Topic: Partner ACS to Retire!!

[mongo5150]

https://support.avaya.com/css/P8/documents/100089943

Yikes!

[EV607797]

Idiots..........  Perhaps the most popular and straight-forward system in history.  Decisions being made by the same people who decided that 1A2 was no good in favor of Merlin.  No further comment.

[mongo5150]

I love the part about migrating all the features into the IPO.  Right, like the 18 Partner phones (max) you can do......
I second the IDIOTS term!!

[hitechcomm]

What a shame   

[mongo5150]

Well, I talked to the horse today...

After a disgruntled letter to Ron Rogers (Partner ACS product manager).  He explained a few things...

They know the Partner version is not where it needs to be.  The biggest faults go around voicemail.  In 6.1 (November) they will release more voicemail enhancements.  There will be even more features added to the Partner edition (that ACS already has) with the R7 in January 2011.

I guess the biggest factor is that about 9 manufacturers (one of which makes the power supply for the Processors and 308 cards) is unable to make them any more.  So instead of redesign the thing, they will migrate the featureset to the Partner Version. 

Maybe not on these 2 releases, but in the future IP Office will be able to use the ETR card.  Which is one of my biggest complaints.  We will have IP Office able to use Nortel phones, before Partner.... moronic at the very least.

[hbiss]

Yeah, the messaging is my bigest beef. If they would only add another AA and submenus I would be happy, same functionality as the Partner Messaging R7 would be ideal. Most of my customers can't justify a full blown IPO and only need 10 extensions or less but even so, with some a full featured VM is necessary. It's good to hear that the VM enhancements will coincide with the ACS discontinuation. Hopefully they will do the right thing and produce a comparable product.

-Hal

[hitechcomm]

Just installed our 5th IP Office Partner.
Works fine. VM still is the only problem. I don't think there is any hope in sight for this.
Makes selling this verison difficult.

[mdaniel]

Why did you choose to sell the Partner Version instead of the full blown IPO?
Did the customer already have some Partner phones they wanted to reuse?

[mongo5150]

Why did you choose to sell the Partner Version instead of the full blown IPO?
Did the customer already have some Partner phones they wanted to reuse?

Ditto.

The voicemail issues alone, would warrant the IPO version.

[hbiss]

My guess would be that he has experience with and knows the Partner so he can have confidence in supporting the customer.

Just one of the big mistakes with the IPO is that it shares little commonality with any previous Avaya products, particularly the Magix and Partner which it replaces. AT&T, then Lucent and previous Avaya's upgrade paths always built on the equipment it replaced by maintaining a similar method of installation, administration and programming. The engineers back then knew what they were doing because whenever new releases or equipment was introduced the learning curve for an experienced tech was not steep and sometimes minimal or intuitive. The IPO on the other hand is a departure from this, so much so that you might as well be starting from scratch with another manufacturer's product- and a very complex product at that.

So, I mean no disrespect to either of you but to simply say "why didn't you install a full blown IPO" is a bit thoughtless. Speaking for myself and as a professional, I'm not going to sell something that I can't be comfortable with in terms of being fully able to install, program and troubleshoot on my own. With work and money, someday I'm sure I can be in that position but right now I have the luxury of neither and I need something that will generate income for me and Partner needs to do that. But I can say this: if they drop the ball on this one I'll be looking for another manufacturer's product.

-Hal

[mongo5150]

..... Speaking for myself and as a professional, I'm not going to sell something that I can't be comfortable with in terms of being fully able to install, program and troubleshoot on my own.

Exactly!.... you would be comfortable installing a Partner version?  Partner ACS, yes, but not Partner version IPO. 

[mdaniel]

There is a bit of a learning curve.
But Hal, believe me. Once you see all that the IPO can do, you will never look back..........

[hbiss]

you would be comfortable installing a Partner version?  Partner ACS, yes, but not Partner version IPO. 

From what I see so far I have to agree with you. I'm waiting to see how they will address the messaging situation.

Once you see all that the IPO can do...

That's what I'm talking about. I'm in business to make money, not waste time getting re-educated on a different way to do something we already know. There is also such a thing as making something so complicated for the sake of covering the most applications (to maximize profits) that it becomes impossible for most people to fully understand. As far as I'm concerned the feature set of the Partner ACS together with the Partner Messaging are about all that is needed.

-Hal

[mdaniel]

That's what I'm talking about. I'm in business to make money, not waste time getting re-educated on a different way to do something we already know. As far as I'm concerned the feature set of the Partner ACS together with the Partner Messaging are about all that is needed.

With a Partner you can't maximize the system capacities if the customer needed or wanted the Partner Messaging, that took up a slot.
If the customer had a PRI, no can do with Partner. If they had a T-1, then again that took another slot.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not happy to see the Partner go away myself. It is a tough little system, but has it's limitations.
A few features that I can pull off the top of my head that customers frequently ask for around here that the Partner can't do are: inbound call routing based off CID, mobile twining, trunk to trunk transfer, more out side conferencing than 2 parties, remote worker, even something as simple as tones on hold, ability to have different hold music for different lines (when more than one business shares the phone system), before Partner R.8 came out you wouldn't believe the people that would want CID to a SLT. And this doesn't even mention the IP side where you can have mobile worker, BLF across multi locations ect.

Again, I not bashing the Partner. Great system, but it does have it's limitation.
And I think you would like the IPO, if you would give it a chance. 

[JordonJ]

I'm not happy to see the partner go either but there are a lot of newer systems that are comparably priced with much more in terms of capabilities and flexibility.  Also a lot of my customers complained about how cumbersome it is to change the AA on the larger Voice mails.

I can't say I'm too impressed with the partner mode, as far as I'm concerned, it's just a broken IPO, making IPO support the partner phones in full IPO mode makes more sense to me.