Infonetics Research released a report that showed WiFi ip phone sales increase 60% in 2007, with 682,000 units were sold worldwide. The report cited “increased vendor support” as the primary reason for the growth. Now, I am not sure what they mean by support; do they mean offer the phones (I.E. we support Wireless VoIP with this new WiFi phone..) or they actually support the phone (I.E. If you can’t get our phone to work, we will help you). I am going to go with the later.
In my experience, most manufacturers are horribly bad at support…and given all of the issues that could arise with a WiFi phone, they are a technical support nightmare.
While some people seem to like WiFi phones, they aren’t for the faint at heart, especially if your aren’t technically savvy. My advice, if you want to go wireless, is to pickup a DECT based solution. A little more expensive, but it works…for everyone.
Like This Post? Subscribe Via RSS Feed and Never Miss Another Post!
3 responses so far ↓
I agree, WiFi phones still suck! // Apr 1, 2008 at 2:02 am
[…] Smith writes some thoughtful words about WiFi phones in his blog: Infonetics Research released a report that showed WiFi ip phone sales increase 60% in 2007, […]
Frank // Apr 1, 2008 at 10:12 am
When they say “WiFi phones”, are they referring to pure-play phones that use 802.11a/b/g/n technology only, or are they referring to/including cell phones that also do WiFi? The terminology used by various folks in the industry is all over the map. Some see this and think those Skype phones from Linksys. Others think the iPhone with some upcoming Gizmo Project/Skype software on it.
If this report is referring to pure WiFi handsets like the Cisco 7921, then I can see the numbers increasing. We’re about to switch out an old Nortel PBX with a Cisco Unified Communication Manager (CUCM) Business Edition, and our setup includes 6 Cisco 7921 phones that have performed flawlessly so far.
As part of our testing, we setup a VLAN for the phones–including on the wireless network (we’re basically a Cisco shop so the APs are Cisco as well)–config’d the CUCM for the phones, and then began walking the building while on a call. Our building, a metal shed for lack of a better term, wreaks havoc on any/all wireless. Until now any cordless phone technology meant a virtual tether of max. 30-50′ (and that’s assuming you didn’t go around certain metal walls inside the building, close a metal door between you and the base station, etc., or it was even less).
This environment also wreaks havoc on WiFi, so we have 3 APs spread through the building to give enough coverage. Using the Cisco 7921s, we were able to walk from one end of the building to the other without ever dropping a call, and the clarity was excellent.
Mind you, this is a Cisco solution front to back (including using SCCP vs. SIP), so no lower-end gear like Linksys APs connecting an Asterisk-based PBX doing either IAX or SIP to some other brand phone. But for this setup, it works perfectly, so I could see corporate environments definitely moving ahead with WiFi phones.
As for smaller shops and those using cheaper (in cost, not quality) solutions, I can’t speak to that. Given my druthers, I’d much rather use a completely open solution, such as a Trixbox or other Asterisk-based box using Grandstream/Aastra/Polycom/etc. SIP-based ip phones. In fact, that’s what started us down the path of ripping out the Nortel PBX.
But as the state-wide network we operate is predominantly on Cisco gear, and our customers mostly are using or looking towards Cisco solutions (including several already having or considering going to CUCMs), and last but not least Cisco offered us substantial discounts and this solution will be covered by our already existing Cisco support contract, in the end what was originally discussed ended up being a Cisco solution. (NOTE: Even with discounts, a solution of similar size using even well-supported/more-expensive Asterisk-based solutions like a Trixbox or Fonality appliance would run you less.)
Off-topic: I can see the power/flexibility of Cisco’s CUCM dominating the Fortune 500 market. It is incredible all the different ways you can configure a CallManager solution involving redundant boxes, trunking lines between satellite offices, etc. It has an insane array of configuration options, and it scales.
That said, good heavens is it overkill for smaller shops. I would not wish a CUCM on a shop our size unless your circumstances are similar to ours (i.e., you’re basically a “Cisco shop” ISP that offers support services to various customers using same, where having similar gear helps you in your work). And even then I might reconsider, especially if you’re looking to offere customers a cheaper solution.
If your situation is NOT like ours, I strongly suggest looking at the kinds of solutions offered by VoIPSupply.com and such. I would much prefer something that’s open-standards/ open-source based, where you’re not locked in to any single vendor. You may need to shop around for a good integration/support firm if you’re not the type to roll your own, but it will still likely save you a bundle and be far easier to maintain. The same flexibility that makes CUCMs so powerful makes them a royal headache to manage vs. something in the Asterisk-based Trixbox/ Fonality/ Elastic/ FreePBX/etc. family.
Ok, I’ll shut up now.
Garrett Smith // Apr 1, 2008 at 8:56 pm
@ Frank:
If you have the money to do it right, WiFi VoIP can work well.
Unfortunately most people do not (or they are cheap), so they are stuck using low-end solutions that do nothing but cause disappointment.
Thanks for the valuable comments, though, I think it is a fair assessment that should help some folks!
You ever think about guest posting?
Leave a Comment