Nokia has announced in a recent press release that “Going forward, Nokia plans to form its enterprise solutions offering by combining Nokia devices and applications with software solutions from industry leading enterprise vendors such as Microsoft, IBM, Cisco and others“.
This announcement comes just over 2 weeks since declaring that Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync will be supported on all Nokia Symbian S60 devices, and nearly 3 years since Nokia acquired the Intellisync technology. Just one day later Nokia then announced the acquisition of OZ Communications a popular consumer email and IM provider.
I recently had the opportunity to chair the Enterprise VoIP Forum 2008 in London. As part of this event I provided a brief presentation on effective methods for evaluating and selecting an enterprise VoIP solution which is repeated in the below slideshow. The presentation focused on four areas with a proposed checklist to consider for each:
VoIP requirements
Short listing potential suppliers
Tender documentation
Solution evaluation and selection
If you are considering undertaking a VoIP project this may provide some useful information.
For organisations planning to deploy Microsoft Office Communicator a consideration worth evaluating is the mobile device integration options.
Integration with Office Communicator (well actually Office Communications Server or OCS) extends features such as presence to mobile devices so users can be aware of the availability of PC based Office Communicator users or other OCS integrated mobile users. Other features include extending a common address book and Instant Messaging. These features enhance worker productivity by aiding efficient communications.
The OCS client for Windows Mobile is called Microsoft Office Communicator Mobile (see image). For Symbian based devices a third party application developed by WebMessenger is available (also works on Microsoft Mobile and Blackberry). For enterprises with a Blackberry Enterprise Server a RIM solution is available to extend services to Blackberrys.
To leverage the most out of your Office Communications Server investment (or any other desktop messaging software) a detailed look at the options available for extending functions to mobile devices is definitely worthwhile. Conversely a comprehensive mobile device evaluation should include desktop messaging integration as a criteria for consideration.
Unlike the iPhone, Android being an operating system, is expected to be released on multiple handsets much like Windows Mobile. T-Mobile has opted for a HTC handset to be the first to release an Android based phone called the G1.
See the below video from Google President Sergey Brin stepping through the Android operating system.
Needless to say Android is tightly integrated with applications such as Google Maps and GMail with specific features such as touch screen dependent on the device the operating system is supplied with. In addition however Google is actively encouraging third party developed applications by providing a $10 million incentive program!
While the Android does not yet include support for any enterprise Push Email services no doubt just like the iPhone it will be a matter of time before IT Managers need to include Android in their consideration of mobile operating sytems along with RIM, Windows Mobile, and Symbian.
Last week HSBC was reportedto be considering the iPhone as a replacement for around 200,000 Blackberrys. So is the iPhone a viable replacement for the Blackberry? Let’s take a look at some recent coverage on the topic.
Recent analysis from Gartner declares that the iPhone is acceptable for business use, excelling in some areas, with some closer examination required around security and management.
Security of corporate devices is always a sticky matter. I personally know of one global firm that has already rejected the iPhone for corporate use due to security concerns. That said, Apple proudly displays both Disney and Kraft as business iPhone users.
Meanwhile Blackberry has released it’s latest model called the Bold. A comparison by the Times Online concludes that the Blackberry is the best smartphone for business use with key advantages including the ability to edit Microsoft email document attachments and a longer battery life. However for browser and touchscreen capabilities the iPhone is ahead.
As with all user facing technology if the feature and security requirements specific to your organisation are met then often the best next step is to experience the usability through demonstrations, then if appropriate limited user pilots.
Mobile device requirements should include consideration of your Unified Communications roadmap. Indeed for a comprehensive mobile device showdown you should really include Windows Mobile Devices and Nokia E class handsets (but that’s another post all together).
Single number reach, Presence, Instant Messaging, Click to Call, single voicemail box… these are some of the key features that separate a telephone system from a Unified Communications system.
A valid question for the technology decision maker in a large enterprise is to ask “why do my employees really need this?”.
