> > Hmmmmm......it's pretty close price wise....I thought the channel banks > > would cost more... > > > > With regards to functionality, I would have to test the two setups side by > > side. > > I know that at a site we setup, the grandstream BT101's came out about the > > same as cheap analogs with regards to quality and functionality... > > This is exactly what I disagree with. The BT101's are not worth > *anything* even if you pay me to take them I will *never* install them > for a client. They need babysitting, rebooting, terrible sound > quality, and are very not userfriendly. Going the analog way (vs > BT101) is not close pricewise it is a *lot* cheaper, since it works. > The BT101's don't, it creates tooooooooooooo much trouble for any > office to deal with. Quality wise, an analog phone is the quality > users are looking for, since that's what they are used to. The BT101 > cannot offer that. Functionality: what function does the BT101 have > that you like so much? last time I checked the conf button wasn't even > working, xfers you get with features.conf, and ringers sound much > nicer on analog phones, CallerID works much better on analog phones. > Can you please name me one feature that the BT101 has that is at least > as good as an analog phone (besides for the xfer button, which with > any decent analog phone can be programmed if it has dedicated one > touch speed dial buttons)?
I think I already agreed with you - that nice analog phones are better than cheap IP phones. PaulH _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation sponsored by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list Asterisk-Users@lists.digium.com http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users