I am not sure what you are asking.  If you are setting up Mailboxes that don't have a person associated you can do it, and by the hundreds.  You won't pay extra for the right to set them up. When you buy Voice mail Pro you pay licences for ports, not users.

As for the supervisor, I'm not sure your purpose.  You need to explain more.

The IP Office also uses licenses for their system.  You have to get Voicemail Pro and whatever ports you need.  If you want the GUI interface you will need a license for Phone Manager Pro.  The basic voicemail and GUI interface do not typically meet the customer needs.  If you post what you need the system to do, I can give you my opinion on what is best for you.  I program and install both systems.

Hello. Sorry I wasn't clear. Basically as ron romano said Avaya says when you purchase Voice Mail Pro for a one time fee you can set up as many mailbox's as you want for no extra price. Is this incorrect? What do you mean by ports?

So lets say we have 20 phones, but we actually want 50 mailbox's depending on the options the caller chooses. For Shoretel it's about 100 dollars per mailbox. But I was under the impression that with Avaya you just paid for the voicemail software and you could use it for as many mailbox's as you wanted.

That is true about the IP Office.  The number of ports is dependant upon how many people will be simultaneously using the voicemail system.
One way you can avoid the license issue is to use Route Points in the ShoreTel system.  Route Points do not need a license and you can associate a mailbox with it.  

You have a unlimited amount of auto attendant boxes that you can use without a license in ShoreTel. If you are running a promtion, assign a DID to ring into the AA box, and you are good to go.

I know nothing about Avaya, but I have been using ShoreTel for 6 years now, and I do not have any problems with their licensing.

Hi VonZipper.

Can you explain how the auto attendant box would work in the shoretel system and why you feel it would be able to replace a mailbox in my example?

Thanks.

This example - So lets say we have 20 phones, but we actually want 50 mailbox's depending on the options the caller chooses. For Shoretel it's about 100 dollars per mailbox. But I was under the impression that with Avaya you just paid for the voicemail software and you could use it for as many mailbox's as you wanted.

If you are using DID's, route a DID to ring into a auto attendant box. In that box you can give users options to dial 0 thru 9, which could be another AA box, ring to a phone, take a message, company directory, or whatever you need. It is endless of how many steps you can make a caller go through. Are you planning to actually leave messages in 50 different mailboxs? If so, there is a issue with that. You do have to pay for a license for every mailbox that will take a message, because there has to be a user associated with it. What we have done, is given our callers the impression that they are leaving messages in different mailboxs, but they all end up in one or two boxes. Meaning, If you call our number and I give you the option to press one to pay your bill, 2 to ask billing questions, 3 to buy widget alpha, and 4 if you want to return widget alpha, they have the impression that they will be going to four different mailboxs, but I will send them all to the same one.

If you are not using DID, you can still make trunks ring to AA box and do the same thing.

Lets say you want it to ring to a phone first, and if it is not answered, you want it to go into all of these options. You can use the call handling modes to control this, or set it to happen all of the time. If you always want your calls to an extension to get options if there is no answer, set the standard call handling mode to forward the calls to the AA box. If you want to select when that will happen, like after hours, the user of the extension will just change their call handling mode when they leave. ( by the way, if you use outlook and PCM, you can set that schedule in Outlook and it will do it all for you).

Does that help at all? If you can give me more detail on what you are trying to do, I am more than willing to help.

I am no Avaya IPO expert but from what I do know (just enough to be dangerous) they license everything.  Avaya always licenses everything, they always have.  My uncle is an old Avaya tech who mostly works with 20-30 year old systems, but none the less does some work on newer stuff at his company.  I am 100% possitive that there is no way to buy 1 license for "Voice mail" and be able to use it for all the users you want.  You buy it in blocks like everything else in the Avaya world.  So your assumption is not 100% incorrect since you do buy 1 license, but that license is for up to XX users.  In your case it would be 1 license for up to 50 users.  It is just symantics.

Route points on the ShoreTel are a fine way to get additional voicemail boxes but they have their limits too and are not practical for general use as voicemail boxes.

