Grandstream GAC2500 vs. Polycom Trio

It is well suited, I believe, in small to mid-level organization where use will be light to moderate. It is useful in a situation where both ends have the same equipment, the same model and the same software release upon them. A scenario where it might be less appropriate is single-use installations and large corporate environments. Though in the future it may become more adapted to the 'open range' of telephony systems right now the system is best when working with others of its kind. It is also inappropriate in a situation where the organization does not have a fully developed Information Technology team or arrangement with a telephony contractor to handle the devices when things go wrong.

Incentivized

• The microphones are extremely sensitive. They make it easier for soft spoken individuals to be heard clearly.
• It is easy to operate. Once connected through Outlook all it takes is one click to get to into a meeting and two or three to bring in outside attendees.

Incentivized

• Our greatest disappointment in Polycom Trio was the lag in using the screen, it wasn't nearly as intuitive and "snappy" as the iPads were.
• Paired next to the iPad's, the Polycom Trio was much more expensive and couldn't be a justified member of our mass Zoom Room adoption.

Incentivized

A well known product that most users are familiar with and simple enough for new users to learn and understand.

Incentivized

I have never contacted support for this product.

Incentivized

Polycom Trio provides better conference call quality, picks up voice from corners of the room with additional mics for large room, better widescreen display, and it was mostly the user satisfaction which made us choose Polycom Trio.

• Since we were really looking for a device that could provide Skype for Business Online services (web conferencing/video/audio/local screen presenting) at a reasonable price point, I cannot say that this device meets all of our needs. The device has to be at least 99.99% reliable. This is about 60% there. Audio is definitely in the 99% range. Local screen presenting is probably around 75%. Video and web conferencing is about 70%. To comfortably deploy a device in the wild you really need to have 99% reliability. It has to work when its needed. I can understand an occasional hiccup, but one every other day is a too many. If you are replacing older SoundStations with an IP or Skype based audio solution, then this is it.

Incentivized