Is Microsoft Lync the future of your enterprise communications system--or is it not ready for prime time? Two No Jitter bloggers, Dave Michels and Matt Brunk, have different answers to these questions, and so we asked them to debate the central question about Lync: Is it right for the enterprise? So that you can better compare and judge the two positions, each blogger used the same structure for his article, breaking the question down into four sections: TCO, Intuitiveness of Interface, Hardware Compatibility, and High Availability.
By Dave Michels
Microsoft Lync is redefining enterprise communications. The product was released last November to a market devoid of intuitive communications. Lync offers a broad solution that can (optionally) eliminate the PBX stranglehold, and offers communication and capabilities that allow people to communicate on their own terms; when, where, and how they work best. Lync offers a robust set of tools that delivers real time unified communications solutions in an impressive and thorough way. It isn’t about phones or even voice, it's about unified communications; integrated into the tools and environment of the modern enterprise.
The following four key arguments will make it clear how Microsoft Lync revolutionizes enterprise communications.
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
The cost of communications technologies has never been trivial. All three cost buckets--equipment, usage, and administration--realize cost reductions with Microsoft Lync. Lyncs approach to hardware is different than traditional telephony that requires proprietary devices connected with dedicated wiring to proprietary servers using dedicated proprietary hardware with specialized interfaces to the carriers. Lync lets users migrate to SIP trunks and realize significant savings on long distance, usage, and capacity planning.
It also reduces administrative costs because it blends right into existing infrastructure unlike any other communications solution. Administrative changes, such as adding a new user, can be done in Active Directory, updating all the systems (email, voice mail, voice/phone) in just a few clicks. Users too will find the Lync client intuitive with reduced user training. Employees will feel liberated and confident when performing previously esoteric procedures such as initiating three- (or more)-participant conference calls.
Imagine using the same infrastructure that provides security (Active Directory), messaging (Exchange), and clients (Windows), seamlessly (optionally) integrated with collaboration (SharePoint) and productivity tools (Office). A single strategy for servers (Server 2008 R2) over a single network. Even the licensing of Lync can be bundled with other Microsoft solutions (many organizations already have Lync licensing available to them).
The implications are profound--no more unique skill combinations to recruit and retain. A single strategy for operations and disaster recovery, and consistent interfaces and tools for management (Microsoft System Center Operations Manager or SCOM). Every bucket that contributes to overall TCO declines; initial purchase, ongoing maintenance, and ongoing skill costs. Factor in improved productivity through intuitive conferencing and collaboration tools including video conferencing which can reduce travel, and the ROI becomes even more compelling.
But most importantly, Lync challenges numerous long held assumptions about telecommunications--such as the need for an expensive phone on every desk. Replace that phone with a feature-rich client that includes IM, presence, video, and yes, voice. Network costs also typically decrease, as most customers deploying Lync replace existing traditional carrier services with SIP services offering lower costs, improved quality, and additional capabilities for increased capacity and availability.
Intuitive Interface
Here's a notion: how about a phone that knows your contacts? How about a conference system that knows your number and either calls you or knows who is calling--eliminating those antiquated PIN codes. Lync understands work flow--it understands that conferences get set up in the calendar, so not only does it book the conference resources from the calendar, but appends a unique click-able link directly into the email invitation.
The power behind the Lync solution is the Lync client, which makes powerful communications available via an intuitive integrated desktop application. One simple productivity tip to avoid voice mail is to only call colleagues that are available. This becomes intuitive as availability is indicated in Lync and throughout the applications in Office--including the directory. Perhaps you have a question about a recent email; if the sender isn't available, an email reply may be appropriate--but if the sender is available (indicated right on the From line), then perhaps a quick Instant Message. An IM conversation can easily escalate to voice or video and back as the conversation dictates. Lync makes it all simple and keeps track of all communications in a single log. And it isn't just the desktop applet either; contacts, appointments, logs are all accessible from the desktop phone too--even calls made from other locations.
Presence, IM, chat, video, voice, collaboration, calendaring, and messaging--all simplified with a consistent user interface. Not sure who to call in a given situation? Try a keyword search in the directory. The system can provide location information, which is important because people work in different places, and knowing both availability and location can really improve productivity.
Next: Michels on Hardware Compatibility and High Availability
Hardware Compatibility
When it comes to communications hardware there are three basic categories: servers, phones, and gateways. Most enterprise vendors are offering industry standard servers--sorta. Actually, they were industry standard before they were loaded with a specific OS and configuration that the administrator can’t optimize or configure to site-specific best practices. If not one of those, then it's a mystery-box appliance with similar limitations. With Lync, the software runs on multiple brands of servers deployed in numerous configurations as the customer sees fit; including virtualization.
Lync snaps into a Microsoft architecture including Active Directory, Exchange, and optionally SharePoint. It offers streamlined deployment possibilities regarding licensing, hardware, and required skills. Lync puts the server hardware decisions with the network administrators--as it should.
With phones, Lync also offers an unprecedented amount of choice. First, phones are optional, as Lync users will find the desktop client included with every user to be highly intuitive. That's what happens when you replace 12 keys sporting a 24-letter alphabet and small screen with a rich PC client, large screen, full keyboard, and mouse. Literally hundreds of products are certified to work with Lync, including headsets and webcams. For those that want a familiar handset and dialpad, Lync users can save money with USB phone-like devices that integrate seamlessly with the software client. And in situations where a stand-alone phone is appropriate, Lync customers have a choice of IP phones available from two quality vendors with extensive phone experience--available through numerous distributors.
Then comes the gateways. Instead of proprietary gateways designed for a single solution, Lync relies upon industry leading gateway makers to optimize the Lync experience for countless configurations. Instead of proprietary cards for legacy digital networks, Lync users can benefit from the experience and lower manufacturing costs of high volume gateway makers such as AudioCodes, NET, and Dialogic. These gateways can be found today in all kinds of enterprises, as they work with most phone systems--unlike proprietary cards that only work with one brand and/or model.
High Availability
Voice communications are typically critical and should be deployed to optimize availability similar to email and other critical IT components. So not only does Lync offer various tools for high availability and resiliency, but the operational strategy, plan, and resources all directly relate to the customer-customized IT and high availability architecture. The key point is that voice and IT should not have completely separate disaster recovery plans as is often the case due to disparate technologies.
The Lync architecture is inherently resilient by separating key services. Deployments can be designed on single server solutions or solutions that utilize server pools (clusters) backed up at additional data centers. Resources can be load balanced between separate servers, pools and/or locations. Services can even be load balanced--and should failures occur, recovery reconnects are fast.
Even branch offices without Windows servers are included in the HA design--five manufacturers make survivable branch appliances (SBAs) that centralize management and enable connectivity regardless of whether a failure is at the data center, WAN, or even the SBA itself.
The key to Lync is choice--choice in hardware, choice in implementation configurations, choice in resiliency--even a choice in scope--Lync can be deployed with or without voice services. It is choice that both reduces costs and increases flexibility so that the Lync solution fits the specific and unique needs of a given customer.
Next: Matt Brunk's case against Lync
By Matt Brunk
Microsoft Lync is a "billion dollar" revenue creation opportunity that started with Microsoft not wanting to buy into someone else’s proprietary offering (the PBX).
Microsoft pitches Lync as a real-time tool that significantly improves and redefines enterprise communications to unify messages that just flood workers with more messages, options and programming decisions. Always-on real time communications is hard to maintain.
These four arguments should make it clear how Microsoft and their partners plan to make the most of their revenue opportunity.
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
Lync talks of initial reasonable software licensing, qualified SIP phones, products and gateways up until the point of licensing. Microsoft doesn’t make it easy to license and they leave out the finer points of interoperability. Customers connecting with Lync end up without fluid interoperability with other corporate assets. Once Lync is running in the data center, maintenance complexity results in higher costs to preserve software assets. While attempting to maintain high-availability demands, an erosion of benefits occurs from higher costs and from unforeseen service disruptions and downtime. Lingering doubt remains about how secure Microsoft is or isn’t simply based upon past experience.
"Microsoft Qualified" is not the same as "industry standard." Available desk phones lack ergonomics and functionality for effective enterprise call handling. This hidden cost to Lync results as companies vie to connect office employees to a singular computing device. Mishandling of calls will happen over time. Declaring desktop phones ancient technology doesn’t change the conservative nature of telephony. Lync is a purchase of buying less, getting less and ignoring practical functional features.