What you need to do is talk to your reps and find out the cost of VM only licenses.  In shoretel land they are about $90 list price and only $60 if purchased with the extension license, again list price.  Doing the math that means that it will cost you $2700 in VM only licenses.  That is about 5-10% or less of the cost of the system for 20-50 users.

Both systems will charge for VM users, both charge for extension licenses.  These are facts, the ways that they charge though may be different, but they still do charge for the right to use the feature.

EV

Wrong wrong wrong eddie.  You licence voice mail ports, not voice mail boxes.  on IPO the first licence is 4 ports with as many mailboxes as you like  I think up to 500, the capacity of the system but I'm not sure of the max.  Yes you do pay per user for other software but those generally are concurrent licenses not tied to a particular user.

You also pay for 3rd party IP endpoint licenses, like everyone else.

The licensing is different for various applications.

Thats the fact. Your post is way off.  Tell your uncle to retire.

I install both systems.  I am a certified Avaya Specialist.  To compare Shoretel with IP Office is like comparing a Mercedes to a Ford Taurus.  Both can get you where you want to go.  The difference is the comfort in getting there.  I would always choose Shoretel over IP Office.

ACS so what.  I am too it doen't mean squat.  I sell the IP Office and drive a Taurus, There both great.

Obviously Ron you know as much about buying cars as you know about phone systems.  ShoreTel blows away the IP Office.  Since you have no experience with the ShoreTel systems, your comments really don't mean squat.

Better results are usually there for people who know how to talk to each other on these forums. Personally I'd like to see a "non-partisian" comparison between the two systems, particularly if done be non-business-partners from each company. Does one exist? I have my own opinions on the IP Office having installed a few, and I reserve the right to dislike either or them. Again, is there a comparison somewhere by non-Shoretel / non-Avaya.

I don't think I've knocked shoretel in this forum or any other.  I think the worst thing I've said is that they are insignificant, which they are.  You're absolutly right, I don't know a thing about Shoretel but I know alot about the IPO.  When I hear morons like EddieVenus descibe the licencing on IPO when he obviously doesn't have a clue it bothers me.  Hey GSmitherman I didn't see you correct him.  From your posts it seems that you are partial to Shoretel.  That's fine, I don't have a problem with that and no one should.  But forgive me if I take offense to someone posting inaccurices about a product I make my living from.

I started a topic in this forum based on the fact that I had been hearing good things about Shoretel.  How many posts did the topic get? 10.  So that tells me the system really doesn't rate.

Sure you can go to the IPO forum and find 100 times more posts and a whole lot more aggrivated people about issues with the IPO.  Why is this the case? It probably outsells the Shoretel 100 to 1.

Finally I'll say this,  If I were a buyer, Tek-TIPS is the perfect place to come to find out about a system to buy.  It would scare me to see the lack of activity in the Shoretel forum.  At least in the IPO  most of "issues" are end users or rookies asking questions from lack of experience.

So I'm curious GSmitherman, since I didn't comment on Shoretel at all, just commenting on the IPO licensing, I take it your really pissed about me saying the ACS is really a waste?

Ron,

I've read many post in these forums where people give incorrect information, or more correctly, information that they believe is correct. Even some of the most experienced users, techs and others don't have all the answers.

Eddie shows as a "technical user". I'd expect a vendor, such as yourself, to be more knowledgable and use that knowledge to educate people on the products you know so well.

There is no reason to respond with a personal attack. I think your comment to "Tell your uncle to retire" was totally inappropriate.

He portayed his uncle as someone who was knowledgeable, and then proceeded to dispense incorrect information.  That was inappropriate.  I didn't tell Eddie to retire.

What upset me was Ron's attitude towards two people.  You say one person should retire and a certification doesn't mean squat.  I am only partial to ShoreTel because after working on both systems, I believe it to be the superior product.  
The reason you do not see very many post here is due to two things.  One is training, the other is the product.  ShoreTel training is light years ahead of Avaya training.  Avaya used to have great instructors.  Now all they have are people who read from a lesson plan and have little to no experience with the product.  ShoreTel training is conducted by ShoreTel engineers.  There was not one question they could not answer on the spot.  After the training course, ShoreTel ensures you have learned by a difficult hands on test.  I walked away from the ShoreTel training ready and able to program and install the product.
How many times have you seen Avaya send product out to market with "Known Issues".  This is horrible.  ShoreTel only sends out the product when it is ready without the headaches of "Known Issues".
I was the most die hard Avaya fan you could find.  I still believe Avaya makes outstanding systems.  I work on alot of them.
My remarks yesterday was probably due to two factors.  One after digging out from the blizzard I can become grumpy.  The other reason is I hate to see someone attacked for the comments right or wrong.  If I offended anyone I do apologize.