There are many answers, one of which may be “because your employees will expect these tools!”.
Imagine the office before email. Business still functioned. Imagine having an office now without email. What would your employees say then? It is probably a fair statement to say email is a necessary requirement in today’s business environment. Notice I never mentioned a business case.
Employees have email at home, they had it in their last job or when at school. Employees now expect and rely on email as a communications tool.
If we take the spread of consumer Internet based Unified Communications offerings then perhaps it is fair to assume that people will start to expect Unified Communications tools in the workplace. Perhaps not now, but in time I propose they definitely will.
For example take the biggest consumer Internet company of them all with Google’s GrandCentral (single number reach, single voicemail) and Google Talk (VoIP, presence and Instant Messaging). How many students (the employees of tomorrow) do you know without an Instant Messaging account?
British Telecom may be seeing the trend, or hedging their bets, through an Internet enabled service offering with RingCentral called BT RingCentral. A service for small office and home office that includes fax to email, single number reach and a single voicemail box.
While neither of the above are exactly a complete Unified Communications solutions they are definitely showing signs of evolving.
So perhaps decision makers in large organisations when considering the latest Unified Communications solutions available to their organisations will need to ask themselves “can I afford not to provide Unified Communications tools to employees?”.
There is an interesting article over at CRN about the rise of HP ProCurve networking equipment. According to research from Dell’oro group HP ProCurve port shipments grew worldwide by 28.4% (10.4% North America) compared to an industry growth of 7.8% (-11.8 North America).
Synergy Research Group places ProCurve third in terms of worldwide revenue for the quarter behind Cisco and then 3Com.
So what are the reasons put forward for this growth? Refreshed product lines, effective channel marketing, lower cost and lifetime warrantly.
In terms of competing with Cisco, their partners point to the advantages of a common vendor for both voice and data. Protocols such as Network Access Control (NAC) will apparantly not work with HP Procurve. HP dismisses this disadvantage commenting that this should not be a concern for standards based networks. My own experience has found that advanced features first arrive as non-standards based, then evolve into standards based. Thus, I’d say there will be some advantages to consider in a single vendor voice and data platform… just depends on the price!
One thing is for sure, increased competition can only result in good news for consumers.
Some highlight news items over the last fortnight in enterprise telecommunications:
Enterasys has formed a joint venture with Siemens Enterprise Communciations by taking a controlling stake in the company. This provides the networking company with a voice offering to aid competing with companies such as Nortel and Cisco who supply both voice and data solutions.
Meanwhile Cisco who already has a voice and data solution portfolio has announced an arrangement with HP to collaborate on Cisco Unified Communications products. Some analysts see this as acknowledgement by Cisco that partnerships with competitors are key to expanding their market.
Energy efficiency of equipment is making headlines. According to the Tolly GroupShoretel IP Telephony will use up to 37% less energy than Cisco for a 1,500 end deployment, thus reducing total cost of ownership and helping the environment. I’m not sure if the absolute comparisions are of too much value, however the key point of considering energy consumption and efficiency in total cost of ownership is well illustrated.
RADVISION will be enablingCisco’s Unified Customer Voice portal, a contact center user self service product, with video. The objective is to support video interactions with customers. Perhaps this product will be renamed soon to Unified Customer Interaction Portal :).
Research firm Frost & Sullivan has made some predictions on growth for the Unified Messaging market: Contact Centres will provide the lead, and the real trigger will be Microsoft and IBM encouraging customers to upgrade their email and Instant Messaging platforms. I agree 100%.
Another market growth observationfrom Frost & Sullivan: growth in IP Telephony is due to replacement of out-of-date equipment rather than drivers for new functionality or cost savings. This is consistent with my own observations of the market.
Nortel has provided their top 5 examples for ”hyperconnectivity” this summer (Nortel’s marketing term for staying connected to communications anywhere anytime): the office is anywhere, rural connectivity, road tripping, island hotspots and playtime. If you ask me their idea of summer is terrible. Lets leave things to “the office is anywhere”.
