I guess I did strike a nerve and I and got plenty of good feedback from the prior post: Mitel Virtual Ice Cream. The readers' comments are all good and it really comes down to perception, sort of. Mitel's virtualized PBX adds tools so the data center can make itself redundant on the voice side by using the second data center to back up the first. You can argue that the old PBXs didn't have this and then you can also argue that old PBXs most times, didn't need this feature.Then as was pointed out to me, the virtual PBX is delivered without the container. This is where I have a hard time paying for something that I'm not getting. I'm not discounting software but in reality you can't discount the hardware either.
The next area that I really take issue with is responsibility--that old hardware demarc now loses its old skin and to me this translates into greater customer responsibility. Since there is no box provided by the manufacturer the new home becomes a server and that server is shared with other virtual destinations owned by the customer.
Make no mistake: Then, I never have agreed with the typical BDM (Business Development Manager) way of thinking--how much does the customer pay now, how much can we get and are they willing to pay the amount. This industry has made the argument that, "voice is just another application" and because the virtual PBX is just software, well then, software is "just software" and it's a commodity. I think between the old and new players this has been a defining line in the sand. My thinking is simply to drive costs down and add more value simultaneously. Still, I challenge both customers and vendors to tally up the benefits for either customer or factory by buying and selling virtualized PBXs.
Licensing comes into question and I don't know a fair solution but here's what I think. The virtual solution can run the virtual PBX from the data center for all locations. Location A needs 325 user extensions but has an employee capacity of 500 during good times. Location B needs 2,700 user extensions and has an employee capacity of 4,100. By moving both locations to the data center the new solution still needs capacity of 4,600 user extensions but only 3,205 working extensions. Now throw in the business cycles of attrition or expansion and employee hiring and firing in the normal churn. How much system do you buy then how many licenses do you buy? I would like the option to buy 4,600 user capacity and then pay for licensing/maintenance on what I actually use.
The past IMHO has been a shell game and it still is today. Whether or not you agree, I do think you will agree that this subject needs further investigation. I'd love to hear your thoughts especially since not only has my cheese been moved, but some have stolen it too! Thinking about a little further, I've gotten my fair share. Still, I hope that the shell game would end, lower prices for virtualized solutions and fairness in licensing. Once the telephony solution is virtualized you are locked in and you won't want to move it, thus you have become the ultimate captive audience.