If you think the reason you don't see many posts here is because the product is superior, you are delusional.  I think it speaks volumes that the most play this thread has had is two guys crying about me coming down hard on some other guy who had the facts wrong.

I'm an ACS-Implement and I'm on the waiting list to take the Performance Lab.  Why am I doing it, because it looks good on a business card and in my email signature.  Its marketing plain and simple, in reality it means nothing.

And GSmitherman, did you ever own a Tauras?

OK..here is my last post on this subject. Ron has no knowledge of ShoreTel systems.  If IP Office is superior, what happens if you lose the control module?  Answer, you lose the system.  On the ShoreTel system if you lose the processing module, the next available module will take over the processing duties.  All phones assigned on the bad module are re-assigned to available ports.  The customer will still have communication capabilities.  While I have never seen a ShoreTel module go bad, I have seen several IP Office modules fail.
In a small community network, what happens in the IP Office world when the voicemail server fails.  Answer, no voicemail.  In the ShoreTel world, if the voicemail server fails all voice messages are stored on another server in the network.  When the voicemail server is in operation all messages that were stored are moved back to the server.  No messages lost.
The competition paper Avaya sends out about ShoreTel list two things Avaya believes they have an advantage over ShoreTel.  One, Avaya has a red hold button.  Two, ShoreTel is a totally IP system.  Avaya feels a totally IP system is not reliable.  Reliability and IP Office sure do not go together.
To answer the question of have I ever owned a Taurus.  Yes I have.  

This has been a helpful discussion for me to watch. We are currently looking at Avaya IP office, ShoreTel, and Cisco for a few new locations. Each has its own pros and cons, but it appears that even though there are some things I don't like about ShoreTel, it does offer the most bang for the buck. It also appears to be the most reliable and easy to manage.

GSmitherman, if the Shoretel is so superior, why do you (or your company) sell the IPO?  

Can you say it has a superior feature set?
Can you say it can be serviced by a large number of regional vendors?
Can you say it has the same R&D and support that the IPO has?
Can you say that Shoretel is on the same financial footing as Avaya and will have the same longevity?
Can you say other companies will develop software to work with it the way AVAYA has?

Look I don't know the answer to these questions. I come to a forum like this to learn not to have disinformation spread.  

I don't see much info being passed here and that tells me alot.

Here are your answers:

1.  I feel the sets are superior to Avaya.  The speakerphone is unbelieveable.  The phones are not as bulky as Avaya sets and take up less space on the desks.  Customers who had Avaya sets and now use ShoreTel sets rave about them.

2.  Quantity doesn't always mean quality.  ShoreTel is very picky on who they allow to sell and service their product.

3.  ShoreTel R&D and support blow Avaya away.  I have only had to use ShoreTel support a couple of times.  The support engineers will actually log on the system and troubleshoot with you.  Avaya support is someone reading out of a book who has no or very little knowledge in the product.  Avaya wants you to send a config, trace and whatever while the customer is still having issues.  After calling ShoreTel support the issue was resolved.  After calling Avaya support you have to wait for a callback.

4. Ask the Avaya personnel who lost a ton of money with their Avaya stock about Avayas financial footing.

5.  I really don't know how much other companies work with ShoreTel.  All I know is the software is outstanding.

The company I work for is an Avaya Business Partner.  We also sell ShoreTel.  Selling two products gives potential customers a choice.  Some want Avaya.  Others want ShoreTel.  I have never said Avaya was junk.  I only expressed my opinion that when all things are considered equally, ShoreTel is the way to go.  

Getting back to the original query. I can't speak for Avaya, but I do install Shoretel systems frequently:

Do your "campaigns" require the ability to record messages with distinct greetings, or play distinct greetings with some options to follow?

