Anyone know of any issues with Unlimitel?

Sent from my iPhone

On 2013-06-07, at 1:26 PM, Chuck Mariotti <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks Mike, You are correct... Money is no object.
>
> I looked at the Kirk units but lost interest when I saw their standard square 
> look... The lower model # does look much better. Will have to read up on how 
> it works exactly (SIP basestation I assume)...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike - QTI [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: June-07-13 12:05 PM
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Beautiful VoIP / SIP phone for Business?
>
> Chuck,
>
> I take it price is not a problem, so how about the PolyCom Kirk line? The
> 4040 is pretty sleek.
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=image+Polycom+kirk+4040&safe=off&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Chuck Mariotti <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> This is too funny... that is the phone that the owner uses at home and
>> he brought into the office as baseline of the looks / example other
>> phones against it.
>>
>> I would really prefer NOT to use an Analog phones... they get too many
>> calls to not have the additional buttons at easy reach. I was hoping
>> to even get them using HD Sound phone, but right now the priority is looks.
>>
>> Yealink's top of the line didn't look too ugly. And their wireless
>> W52P also looked okay in that it was just a brick/small footprint...
>>
>> Any other recommendations?
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nabeel Jafferali [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: June-07-13 11:28 AM
>> To: Alex Kink
>> Cc: Jim Van Meggelen; Chuck Mariotti; [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] Beautiful VoIP / SIP phone for Business?
>>
>> The Beocom 5 appears to be VoIP as well.
>>
>> --
>> Nabeel Jafferali
>> X2 Networks Inc.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Alex Kink <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> If analog is an option at all (which most likely isn't) then Bang &
>>> Olufsen Beocom 2 or Beocom 5 might be something to look at.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Jim Van Meggelen
>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Get an analog phone and run it through an ATA.
>>>>
>>>> Something like this?
>>> http://imshopping.rediff.com/imgshop/600-600/shopping/pixs/936/s/sho
>>> ep hone._sexy-shoe-shape-phone-collectors-edition.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Chuck Mariotti
>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know it sounds like an odd request, but a client has a very
>>>>> new
>>>> boutique
>>>>> office that they paid a small fortune to have designed and now
>>>>> they are demanding that I find the "best damned looking phone
>>>>> out there". Let's
>>>> just
>>>>> say that their office is extremely tastefully done and sticking
>>>>> a big
>>> old
>>>>> SIP phone on the desks is not an option...
>>>>>
>>>>> The nicest I had on hand was a Snom 821 phone and it was quickly
>>> scoffed
>>>>> at...
>>>>>
>>>>> The closest I can find so far is this red dot award winner
>>>>> http://www.innovaphone.com/en/products/ip-phones/ip232.html ...
>>>>> Anyone have any experience with them or know where I can source
>>>>> a
>> distributor?
>>>> Not
>>>>> sure if the fact that they aren't showing a display is a good or
>>>>> bad sign... seems almost like a rendering.
>>>>>
>>>>> But more importantly, can anyone recommend a beautiful looking
>>>>> SIP
>>> phone
>>>>> for an asterisk setup?
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional
>> commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> --
> Mike Ashton
> CTO
> Quality Track International
>
> Phone: +1 647.724.3500 x251
> Cell:     +1 416.527.4995
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to