Let me rephrase. After reading so much on why Freeswitch was developed in the first place, I consider Freeswitch to be a more powerful and better media engine than what Asterisk is. So its not that I object to opensource in general, I just think moving forward that if building a communications application I would think that Freeswitch is a better option that Asterisk.
I might be asking for a lot, but consumers expect a lot as well. I did not say the cheapest price point available. I want a licensing model that is not restrictive like Broadsoft. On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Alex Balashov <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/02/2015 09:00 AM, Colton Conor wrote: > > I don't like the tough of Asterisk being the core of the product. >> > > I'm sorry, but that's just ignorant. Do you object to Broadworks running > on Linux and not AIX, too? > > I mean, I suppose I could understand your reluctance at using a glorified > Asterisk box, e.g. an embellished FreePBX. However, have you bothered to > understand the highly distributed systems architecture of Integrics before > making such a statement? > > In a nutshell, Enswitch merely uses Asterisk as a dumb compute node. An > expansive middleware layer performs the synchronisation, event distribution > and logic control that drives it. It's a clustered application silo on top > of Asterisk done _right_. I don't even know that it's accurate to say that > Asterisk is the "core" of the product. Asterisk is a part - merely one - of > the open-source technology stack on top of which this proprietary product > is built. > > NDAs would stop me from disclosing where Asterisk and Freeswitch are > similarly situated inside commercial platforms with mainstream enterprise > acceptance and which scale to millions of users, but, it suffices to say > that it's a lot more common than you think. Perhaps Integrics' biggest > failure is disclosing Asterisk as a building block. > > The upcoming next Enswitch release, version 4.0, is written in Golang. Its > automated testing, continuous integration QA, and service-oriented > architecture would give the bureaucracy of any large-scale enterprise > software initiative a run for its money. > > So, I would submit that it's not just a question of what is under the > hood, but rather how it's used and the role it plays. There's a qualitative > dimension to it, as well. Otherwise, you may as well say that you object to > expensive commercial products which make central use of Apache or, say, PHP. > > -- Alex > > -- > Alex Balashov | Principal | Evariste Systems LLC > 303 Perimeter Center North, Suite 300 > Atlanta, GA 30346 > United States > > Tel: +1-800-250-5920 (toll-free) / +1-678-954-0671 (direct) > Web: http://www.evaristesys.com/, http://www.csrpswitch.com/ > _______________________________________________ > VoiceOps mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops >
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