If YES: Then you need mailboxs.
If NO: Then you can use menus.
If SORTA BOTH: You can have Menus play options then transfer callers to certain mailboxes to reduce required mailboxes. Either way you could email the voicemails back to people/departments to be dealt with.

Either system will handle this, but in hindsight if you want to compare apples and oranges (in terms of how they each cost their products out), Shoretel Voicemail is approximately 250+ ports similtaneous access out of the box, so really a few licences are really not that big of a deal. Avaya gets you on the port activation fees, unless I'm wrong. If I am wrong about any of this stuff, someone correct me please! ;)

Either way, you will get a good system, but if you are considering high inbound voicemail traffic, look more closely at what you want to accomplish and why. Function before Fashion I always say.
 

http://marketingtools.avaya.com/knowledgebase/


This is the IPO knowledgebase, if you want take a look.   

I previously worked for the largest shoretel dealer, and they were also one of the largest (top 20)  Avaya BP's there was differing opinion about which was best by the technical staff.

First of all, I mostly care about what techs have to say because they are the ones who install, and program the systems.    Everyone else, including all other shoretel, and Avaya partners employees, managers, owners, etc., are just users, so they do not know much.   Users know what they like, but do not know the application of the technology which is possible.   

Where I worked IPO techs were a dime a dozen, including all experienced enough to implement an IPO probably three dimes worth at least.   Shoretel experienced implementors were much fewer, maybe 6, but no where near as experienced with the shoretel as the IPO guys were with the IPO.

This is simply because the IPO is implemented so incredibly more numbers wise than the shoretel that it was impossible to have as many experienced shoretel guys.   Very few were experienced on both, and none at the time I left this year do I believe had more than 6 shoretel implements if they had ever installed an IPO at all.   Almost no one who was highly experienced with the shoretel  had even installed one IPO by 100% themselves yet.     That means the IPO techs were the only ones really qualified to evaluate both, which leaves a little bias in the mix most probably.   

That being said, the concensus was that the shoretel was as stable as the network.   For multi-site that includes the P2P's.   Servers fail too because they have moving parts, so that is the next weakest link.  If having just mailboxes is sustained VM, then P2P, or VM server  being down does not effect sustained VM service.   The shoretel is hands down more expandable, but has  less features than the IPO, which is irelavant if you don't need what shoretel does not have.   
The IPO is only network dependant at the multi-site level, as it is a hybrid system not pure IP which from that standpoint removes local network issues from effecting the IPO.  It has the same VM server failure issues, but loses mailboxes as well when it goes down, although in most multisite scenarios if the P2P goes down calls still reach all VM facilities as normal.   The IPO has more features, but cannot compete on the enterprise level expandability scene anytime soon.   Although, as an enterprise system level Avaya has other systems as options with greater feature sets, which shoretel does not.

I have not confirmed this, but from what I have been told so far in this calendar year alone Avaya has implemented more IPO's than shoretel has implemented its systems in its entire history.   From what I am told on the numbers of systems installed, the number of members of the shoretel forum 302 members VS the IPO forum 9,681 shows that a higher percentage of shoretel techs come on here than of IPO techs.  

Oh, IPO VM is a pay for ports, which means how many simultaneous people can be accessing VM at the same time, including checking VM via phone, leaving VM, interacting with an AA, or hearing a Q message other than MOH/IOH.   The number of VM boxes, AA's, etc. the VMPRO server can handle is a matter of server resources for the most part, not constricted by licensing.   I have done 485 total which I recall, maybe more.

I think from my own limited experience that they each have their niche, or they would not both be selling.   It is really not fair to compare the two as most small networks cannot support VOIP, so a pure IP system cannot be implemented without a serious network investment which changes the total cost of ownership.   Also, Avaya licenses as a rule are assigned based on first come first serve, so when one logs off another can use that license.

Most of my knowledge of the shoretel is from working on some shoretel projects with a shoretel tech, and a tech being trained, neither of which had the experience to do anything but programming.   They did have some issues that required some hours of support from shoretel, and the tech doing the training had advanced training, and certs.   They just didn't know the punch down color pattern on a cable, if you know what I mean.