Nortel and Microsoft are on different tracks for their vision of unified communications. Trying to consolidate that vision would come across several contradictions.
|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
Totally Seperate Directions
Hi Guys,
As some of you may remember I recently talked about this product in regards to its competition to Call Manager, and I had a bit of a eureka moment when I realized this: Microsoft is not out to replace the PBX.. They wish to remove it completely.
For years now I have been saying to anyone who would listen (that's not many people) that telephone numbers SUCK. _WHY_ should I have to remember a telephone number? The Inventors of the internet and WWW where smart enough to say "People cannot remember numbers, computer's can. Let's invent DNS." Why are we expected to remember telephone numbers?
Microsoft know this, OCS is not a PBX replacement, it's not even a telephony system. It's MSN for Businesses with collaboration thrown in instead of online games. I like this approach. Microsoft have basically said "Okay, we are going to ditch the telephone, circuit-based network for the packet driven internet for our telephony.. Why keep there addressing model? Telephone numbers suck, emails are pretty easy to remember. Lets adapt them along with DNS for our use."
It's the right approach long-term I think, but convincing people to adapt to it may be the difficult part. People are used to the traditional Phone and the way a Traditional Phone works which is the bet Cisco are making.
Cheers
Pete
One small point
"Microsoft is not out to replace the PBX.. They wish to remove it completely"
I am not sure I understand this staement. What is the difference?
"Microsoft know this, OCS is not a PBX replacement, it's not even a telephony system."
Well you are right it is not a telephony system. It is not Microsoft that is chaning the phone numbers it is SIP another little thing that was created by Internet and WWW people you refer to not MS.
UC was to replace the present enterprise communication
If my understanding is correct, the UC is the new marketing shit of the communication, it does provides all the function which use to be supplied by a bunch of systems.
The UC it's self is more a marketing concept than any real innovation.
Since all the major vendor are trying to push the UC, then It will be accepted by the enterprise users that they need to upgrade they present system even if the legacy system still works very well.
Telco carrier are another push of the UC system, as UC provide more management capability for they to provide the managed/hosted communication service to the SMB.
Large enterprise will continue to manage they system, but the SMB is more likely to outsource every tough job/expensive job to the carrier.
the uc market player:
CISCO
AVAYA
MICROSOFT
NORTEL
Cisco will not partner with anybody in the market as they are trying to turn themself to a service and mobile solution provider.
Microsoft/Avaya/Nortel is more likely to partner with each other or even 3com
Cisco will becoming very strong in the software division which microsoft may take the advantage for grant.
microsoft finally realize that the ambition of cisco will destory it's position in the enterprise communication market, it need a new partner, probably nortel or 3com is a much better choice.
Avaya/policom/MITEL will have uncertain future if they dont change they strategy.
Pingback from:
Pingback from: http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/25023
Microsoft could be positioning itself for the big war with Cisco. Cisco hasn't had the traction it needs with "Telepresence" and Microsoft could fill market with a true integrated end-to-end solution.
Post new comment