Archived from groups: comp.dcom.videoconf (
More info?)
"SPD" <blairsp@dca.net> wrote in message
news:81a01$40b25568$cff549e4$2337@dcanet.allthenewsgroups.com...
>
> My experience may be a bit dated but I'll let you
> decide if it useful.
I'm sorry but it is as you say a little dated.
> In my experience Polycom has had better support including
> telephone access as well as access to software updates.
> Lately Polycom has been requesting people create an
> account on their download server before granting access
> to software updates. Annoying but not too painful.
There is a reason for that, see below.
> Polycom seems to be slower at implementing newer functionality
> but free access to software updates makes the upgrade
> painless when new software is available.
Polycom (Picturetel) have invented just as many features as Tandberg, if not
more.
> Tandberg support, for me, has been a pain. When I worked
> with Tandberg they required a software support contract
> (for a fee) in order to get software updates.
Polycom are going the same way, at the end of the day you buy the product
once, the vendor then continues to develop features and its the best way of
charging for them imho. If you don't want any nre features then you can fly
without a maintenance contract but then i do not recommend this, you need
the updates to keep your equipment compatabile and secure.
> We were setting
> up for a conference and experienced a known audio bug and they
> wouldn't provide the software patch until they had a signed
> support agreement. Remember we were an existing Tandberg
> account with several 800s, 2500s and a 6000 at the time.
Well Tandberg don't do patches generally, there releaeses contain features
as well. However these are business orientated products, why wouldn't you
want to cover them ?
> I will say that the Tandberg 6000 has very nice picture
> quality when compared with a VS4000.
Tandberg 6000 MXP vs Polycom VSX8000 would be a better comparison today.
> The Tandberg also seems to handle and recover from lost
> frames a litte more gracefully. The Polycoms I've used
> sacrifice the video quality to keep the audio working.
> Consequently lost packets can immediately freeze the
> Polycom video but the audio remains intact. This isn't
> a bad thing but something to be aware of and test in your
> environment.
Both systems will priorotise audio over video in a bad network environment,
get the network working in the first place is my advice. There is no excuse
for packet loss or high jitter in a well engineered modern corporate WAN
imho, MPLS is your daddy.
> In the end we implemented several Polycom systems in new
> locations and kept the Tandbergs where they were. So I guess
> we are happy with both
In general they are quite compatible, only the newest features such as
encryption and stereo audio have interoperability problems at present.
(assuming your on the latest s/w version due to your maitenance contract
-=-peas-=-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram