I don't agree that there is a "drop in phone prices" songs being sung by the marketing chorus. Here's an old reality--users don't see what the phone is connected to and supported by. Here's a newer reality--buyers don't really see the true cost of phones.No, I don't think I am splitting hairs on this one. The old IT ways of pricing apply today--sell the hardware cheap and make a killing on the software, support and options. The added twist today is that SIP phones, especially the ugly ones, are cheap and I'll go on record to say, the uglier the phone, the cheaper, and some of these are the ones with poor ergonomic design. But you still only get the appliance regardless of the price and you don't always get the development or brains that provide the functionality and feature sets behind the phones.
What really raises the hairs on my neck are the claims that IPT or open source is cheaper than proprietary solutions. That's not necessarily true.
One thing that does ring true is regardless of the solution you choose, it boils down to a matter of convenience. Open source solutions are no picnic and to bring the solution in-house requires a significant investment. Developing the solution and then being able to support it with consistency is another challenge.
Whatever the telephony solution is, there is a sliding degree of convenience as well as dependence or independence. The solutions vary as do the brains behind the solutions, and you can take that anyway you like. Open source boxes come with a little, some with a lot more, but most require customization and even integration into the company's network. Of course the same is true for proprietary solutions. Most agree that one size doesn't fit all but most find that proprietary solutions will fit nicely and are designed to meet many needs. What is objectionable is either the degree of control and the degree of dependence that customers either have or lack.
Another shifting example is XML that is promising, and that means new opportunities for large color display phones, but you are doing the same thing again--shifting costs away from PCs and investing more in software and into large display phones carrying hefty price tags. Back in the roaring '80s the airlines and the transportation industry were stuck in the mode of developing their in-house software solutions and they ended up costing too much and the later shift was to use OTSS. The thinking towards telephony really hasn't changed from the old desires exhibited by the transportation industry and when you consider the software as off-the-shelf-solutions, it's really akin to old school telephony.
While telephony has undergone huge repackaging in the past ten years, this remake is representative of convergence and doing more with less but not necessarily costing less. Early last year, I reviewed some data from our sales spanning over two decades. What did I see? Customers are getting more for less and prices aren't really increasing or decreasing, but they simply shift. Overall, I will agree that customers are getting more bang for their buck and this is largely due to convergence and not to the flood gates being opened by many players or commoditization and not due to the down economy.
I think the example of power (for phones) is one good example of a shift -IPT solutions require PoE while TDM boxes delivered power and voice cheaper while using only one pair of cheaper wires at greater distances. Energy use and cost still remains an objectionable issue in IPT. Other shifts were: move voice onto the data network (at a significant cost), let the IT folks manage voice (at a significant cost and learning curve), and use one cable for phone and desktop computer/terminal (the initial cost savings was erroneous--now the cabling standards have changed, costs have gone exponentially up).
Whenever we discuss voice security the argument shifts to the guy with the buttset, but the real shifts are the costs in security to secure voice and in the increased risks of using un-secure IP/SIP voice calls. While I'm not arguing for any particular solution, I am questioning how solutions come across and in the repackaging of telephony I think they are more about perception even some deception for those not in the know. A wise boss from the past once told me, "Matt--telecom costs is just a big money game, constant moving from one place to another, yet doing basically the same thing." This former boss was also ex-Army and he used the shell game in his explanation to me.
The real kicker remaining is service. IPT isn't necessarily cheaper and it is, as my server buddy says, "complicated and it will always be complicated." Service isn't universal and sometimes the costs are so well hidden without transparency namely because of the complexity or of the blinding desire to replace the old with the new. If you missed Fred Knight's, Phones Face a Darwinian Challenge, then you missed a key point about another re-packaged phone known as the "softphone." My company has sold only a handful of softphone licenses since 1999 (Always use the FREE trial); what the industry doesn't get, we do; and what the help desk gets stuck with, we don't. Are softphones another great idea? I don't think so with the current Internet, but they represent a great shift of resources with a huge price tag on support. Phone prices haven't dropped, the components behind them have shifted and so have the costs. You can keep repackaging voice and you can even add other components to it like UC or even disguise the solution, but when you get down to the wire you can't ignore the individual elements of cost found within those shifts.
