692
    , in case one feels locked in ;-) Cheers!

    btw: TeoTech’s phones are the same that AudioCodes offers for Lync as “compatible” via their gateways, (check out and compare the websites, if you like).

    Such devices are originally made in Malaysia (gentek), not made in USA or Israel.

  5. Anonymous
    View 2011/07/25

    Just a sidenote: Great guide provided by Microsoft: ”

    Uninstalling Microsoft Lync Server 2010 and Removing Server Roles”

    http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?id=18692
    , in case one feels locked in ;-) Cheers!

    btw: TeoTech’s phones are the same that AudioCodes offers for Lync as “compatible” via their gateways, (check out and compare the websites, if you like).

    Such devices are originally made in Malaysia (gentek), not made in USA or Israel.

  6. Dontcare0815
    View 2011/08/03

    You should also probably disclose that you work for Asterisk when posting. Just saying. (Yes, I work for MSFT)

  7. Dontcare0815
    View 2011/08/03

    You should also probably disclose that you work for Asterisk when posting. Just saying. (Yes, I work for MSFT)

  8. finance and accounting
    View 6 months ago

    i don’t think that asterisk is required in this case.lync can federate other OCS server online.with the support of skype this could add up the maximum coverage.

  9. Zebra Printer
    View 6 months ago

    i like your post very much.it inspires me a lot to use lync.i will start using it as soon as possible.thanks for the post.keep it up.

  10. banking software
    View 5 months ago

    Nice tutor. Your way of presentation is really too good. I am totally impressed by your post. I am looking for your more updates. Keep them coming.

  11. V5 Loans
    View 5 months ago

    Good post.

Proudly powered by WordPress