On Sun, Oct 22, 2006 at 04:47:31AM +0500, Farzal Dojki wrote: > The point is - open source does not mean broken. It does not mean weak. It > does not mean nightmares. And you all seem to imply that the underlying > Asterisk is broken, weak and unreliable, and spending hundreds of $ per user > is a must to have a reliable system.
Noone implied that; you inferred it. The argument being made here was "Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick any two." How much hardware you need to support Asterisk reliably at any given service level and how much that will cost depends on where you are, what parts costs, and ... well, what service level you're willing to tolerate. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later, they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_ _______________________________________________ --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
