Polycom HDX 9001 vs. Tandberg equivalent

[ncc63725]

We are a midsize company looking to purchase a video conferencing system. The local Polycom rep is trying to get us to go with the HDX 9001. It seems fine, but I know virtually nothing about systems other than Polycom's. What would be the Tandberg equivalent of this system? Does anyone else out there with the HDX system have a review or some opinions about it they could post?

[Sean Lessman]

We are a midsize company looking to purchase a video conferencing system. The local Polycom rep is trying to get us to go with the HDX 9001. It seems fine, but I know virtually nothing about systems other than Polycom's. What would be the Tandberg equivalent of this system? Does anyone else out there with the HDX system have a review or some opinions about it they could post?

The HDX9001 is a non-HD capable endpoint, so you can really take your pick of systems in the TANDBERG product line. Which product to chose really depends on what you are trying to accomplish. More than happy to discuss in email if you like, I am not in sales so no worries I wont pressure you :)

sean.lessman@tandberg.com

Sean

[marktwilliams]

Well Sean, the HDX-9001 is non-HD now, but upgradeable in the near future. From my understanding via hardware, daughterboard from what I was told. I have a HDX-9004 testing now on loan and this thing rocks. I'm tring to get a Tandberg HD MXP here to compair. But from looking online, the HDX has tons more HD inputs and outputs than the Edge. I had a Tandberg rep here last week and told me that he would get some equipment here for me to look at. I haven't seen or heard anything. Called Polycom and I have equipment here quick. I need a HD Bridge and 20 systems now with 40 systems over the next year.
Just from what I have seen so far, the HDX has more horsepower than the Edge. I have been a Tandberg fan for many years, prove me wrong.

[Sean Lessman]

Well Sean, the HDX-9001 is non-HD now, but upgradeable in the near future. From my understanding via hardware, daughterboard from what I was told.

Correct. Although I am sure if we did something similiar this would be a headline in some Polycom marketing document with the title "TANDBERG requires forklift upgrade".

But to be clear, if you are ok with the hassle of having to send all the units back for upgrade once HD becomes important to you, I don't see any issue with this. A software upgrade would have been a more convenient upgrade process.

I have a HDX-9004 testing now on loan and this thing rocks. I'm tring to get a Tandberg HD MXP here to compair. But from looking online, the HDX has tons more HD inputs and outputs than the Edge. I had a Tandberg rep here last week and told me that he would get some equipment here for me to look at. I haven't seen or heard anything. Called Polycom and I have equipment here quick. I need a HD Bridge and 20 systems now with 40 systems over the next year.

Like I said above, I am not in sales. However if you want me to help, send me an email to sean.lessman@tandberg.com and I will certainly speak with the sales rep to move things along.

Just from what I have seen so far, the HDX has more horsepower than the Edge. I have been a Tandberg fan for many years, prove me wrong.

Seeing as how the HDX uses the TI DMM642 chipset that the original Codian has been using for 3 years now, it is already old technology. The VSX also used 3 year old technology (Equator) when it came out...and it only lasted a little under 3 years, and had minimal feature upgrades throughout the life of the product. Seems to me if the DMM642 was the 'power chip', Codian would have stayed with it instead of moving to the latest TI chipset. Did you know it takes multiple TI chips in the HDX to provide 720p? There are TI chips available today that will encode 720p on a single chip. It doesn't look like it will have the lifespan you would expect of 'next gen' product.

My $.02.

Sean

[marktwilliams]

Thank You Sean, that's what I needed to hear. I will email you direct to talk more.

Mark

[Jontracey]

Just one thing to be aware of..

The HDX may have older TI DSPs but they are significantly more powerful than the TB options. The HDX (9004) is capable of 108,000 macro blocks per second. That means it can maintain 30 frames per second no matter how much motion there is in the image.

The TB even with the F6 sofware can only maintain 30fps with zero or very low motion as it can only process approximately 35000 macroblocks per second. More motion causes the frame rate to reduce.

So its even if as Sean says they are older DSPs they seem to be running at 3x the power of the TB system

Best Wishes

Jon

[Sean Lessman]

Just one thing to be aware of..

