Regarding the collaboration systems, there is a lot of difference between Cisco and Avaya. While some of these differences are beneficial, others are detrimental.
For example, Avaya has a better energy policy than Cisco, which means that you will use less energy when using Avaya’s system than if you were using Cisco’s; however, this also means that your data center will get hotter as a result because it takes more heat to function at the same level as before.
Avaya has better voice quality than Cisco.
Both companies have good voice quality, but if you’re looking to choose between the two, then consider how important voice quality is to your business.
Suppose you have a lot of phone calls that are audio-based. In that case, it’s essential to find a solution that will give you the best quality possible so customers can hear and understand what they need to know while on hold or taking advantage of other call center features like interactive voice response IVR systems (IVR).
Avaya manages packet loss better than Cisco.
Any two VoIP systems in a given network environment are not always identical, but it can be hard to identify their differences.
Network administrators and architects are often blindsided when they discover one system’s performance is better in certain circumstances than another’s. While only a few differentiating factors exist, these can outsize the interaction between systems.
Cisco and Avaya both managed packet loss differently, with Cisco deciding how to handle dropped packets up to the device itself and Avaya controlling it from the call control platform (CCP).
Cisco’s strategy requires higher signaling traffic across the network, while Avaya’s strategy minimizes signaling traffic to save resources on both ends of the call and reduce latency.
If you’re using Cisco devices, you’ll need to enable packet loss to get any intelligent handling of dropped packets. Packet loss prevention (PLP) has been enabled at each site by default since it was first introduced into the Cisco IOS software in 1998.
When PLP is enabled and if a packet is dropped, it will generate a System-level “LossOfFrame” event message that triggers an error message indicating a media failure on the other end of the connection.
The device will then attempt to re-send the packet, which can result in a large amount of signaling traffic.
Cisco has a better energy policy than Avaya.
Avaya uses more power than Cisco, and it’s because of its energy policies. Avaya uses less power than Cisco because they have better energy policies.
Avaya has a policy that states that all new products must have an Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) certification.
EEE certification means the product must meet specific criteria for power consumption, including how much power the device uses at rest and when it’s in use.
Cisco has a similar product policy but doesn’t require EEE certification. Cisco has an EnergyWise program that helps customers save energy, but this is just a voluntary program Cisco has created to help customers cut costs.
Cisco is cheaper than Avaya.
Cisco is much cheaper than Avaya. One of the reasons why Cisco is cheaper than Avaya is because they don’t charge as much for their hardware and software as Avaya does.
Another reason is that they offer lower maintenance contracts than what you would have to pay if you buy an Avaya system.
Cisco is more interoperable than Avaya.
Cisco is a well-known name in the business world, and for a good reason: it’s known for having better interoperability than Avaya. When you buy Cisco products, you know they will work better with other vendors’ hardware than Avaya products.
In addition to being more interoperable with other vendors’ equipment and software, Cisco also has a reputation for being more compatible with its products.
For example, if you have an existing software solution from another vendor and want to integrate it into your system without having to completely rebuild your environment from scratch or start over again, choosing a switch or router that is compatible with those applications will make things easier on everyone involved (and save some money).
Avaya has backward compatibility with older SIP devices.
Cisco does not have backward compatibility with older SIP devices; if you want the current system, you will need to replace all your existing equipment. Additionally, Cisco is more expensive than Avaya.
Avaya’s energy policy is better than Cisco’s as well—Avaya can save up to 50% more energy costs than Cisco while still providing a better user experience
security
Cisco’s security policy is much stronger than that of Avaya. Cisco has a much better firewall and more advanced security features than Avaya.
Cisco’s system is much more secure than Avaya one. It uses three layers of protection that work together to protect your data against attacks by hackers or malware: hardware firewalls, software firewalls, and anti-virus software.
I recommend this company to anyone who wants their IT system to be highly protected against attacks because their services are much better than those offered by other companies such as Avaya or Polycom (which will be discussed in future posts).
Cisco provides software updates every 6 months, whereas Avaya does so only annually.
Cisco Aries is a collaboration platform that offers on-premises and cloud-based options for businesses looking for a more flexible solution than Avaya’s Meridian1.
The Cisco platform can integrate with other solutions like Microsoft SharePoint and Office 365 but is also available as an integrated system from the start.
With Aries, you’ll get access to new features and updates every six months — an improvement over Avaya’s annual update schedule.
Cisco provides support for HD voice for both video and voice calling, whereas Avaya does this only for video calls.
Cisco and Avaya are leaders in providing enterprise communications solutions, but there are some significant differences between their collaboration systems.
One of the most significant differences is that Cisco supports high-definition voice for video and voice calling. On the other hand, Avaya only supports high-definition voice for video calls.
Another difference is that Cisco offers advanced applications such as the Unified Attendant Console and UC Integration with CTI. In contrast, Avaya provides these features as add-ons to its standard collaboration systems at an additional cost
Conclusion
I prefer the management interface of the network from Cisco because its system is easier to set up and configure than Avaya’s, even though the Voice VLAN mechanism is poorly managed on the 2960 series switches by Cisco.
Both companies have many strengths and weaknesses but differ in management, interoperability, security, and pricing.