I often get asked “which manufacturer is best for IP Telephony and Unified Communications?”. I see this questions almost like being asked “which car is best?” … really it depends on what your requirements are, now and in the future, and on your budget. I’d be happy with a good value sports car now (because I cant afford a luxury sports car!) but that is not going to work when I get a family (my requirements will change in the future)… my retired self-made millionaire friend (if I had a friend like that!) will give you a different answer.
When considering an immediate requirement for a new corporate telephony solution it is important to also consider the Unified Communications requirements that may be needed, even if not needed immediately. A bit like my sport car annology you don’t want to out grow your purchase.
If your requirements are clear the next challenge will be determining which manufacturer and ultimately supply partner is best suited to meet them.
Manufacturer platforms change so rapidly that assessing the relative merits can be difficult. Companies such as Gartner release research on their view of the Corporate Telephony and Unified Communications landscapes. I propose that the relative positions of the manufacturers on the above charts are not too important, but understanding the differences between their solutions is key to determining which is right for your own requirements (and it may result in a combination of manufacturers - note that IBM and Microsoft do not appear in both charts for example).
If you have a good understanding of your requirements (now and in the future) and a good understanding of the available solutions then you will provide your own answer, or answers, to the question “which manufacturer is best?”.
I recently spoke about selecting a Unified Communications supplier at the IBA Forum in London so thought I would try and get the key points into a post.
Unified Communications has the objective of integrating traditionally disparate communications technologies to work in a unified way. This includes voice services (including voicemail), presence, unified messaging (fax to email etc), instant messaging, e-mail, audio and Web conferencing and videoconferencing.
The benefits achieved by unifying communications are nicely demonstrated in the below Microsoft video “The Devil Wears Prada” about ~ 4 minutes duration.
For me the key factor in selecting a Unified Communications supplier is that the multiple communications technologies involved will generally have evolved independently within an organisation without consideration of any future unification. As a result unification will require a range of integration, replacement and upgrade across a variety of technologies that were not necessarily envisaged to operate together. Before even contemplating to select a Unified Communications supplier a roadmap for unifying communications is therefore required.
A Unified Communications roadmap will include:
Identification of the business objectives to be achieved (at an individual, team, or enterprise level - to be the subject of a future posting);
Creation of a Unified Communications architecture by understanding the capabilities of the current and future technologies and the potential integration requirements to meet the business objectives defined;
Alignment of the upgrade and replacement lifecycles of the existing communications technologies such that the Unified Communications architecture evolves in a logical manner. This may mean delaying or accelerating upgrade or replacement lifecyles that were determined independently of the Unified Communications architecture. It may make business sense to modify the Unified Communications architecture to align with pre-existing technology lifecycles; and
Demonstration of the technology options available so that roadmap is both informed and includes end user input.
Once a Unified Communications roadmap is complete the task of selecting a supplier, or most likely multiple suppliers, will include consideration of the following:
Evaluation of a supplier’s understanding of the various technologies that comprise your Unified Communications roadmap together with the integration skills required;
Evaluation of a suppliers experience in delivering a Unified Communications solution with the components identified in your roadmap;
Evaluation of a supplier’s ability to support and maintain the Unified Communications solution identified in your roadmap; and
Evaluation of a supplier’s ability to grow with the roadmap and meet the future changes required.
For many suppliers the integration skills and experience required to deliver a Unified Communications solution across multiple communications technologies will not be available. This directly extends into challenges for ongoing support and future platform evolution.
Developing a roadmap empowers an organisation to make an informed selection of the best business aligned Unified Communications platform given existing and proposed technologies. In turn, this directly provides a targeted set of requirements to better select a Unified Communications supplier.
For organisations planning to deploy 
Some highlight news items over the last fortnight in enterprise telecommunications:
