Microsoft Lync: Another Death Call To The IP-PBXMicrosoft Lync: Another Death Call To The IP-PBX
Maybe they will achieve success but I have to wonder at whose expense?
November 12, 2010
Lync (formerly OCS R2) was announced last month by Microsoft, and will be formally rolled out next week at an event in New York. After having spent time in beta with Microsoft’s Technology Adoption Program (TAP), the Lync brand announcement arrived with the release of an evaluation version of the product last month. Lync is expected to to be available late this year. IP-PBX vendors watch out: the bundle that Microsoft is peddling makes mention of "no additional licensing fees required out of the box."
According to Microsoft: "This may be the point from which we mark the death of the 'PBX market' as a discrete entity."
I don't disagree with the above statement either, and I think that the trend to bundle the right features into a software platform that unifies communications tools among enterprise users is smart. Microsoft is dangling more than just that old forbidden fruit to large enterprise users by offering:
* Connectivity across networks
* Utilization of existing A/V infrastructure
* Integration with existing IP PBX systems
* Embedded communications in business processes.
Microsoft is right, the PBX market no longer is a discrete entity, but I don't think it’s because of Lync. The PBX will remain in the SMB/E, but not without struggles and changes to how the factory guys think. The word is "value" and unless you offer value that is clearly recognizable, achievable and accountable, then your offering is rapidly fitting for the bone pile.
If Microsoft is successful, then will "value" get a price facelift from competitors? The TEO platform already provides a "value bundle" of features within their licensing and it's just a small example that could capture an existing base of digital Centrex and ISDN phones. Bundling of advanced features may be the hook to entice more sales as it was early on in IP-PBX deployments--even though we (3Com NBX) couldn't get "Do Not Disturb" as a basic feature until a few years later.
Lync doesn't come without caveats either. Integrating it into the existing infrastructure is going to require consideration and careful planning. SIP trunking is another feature and so is hostability of Lync, but each still depends upon how and what you are integrating and connecting.
Sure, having Microsoft's name on most business computing software is important but does it work? Does it work well and does it hold up across platforms and disparate systems that the users may want but IT can't seem to dispose of because of some older feature or functionality that is important? Embedding voice into the communications enabled business process doesn't come without risk and vulnerability and as Microsoft has proven in the past it leaves plenty of holes in its software.Still, Lync will attract businesses and IT guys because of familiarity and the name. Microsoft has that allure and IT folks are pretty comfortable monkeying with Microsoft and servers.
Suppliers are changing, just not at the pace that everyone wants. Does it make sense to leverage Lync and in-house support around Microsoft? It may make more sense to assess whether or not you need the integration and even if you do, how tightly will the solution fit? The word picture that someone created long ago about "the server guys just having to reboot" projects a sobering image. Even if that server is my beloved Apple product, still I'm not in a rush to shelve the IP-PBX. Why? Not just because ‘it just works" but because "it just works and works and works.” So before you cross the bridge you’d better check for trolls. Either way you look, someone's going to hook you.
Microsoft is offering some hooks too:
* Offers the same rich functionality and security features outside the firewall without requiring a Virtual Private Network (VPN) connection
* Lync Server 2010 works with almost any PBX system
* Lync Server 2010 delivers a standalone voice offering to enhance or replace traditional PBX systems
* Easily deploy systems of any scale, and manage them with ease
* Integrate with existing IP PBX systems
Market erosion is one thing, but this market is splitting into another faction and you can bet that Microsoft wants a chunk of it. They've re-launched or should I say rebooted their efforts again with Lync. How many times before they get it right I don’t matters because they have funding, presence and brand. Competing suppliers must bundle their wares too because I think bundling is going to be more relevant than ever. The bundle with the right mix and price might just attract more buyers.
Microsoft hits a key area in eliminating the need of a VPN connection too, and my IT pals are all making me use an Apple desktop client that connects me to customer sites so we can do our "voice thing" and have a peek into switches, traffic and the infrastructure. But bundling won’t be enough. Anyone with a box solution must figure out the right balance, and whether leveraging cloud-based services will fortify positions of IP-PBX manufacturers--and I don't mean virtualization and hosting of the IP-PBX.
The picture I want to leave you with is "have you ever successfully contacted Microsoft and resolved an issue in a timely fashion?" Maybe you have but I know plenty of folks that haven't. Still, I can’t help but wonder that some IT folks just want a voice solution that just works so long as it’s Microsoft.
Microsoft's Lync may be cause of concern for less IP-PBX’s (box sales) being sold, but Microsoft will learn that there's still the desktop phone. Will they get into manufacturing their own phones too? Reboot baby, reboot and once you’re back up, how did all that deep integration fare?
Not that I'm heckling Microsoft but they just don’t strike me as having the ganas that Apple has or as being the phone company that I’d want to have in my shop. I haven’t forgotten their Costco sales and dead end Response Point PBX that floundered with the independent IT guy/wannabe phone guy circles either. Then, Microsoft integrates with Microsoft but what about Apple and Linux? Maybe they will achieve success but I have to wonder at whose expense?
