Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Solution Comparison:
Avaya Aura vs
Cisco Unified Communications (UC)
Avaya Advantage
Investment
Performance Value
Protection
Cisco Claim Avaya Counterpoint
• Disruptions to Avaya platforms due to the • This is just sheer noise. Current systems continue to run,
overlap between Avaya and Nortel global services support is expanded, products remain
products available to buy, a clear roadmap has been provided for all
products, and new common applications can be
incrementally deployed to add value to existing investments.
Factors Avaya Aura Cisco UC
Business • Full featured resilient branch • CUCM can be configured in either a
Continuity survivability with Local Survival primary/secondary/tertiary design or a load
Processor (LSP) sharing design, where each server would
• Enterprise Survivable Servers (ESS) have capability to handle failover from non‐
provides protection against network primary registered devices
failures • Remote SRST does not provide full feature
• Active/Active Session Managers for high survivability during WAN failure
availability • Not all MCS models support redundant disk
• SIP‐based survivability with Feature drives (7816) or hot‐swap power supplies
Server (7816, 7825)
• Optional power supply redundancy
• Hard drive redundancy with
S8500/S8800
Communication • Agile Communication Environment (ACE) • With Unified Application Environment
Enabled provides packaged applications and a (UAE), the customer is forced to move to an
Applications developer toolkit with Web services for all Cisco infrastructure to benefit from
a range of multi‐vendor network communication enablement of business
communications platforms. Has large applications. UAE APIs are compatible only
developer community who can leverage with Cisco UC environments. UAE has
ACE adapters. ACE integrates with limited integration with other comms
several telephony vendors including vendors ‐ mostly via SIP and gateways
Cisco. Integration is broad and deep,
with CTI control