Thank you Jon, as always we appreciate the LifeSize sales input. I guess statements of 'be sure to see the demo yourself' isn't working in your favor so now its on to confusing the argument with engineering talk. Good luck with that, who knows maybe sales will finally take off :)

Sean

[Jontracey]

Sean

I am confused why you are worried about me presenting facts, if what I said is incorrect then please feel free to correct my statements and I will be happy to test and validate, and If I am wrong I am happy to state as such. However the information presented is from our own tests and validated by others.

That said why is it when someone from LifeSize posts to any forum you take it personally and feel the need to make snide underhand comments. It does seem only you are allowed to put down the competitions products without challenge and when challenged you fail to produce results to back up your assertions. If I am wrong please state exactly how many (even best possbile case) macroblocks a second an Edge 95 running F6.0 can process.

I have always posted information that is pertenant to the discussion and refrain from bashing yours or anyone elses product. I did not bring LifeSize into this discussion as it was about the HDX and the Tandberg systems, however given we have both systems in our lab for testing and even offer both systems on the internet for people to test against I think I may have something impartial to add to this discussion.

As for sales taking off, your tense is wrong "took off" is what you were looking for :-)

JT

[Sean Lessman]

That said why is it when someone from LifeSize posts to any forum you take it personally and feel the need to make snide underhand comments.

I don't take it personally when useful information is posted. However when the focus of a purchase is taken away from solving customer issues and redirected to irrelevant engineering talk of which only a very small percentage of people in this industry are qualified to talk about -- I see a sad issue for all of us. Anyhow continue focusing on macroblocks and we will continue to focus on serving the customer needs.

As for sales taking off, your tense is wrong "took off" is what you were looking for :-)

In a recent Wainhouse Summit (San Fran) your guy announced that you have sold 4000 units to date in 18 months. I guess we have a different opinion of 'took off'. Please don't take this as bashing, just the facts, right? ;-)

Sean

[marktwilliams]

"And in this corner".........You guys are great. I just need to pick a product that will best fit my customers needs. I have a HDX and an Edge to choose from. Currently I have TMS and Border Controller that I use. So naturally TB would be the best solution. But I have 90% VSX's in use now. I inherited this bowl of salad a couple of months ago. To make things worse I have a IPVC 3540 that doesn't work. So I either want a MPS and Edge solution or a RMX and HDX solution. HD is something that we will utilize later so it's not important now, as long as I can have it later without any major $ upcharge later. Something that works great accross a heavy traffic network.

[Sean Lessman]

I just need to pick a product that will best fit my customers needs.

And I am sure you will do your best to pick the solution that fits your customers needs, whether that will be Polycom or TANDBERG. Good luck and if you have any questions about TANDBERG let me know.

Sean

[marktwilliams]

Thanks Sean. I have already started my test. I'll let you know.

[Willdo]

Well Sean, the HDX-9001 is non-HD now, but upgradeable in the near future. From my understanding via hardware, daughterboard from what I was told. I have a HDX-9004 testing now on loan and this thing rocks. I'm tring to get a Tandberg HD MXP here to compair. But from looking online, the HDX has tons more HD inputs and outputs than the Edge. I had a Tandberg rep here last week and told me that he would get some equipment here for me to look at. I haven't seen or heard anything. Called Polycom and I have equipment here quick. I need a HD Bridge and 20 systems now with 40 systems over the next year.
Just from what I have seen so far, the HDX has more horsepower than the Edge. I have been a Tandberg fan for many years, prove me wrong.

What? So the HDX 9000 series is not HD right now? The spec says it supports up to 1280 x 720 at 30fps. So what is it actually?

From an integrator point of view the HDX is a far superior product to anything else on the market with the range of outputs and inputs (including balanced audio!) that it has. Although i'm still in a state of shock that it isnt an HD system out the box! :ermm:

[marktwilliams]

Willdo,
Only the HD 9001 is not, the higher end units are HD. The 9001 will be later upgraded to HD by hardware addition, a daughterboard from what I was told.
Sorry for the confusion. But yes, HDX units are HD.

[marktwilliams]

Correction, HDX-9001

[CZoli]

The Original question is "shall I buy an HDX 9001 or a TB equivalent?"

Actually ... I would not waste my money buying a system which is not HD Capable, whatever if the brand of your choice.

I understand that the HDX looks cool but the 9001 is just something to carefully avoid.
The system is HD only even if It comes with an HD Camera.

