Who else thinks VOIP sucks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
We have Avaya phones at work and they are VOIP and very hallow sounding. Bring back the Northern Telecom phone systems. Great quality and great sound. They were really ahead of their time with their digital lines. It's too bad that it didn't move into VOIP or they would own the market instead of the [censored] that is out there commercially.
frown.gif
 
Voip seems to work for the 200 people I support using it. Good quality. The only issues we have are with our POTS carrier or remote local carriers.

Unrelated to VOIP, Skype for Business will not run well, at all, on a lower powered computer. My prior work computer was manufactured in 2007 and had a Celeron and 3.5GB of ram running windows 7. If anyone sent me something on Lync/S4B, and I didn't have a chat window open with them already, the notification would lock up the computer or a good 5 minutes.
 
If they switched, they saved money..trust me. Alot of companies have trouble finding out the real savings because they dont think of calculating cost of downtime or new technology failing or being less reliable. Whats it to you? Dont let it bother you
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Subdued
voip is fantastic, don't blame the technology when your IT department is a complete failure.

Seriously, under 95% network reliability is trash-tier.


Disagree.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/wireless/why-mobile-voice-quality-still-stinksand-how-to-fix-it

?

You posted a fantastic example of a non sequitur. Mobile voice quality has nothing to do with office VOIP replacing land lines, especially when the articles stated solution is VoLTE, aka, VOIP over your data connection.
 
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
I looked it up! VOIP = Voice Over Internet Protocol
crazy.gif



woohoo!!
banana2.gif


glad you were able to find out what VoIP means.. I was reading this whole thread wondering the whole time if someone would tell you what it meant!
 
Originally Posted By: Rolla07
If they switched, they saved money..trust me. Whats it to you? Dont let it bother you
smile.gif



Your faith in the quality of organizational decision making is touching, if mistaken.
 
Originally Posted By: HorseThief
Originally Posted By: leje0306
For those unaware, smart phones produced in the last three years use the same technologies.


yeah.... and just wait till the carriers FORCE you to use VoLTE, like verizon when they decommission the voice side of their CDMA network at the tail end of 2019. I always make sure Wifi calling and VoLTE are disabled unless needed.

Biggest Issues I've seen with VOIP are having to do with poor implementation (network redundancies/bad wiring or equipment/overtaxed network/bandwidth issues/poor QoS implementation, etc.) and of course, having a [censored] ISP doesn't help. Analog PBX systems worked and worked well for a LONG time, but they're complicated, messy, and (sigh...) antiquated. I will admit that comcast has really hammered out a lot of reliability issues we've had in the past in SE MI, but not nearly enough to not have wireless failover backup (Which in reality sucks for VOIP - too much variance in latency, even with LTE). Fortunately, I work for small business with 3 and 6 total lines, so comcast gets them all - and in the building with 6 lines there's a semi-smart/updated analog PBX system behind that with about 20 phones and a call waiting/hold message system (it plays advertisements for the business and Africa by Toto - I added that.)

Virtual #'s and PBX systems can offer BIG savings and great options for scalability and portability for businesses, but at the cost of reduced inherent reliability over copper (or coax). Then again, even AT&T is giving out VOIP adapters for phones.... putting a box between the PHONE CORD and the PHONE... makes total sense, right? It blew my mind when I saw the complicated mess of adapters and wires in my neighbor's living room.



VoLTE is on by default now. You and three other people know it’s there and actually turn it off. Anecdotal for sure, but I don’t hear a lot of complaints. The last two companies I worked for use it. In fact, my current employer is transitioning to soft phones. Works great for me. Seems similar to most things, if it’s done right, it works.
 
Originally Posted By: Subdued
Originally Posted By: Reddy45
Originally Posted By: Subdued
voip is fantastic, don't blame the technology when your IT department is a complete failure.

Seriously, under 95% network reliability is trash-tier.


Disagree.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/wireless/why-mobile-voice-quality-still-stinksand-how-to-fix-it

?

You posted a fantastic example of a non sequitur. Mobile voice quality has nothing to do with office VOIP replacing land lines, especially when the articles stated solution is VoLTE, aka, VOIP over your data connection.


Unfortunately, I'm not able to turn off VoLTE on my phone. It works great for the most part. But when I call my mother on her cell phone it is awful. They live in a low service area so it will switch back and forth between VoLTE. When it's using VoLTE it's awful.
 
Just turn off cellular data before you make a call and it will force it to the phone network only. Luckily in our new Samsung Note 8 phone they give you the option to turn it off.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Subdued
voip is fantastic, don't blame the technology when your IT department is a complete failure.

Seriously, under 95% network reliability is trash-tier.


Agreed.
 
Originally Posted By: StevieC
We have Avaya phones at work and they are VOIP and very hallow sounding. Bring back the Northern Telecom phone systems. Great quality and great sound. They were really ahead of their time with their digital lines. It's too bad that it didn't move into VOIP or they would own the market instead of the [censored] that is out there commercially.
frown.gif



Avaya bought, and now supports Nortel, IIRC. I've dealt with a number of Avaya installs (and they are popular in hospitals) and they will support the old Nortel digital handsets.
 
It is true. (I worked for Nortel right out of school just before they got caught cooking the books and I was let go). Nothing will beat the quality of the old Meridian phone systems and similar for audio quality. I miss those.
 
I organized and executed our migration from an old Nortel PBX and Bell lines to a Cisco VoIP system at our HO. Cost was definitely a factor, our phone bill became an 1/8th of what we were paying before. I used QoS with the phones on their own VLAN, we have no performance issues and have had zero outages in the 4 years we've had it now. Voice quality is just as good as it was with the Nortel.

Service is provided through a dedicated fibre connection (with fail-over) through a local ISP. Service is a private SIP trunk through that provider with the option of cellular fallback. We are using G711u with G711a as optional. The SIP service does not traverse the Internet and does not share bandwidth with the internet connection.

If you guys have 95% network reliability at work, that's wholly unacceptable and likely a key component in why you are dissatisfied with the call quality. What model of Cisco phones are you using if you don't mind me asking?
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
...
If you guys have 95% network reliability at work, that's wholly unacceptable and likely a key component in why you are dissatisfied with the call quality. ...


Exactly! Especially with modern fail-over systems that work really well there should be no reason for this if setup properly.
 
Originally Posted By: DallasTexas
Ooma last 10 year's no issues.



We've also been using Ooma for the last 7 or 8 years and have no complaints.
 
We have network outages at least one day out of twenty, which is where I pulled the 95% figure from.
We had one last Friday and we fortunately had a tech on site to fix it, although this took more than an hour.
These things happen exactly when I or my three peeps need to get something done.
Since virtually everything we do requires access to an online application of some sort, not having access is a real killer.
The irony is that twenty years ago, the network was both more reliable and much faster. Of course, it also handled far less traffic and had none of the protections against malicious software that we now have, but then there were also fewer hazards a couple of decades back.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top