Avaya Contact Center vs. Cisco Unified Border Element (CUBE)

I would say well-suited for the everyday user, with the ability to use the products. I think it's really user-friendly in that way. The lack of education for the end users, maybe through some of our companies, makes it difficult. And the turnover.

Incentivized

If you are in an environment that is primarily Cisco and switching from PRI circuits or other non-SIP circuits and are generally considered to be on an enterprise-grade platform, CUBE is likely a solid choice for you. From my experience, I cannot speak to the video handling that CUBE offers as we do not employ that, so hopefully other reviews will provide insight on that.

Incentivized

• The app and the ability to use the "office" phone while on the road.
• There's an easy implementation and training process to get everyone on board quickly.
• Flexibility of transferring calls to different mediums - I can switch a phone call to a conference or patch in other parties with ease.

Incentivized

• Call accounting (Integration with 3rd party applications for ease of use and comprehensive CDR's)
• Address hiding (Keeping your internal network secure with PSTN calls)
• Internetworking between multiple protocols
• SIP profiles (message/header customization)
• Billing, cost counting

Incentivized

• Calls are automatically terminated at an agent and do not allow for the agent to "manually" answer the incoming call. This is very problematic as agents are not able to prepare properly for incoming calls. In addition, agents have stepped away from their desks and forgotten to put themselves in an away status, and calls have been directed to them, and they just sit there with no agent present. This is a very undesirable feature of the system.
• Password resets are extremely problematic and continuously cause problems for users. Agents are prompted to change their password upon expiry, and when they follow the instructions as outlined, it rarely works and ends up needing a full reset. The challenge questions are useless and do not work at all.
• Support can be a bit challenging as there are definite language barriers that have made both explaining the problem and understanding the recommended solution difficult.
• The system is sometimes unreliable and will randomly log agents out with no explanation. Agents are then advised by support to log out, clear cache, and log back in. This is not feasible in a busy call center.

Incentivized

• The way to configure is not so intuitive.
• It cannot show SIP ladder diagram directly.
• The learning curve is a bit steep.

Incentivized

I am really not the decision maker on this subject but given the cost of the investment in Avaya, I do not see the company not renewing the use of Avaya. The new licensing model no longer requires expensive upgrades to stay current with new features added to the system and really helps with the cost of investment.

Incentivized

Avaya has versatility in calling, receiving, and configuring. Being able to have notion of location, exchange of messages. we could see supplier information and configure it to our liking. as it is practicality for configuration and manual handling. Interactive and easy to learn screen. Being able to generate call reports for analysis of service in others

Incentivized

I rated Cisco Unified Border Element’s (CUBE) usability an 9 out of 10. It offers excellent flexibility, reliability, and integration with Microsoft Teams Direct Routing. However, its configuration can be complex for non-experts. Once properly implemented, it provides powerful SIP control, security, and scalability in both virtual and hybrid voice environments that we require.

Incentivized

I give it this rating because the support services of Avaya have proven to be reliable when needed. Great feedback for our queries has always been received from the support agents. 24/7 availability of support, which is very essential as our Call Center department also functions this way, therefore, the knowledge and technical support we require is always available to us.

It is very powerful and secure. However, for most people, it is a bit difficult to learn how to configure and debug.

Incentivized

No, everything was implemented by Avaya Support

Incentivized

Switched from Polycom to Avaya, although polycom worked well there were too many reoccuring connectivity issues and the turn around time for solving them was also too long. Avaya has fewer connectivity problems and their support is much better too. Pricing wise they were similar so we didn't have much to lose.

Incentivized

We previously used other SBC's but weren't satisfied with the performance. The support wasn't there and constant RMA's for defective hardware. Although the CUBE is expensive, it saves time and resources on support. Robust features and no downtime in 3 years. I don't believe many vendors offer products to compete in this space. You will regret to decision to go with cheaper SBC's.

Incentivized

• Overall from a business objective standpoint, Avaya has to have had a positive impact on our Return on Investment. Its use in day-to-day operations has been beneficial to not only the company, but the business as well.
• Using the Avaya soft phones supplies a business or company a way to limit expenditures on the hard phones by allowing the use of Avaya soft phones. The equipment is no longer needed, save for headsets to be used with the application itself.
• Business objectives have to be just that, objectives. Economics begs for ways for a company to limit expenditures that may see little or no return. Avaya has tackled this issue and won!

Incentivized

• Positive impact, saving on monthly phone bills due to sip trunk migration.
• Positive, using a couple of CUBEs to concentrate several SIP trunk.
• Positive, using a couple of CUBEs to route several branch outbound and inbound calls.

Incentivized