Can It be upgraded to HD later on? The Answer is yes and you need to send it back, actually a trade in and the price won't certainly be so interesting, the upgrade is replacing the hardware inside and it is not something the end user or the reseller can do.

I am very suprised about Sean's statements about the HDX using "old" DSPs. Actually the TB is using DSPs which are many times less powerful.

However Tandberg did manage to implement HD on the MXPs starting with F6 Release. It has to be clarified that not all of the Tandberg MXP endpoints are HD Capable, you need to avoid the entry level ones.

You would need to pick up the Edge 95 and not the 75 for sure. this is becouse the entry levle one does not have the guts to do what Tandberg is calling HD.

In order to be 720P complaint you need to be able to send and receive 24 fps minimum.

Before the F6 release Tandberg could not certainly claim 720P support ... just 720P resolution support .. there is a huge difference.

Not all 720P complaint endpoints do support it the same way.

Tandberg is using what is called MaxStatic MBPS which is kind of a trick to free up the DSPs while processing 720P. you should not be fooled into thinking that Tandberg did it in a better and smarter way compared to Lifesize or Polycom.

Tandberg did it because It was the only, and let me repeat, the only way to get 720P with the DSP power available in the box.

Another "innovation" used by Tandberg in the F6 is the Reduced Complexity H.264 Encoding and Decoding. This standard is actually an alternative method to Encode and Decode H.264 (HD or not does not matter here), the goal of the guys who worked on it and pushed it (tandberg BTW) was to further decrease the computational requirements. However .... less computation requirements equals to less "precision" and less video quality.

What Jon Tracey (of LifeSize) has correctly pointed out the Tandberg is able to send 720P at 24 FPS only if little or zero movement is involved.

I guess It is clear that sending 30 fps or just 1 does not matter if the shoot of the camera is almost a still picture.

I think that Videoconference should transmit live images with people moving otherwise we could use audio conference instead and send a picture of us to the far site :-).

Going back to the HDX line ... HDX 9002 and 9004 are the HD capable ones.

Anyhow the HDX does cost a lost of money and the performance is very very poor compared to a True HD system like Lifesize.

There is absolutely not possible comparison between the two.

Do you need HD ? even if the answer is not .. why waste your money on an SD system .. Yes .. If it is SD only It is legacy stuff.

Is the HDX a good choice? NO ... immature, overpriced, bad performing product. Will it get better over time? Maybe ... but do you need a product which is stable and really delivers good quality ???

Go for LifeSize and Tandberg ... do not waste your time on HDX .... maybe next year will be worth looking at ... certainly not today.

Regarding the RMX ... I would ask money to beta test a 1.0 product ...

[Sean Lessman]

Anyone who thinks that video quality is only a function of macroblocks is ignorant and doesn't know what they are talking about.

Ckristian, don't be so easily lead by negative marketing.

Sean

[CZoli]

Suggesting that HDX is using old DSPs while TAA is using even older ones equals to "Tandberg Marketing Distortion Field" and it is plain libelling against Polycom.

Claiming that TAA is supporting 720p stardard while the 24 frame-rate is reached when NO movement is present is just ridicoulous.

Using MaxStatic MacroBlock per second is only a trick to achieve higer performance with underpowered hardware.

Ignoring the StaticMaxMBPS story is plan marketing.

Claiming that RCDO (see your F6 release notes) is "another evolutionary step of the H.264 standard" and willing to imply it is a great thing for Room Videoconferencing systems is simply ridicolous.

RCDO, like MaxStaticMBPS were designed to achieve higher resolution on HW that would not be capable of otherwise, see software endpoints.

It seems that TAA and Aethra got something in common -> StaticMaxMBPS .... I can smell the rat here.

I never claimed that MBPS is the ONLY parameter to judge the quality of the a system .... ignoring it, as you do, it is not professional,even evangelists like you should have have some limits.

If you think that Tandberg "few frames per second" 720P is okay ... fine .... but customers should know the facts and what J Tracey reported are simply facts.

There are other parameters for video quality ... sure ... RCDO for example is reducing the video quality even further, in fact Modern products like Lifesize provide not only higer framerate but better video quality.

I understand your corporate position: whoever disagrees with the tandberg marketing FUD is ignorant.