Lync offers no wireless or low-cost common-area phones and only a handful of IP phones, which cost the same as those in PBX solutions. Lync requires Exchange--and is the only phone system that requires a specific messaging server. Lync requires more servers and middleware.
Intuitive Interface
Users say repeatedly, "I just want to make a call." Microsoft jams the desktop interface in a way that doesn't necessarily equate to simplification or enhancing user experience. Explore any UC interface and customers will find some just too much to manage. In Lync's case what are the new features? Web-interface dependency for quality experience isn't what I'd call reasonably setting expectations. Everyone knows computers will go down but everyone still expects communications with high availability.
Lync includes presence and IM as a proprietary Microsoft solution. Plenty of presence and IM solutions are available--some free, and some already implemented (see Ezuce). Why lock into a new unproven proprietary solution with so many best of breed alternatives available? How many MCEs does it take to make a phone call?
Next: Brunk on Hardware Compatibility and High Availability
Hardware Compatibility
A key benefit of the PBX is backward/forward compatibility. Customers with legacy (proprietary) phones easily move from one system to the next, taking old phones with them while staying with the same manufacturer. Because desktop phones represent a key portion of the original investment (30-35%), manufacturers know this is an effective tool to retain customers. This move and change makes transitioning to a new system easy with virtually no learning curve save the advanced system features.
Does the world really need yet another proprietary IP phone? Proven, proprietary phones work with old infrastructure. Nearly every major manufacturer now supports SIP phones--and just like Microsoft, everyone has a SIP flavor that proprietizes the solution. The difference is: who trades off decades of experience in return for an all-Microsoft solution? How long has Microsoft been in the voice business?
Lync's proprietary protocols require session border controllers (SBCs). This remains a deterrent to SMBs whose firewalls’ deep stateful inspection doesn't play well with proprietary protocols. The modern PBX is already virtualized ("Green and Converged" without virtualization), unlike power hogs in the IT space now claiming to be "green."
I found a comparative analogy that reflects on Microsoft Lync in a post: Microsoft mash-ups: Can OCS, LCS and Lync environments coexist? by Hugh Marlor of BT Professional Services Group. Hugh writes that:
* OCS and Lync clients can communicate with no issues
* OCS and LCS clients can communicate with no issues
* LCS and Lync clients are not able to communicate
Lync isn't compatible with everything Microsoft. Is Microsoft poised to offer customers the same capability to operate with backward/forward compatibility? How much of old OCS can you retain? Customers want to retain assets to avoid replacement and protect initial investment. When Lync software is upgraded--will other upgrades entail hardware forklifts, simple upgrades or something else? What is Microsoft's migration strategy moving forward? Will Lync remain focused and will "qualified" manufacturers be able to preserve continuity? Does "Microsoft Lync Qualified Device" mean that these devices always remain qualified to work with Lync? Even Microsoft issues a warning on its webpage: "Always check if your Lync version was tested with the interoperable IP phones available.
Lync doesn't converge the many endpoints found in today’s enterprise: Paging, network cameras, access-control, door entry, gate openers, DECT, 2500 sets and even relays and sensors that adorn the mission critical PBX. When customers buy PBXs there is the assurance that purchased phones and devices, including those inherited--just work. Customers are also reluctant to abandon the "old embedded."
High Availability
Lync is complex and depends upon high availability and always-on technologies. Lync is product immature and a migration dream tempting companies to place Lync in existing and all-Microsoft infrastructures, but it fails to remove dependencies. The question of whether or not Microsoft will be a one-stop shop remains, but complexity and dependency still equate to higher costs and risks. The gateways in any Lync configuration must future-proof Lync investments by providing protocols, SMDI and even digital trunk integration with existing voice mail, PBX systems and other gear. Upgrading and maintaining Lync is complex and yields a higher back-end cost along with the burden of maintaining high availability on WAN links. The engine driving Lync is people that are viewed as premium customers because they're charged with highly technical and specialized skills. Lync is PC centric, justifying Microsoft. But as someone said, "PCs are going the way of the do-do bird."
When you think of survivability and high availability do you think of Microsoft? Blue screen of Death anyone?
