Do you really expect an unbiased response from this community? Seems to me a similar argument for and against hosting ones own web presence in house with mixed results . Others choose to use a datacenter service, seldom but sometimes with poor results.
Placing ones business lifeline in the hands of a telephony amateur, one has to question management decisions. Placing ones telephony onto "any old server" certainly isn't wise either. Certainly these days many have come to expect less than 99.999% from their telephones, even with providers that have been around more than 100 years. A sad situation indeed. John Novack Gilles wrote: > Hello > > I just read this article and would like some feedback from > experienced Asterisk users: > > =============== > "Failed open source VoIP deployment leads to hosted VoIP strategy" By > Jessica Scarpati > > "When budgets are crimped, open source voice over IP (VoIP) solutions > look attractive -- a little extra work for a lower cap-ex. But those > savings came at a high price for one Texas company, which -- after > years of struggling and failing to tame open source VoIP -- opted for > a hosted VoIP service from a local service provider. > > [...] To harness the power of Asterisk and exploit the platform's near > boundless capabilities, you must have the in-house expertise to do so, > or at least bring in a well-vetted Asterisk consultant. > > [...] CuDerm employees frequently collaborate with colleagues at two > partner companies while developing marketing campaigns for cosmetic > products. Three years ago, the company recognized that this frequent > collaboration would be more productive with direct inward dialing > (DID), DeRudder said, because users were spending too much time > retrieving and relaying individual phone numbers for incoming and > outgoing calls. [...] It wasn't until CuDerm adopted a hosted VoIP > service from Cypress Communications, an Atlanta-based service provider > specializing in hosted VoIP for small to medium-sized businesses > (SMBs), that simple conveniences such as call transfers became a > reality. > > [...] Looking to reap the cost benefits of VoIP but avoid the expense > of buying and maintaining an IP-based private branch exchange (IP > PBX), DeRudder chose the open source VoIP project Asterisk. He chose > Asterisk because it required a custom-built server but no other > dedicated hardware for the phone system. The system was a perpetual > headache, DeRudder said. Bandwidth maxed out, users complained of > dropped calls and the main driver for the system, DID, never worked. > > [...] Enterprises and SMBs sometimes overlook bandwidth needs and let > them take a backseat to cost savings in a hosted VoIP service, causing > call quality to suffer, Whelan said. Service providers may also offer > compression to squeeze more simultaneous calls in the pipe, but that > too can damage call quality, she added." > > http://searchunifiedcommunications.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid186_gci1508323_mem1,00.html > (free registration required) > =============== > > So it looks like this company had the following issues: > * No in-house technical expertise to set up and maintain Asterisk > * Not enough bandwidth > * DID module apparently not reliable > > Based on your experience, are those problems typical? > > Thank you. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.829 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2914 - Release Date: 06/02/10 > 14:25:00 > > -- Dog is my co-pilot -- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users