Let me answer that, Carlos. A big hospital.
These big infrastructures can be quite outdated and messy. Getting someone to
cable old parts of the buildings can be very expensive. However, replacing just
the backbone switches is something they can afford. And they don't need PoE,
really.
What kind of applications benefit from gigabit speed? Well, plenty, such as MDs
having to view a whole bunch of x-ray images of several patients, as fast as
possible. Believe me, doctors aren't patient and Gbps makes a big difference.
So basically, that's your answer: these sites don't need PoE, just Gbps and
can't afford cabling a huge old building. Now, they don't care for PoE on the
hardphones either.
So in these cases, I think it's clearly justifiable to have a low-budget Digium
D40 or Grandstream GXP280 with a 2-NIC Gbps switch.
Not a big deal anyway, because they can always add a mini 5 or 8-port gigiabit
switch for around 20$ between the wall socket and the hardphone+PC, but that
just adds another appliance to the doctor's office...
--- On Wed, 2/8/12, Carlos Alvarez <car...@televolve.com> wrote:
From: Carlos Alvarez <car...@televolve.com>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-users] SIP hardware phones
To: "Asterisk Users Mailing List - Non-Commercial Discussion"
<asterisk-users@lists.digium.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 8, 2012, 9:26 AM
If the customer is so cheap that they won't properly build out the network, why
would they have gigabit switches to the desktop which have a limited set of
applications that actually benefit from it?
Then there's PoE, which is expensive to start and very expensive with gigabit.
So this mythical customer is too cheap to cable, but will buy a gigabit switch
of dubious value, will they buy a PoE gigabit switch? If not, why not buy a
value-priced PoE 100m switch which has a clear benefit instead of a low-end GB
switch of dubious value?
I just don't see the fit, and I'm guessing the vendors don't either. What is
the exact network topology (brands/models) and applications that justify GB to
the desktop, don't justify additional cabling, and how do you account for PoE
in this environment?
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Vieri <rentor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- On Wed, 2/8/12, Jason W. Parks <jason.w.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From everything I've researched to
> date, my understanding is most
> locations have chosen to double their port density and
> continue to
> service the phone and computer on separate ports than to
> share a single
> line for both computer and phone. Reason primarily mentioned
> being
> troubleshooting concerns. If this is the case, the second
> port is not
> required, and become nothing but another gimmick to sell to
> you.
>
> Is this everyone else's experience as well?
Well, at some locations, for technical and mostly political reasons, doubling
port density so that the computer connects to a separate port is too costly,
way over what a 60$ hardphone can cost (eg. Grandstream GXP285). I'd be glad to
pay just "a tad more" for hundreds of "basic" hardphones, just as long as they
can do gigabit.
Vieri
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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