Ignoring FACTS while bashing the competition is not what I would call professional. It is possible, anyhow, that you do really believe your own marketing

I do not want to start the usual CZoli vs Tandberg Marketing ...

Have a nice day




Anyone who thinks that video quality is only a function of macroblocks is ignorant and doesn't know what they are talking about.

Ckristian, don't be so easily lead by negative marketing.

Sean

[Willdo]

Has anyone successfully made a 720p call between the HDX 9004 and any Tandberg EP's?

I'm having trouble achieving this. The 9004 is only transmitting 4CIF.

Setup:

TANDBERG 1700 to HDX9004 (Also tried with Edge 95 and Lifesize Team)
Both EP's on internal IP
Both registered to TANDBERG GK
Both set to sharpness
Calling at 2MB
Both on latest software revs
1700 transmitting w720p, 9004 transmitting 4CIF

Does anyone know what might be limiting the HDX to only transmitting 4CIF?

[Sean Lessman]

I do not want to start the usual CZoli vs Tandberg Marketing ...

Actually this is pretty much all you have done for the last 2 years on the Wainhouse Research forums. It got old, I stopped replying to you since it became quite obvious that as a Codian and LifeSize dealer you were only interested in selling their products (and would say anything to do so) and not discussing technology. It apparently bothered you so much that I didn't give you attention that you decided to sign up for an account here (after many many years) and continue your (very old) rant.

If you go back and read my post, I didn't say one product had more power than the other. My point was if you think the HDX is next gen, my opinion (that's what my $.02 means) is that there is better technology today to base an endpoint on than what they have chosen. My comment was they made a poor design choice (again my opinion). I don't recall making a comparison with any other product except the VSX.

If anyone really cares to see the response to Ckristian's rants, you can see these on www.wainhouse.com in the hundreds of posts on these topics. I am not interested in turning this board into your personal political playground like you have done to Wainhouse.

Sean

[Sean Lessman]

Does anyone know what might be limiting the HDX to only transmitting 4CIF?

We are using some optional parameters within H.264 that the Polycom is currently not able to encode. Because of this the HDX choses to send 4CIF instead.

Sean

[Willdo]

So right now the HDX is not compatible with TB EP's and not compatible with LS EP's....... great! I retract my statement about the HDX being a good product in an earlier post, infact I'm rather embarassed :embarrass

[Sean Lessman]

So right now the HDX is not compatible with TB EP's and not compatible with LS EP's....... great! I retract my statement about the HDX being a good product in an earlier post, infact I'm rather embarassed :embarrass

It is a good product. Just at this time we have some interop issues to work out. Stay tuned.

Sean

[CZoli]

So right now the HDX is not compatible with TB EP's and not compatible with LS EP's....... great! I retract my statement about the HDX being a good product in an earlier post, infact I'm rather embarassed :embarrass
This is not correct, HDX can establish a 720P TX and RX with LS.

The problem is just the Tandberg implementation. Either Tandberg do it the "proper way" (I mean as others are doing it) or Polycom,Sony and Lifesize will have to adapt to tandberg, current not interoperable, implementation.

The problem is NOT the HDX, the problem is caused by the Tandberg implementation which differs from the one shared by all the others vendors (aethra same as tandberg anyhow)

Cheers

[CZoli]

Actually this is pretty much all you have done for the last 2 years on the Wainhouse Research forums. It got old, I stopped replying to you since it became quite obvious that as a Codian and LifeSize dealer you were only interested in selling their products (and would say anything to do so) and not discussing technology. It apparently bothered you so much that I didn't give you attention that you decided to sign up for an account here (after many many years) and continue your (very old) rant.

If you go back and read my post, I didn't say one product had more power than the other. My point was if you think the HDX is next gen, my opinion (that's what my $.02 means) is that there is better technology today to base an endpoint on than what they have chosen. My comment was they made a poor design choice (again my opinion). I don't recall making a comparison with any other product except the VSX.

If anyone really cares to see the response to Ckristian's rants, you can see these on www.wainhouse.com in the hundreds of posts on these topics. I am not interested in turning this board into your personal political playground like you have done to Wainhouse.

Sean

I fully understand your need to bash competition, especially if you have a 720P implementation with

A) similar performance to Cheap Aethra X7
B) not interoperable with Polycom HDX
C) not interoperable with Sony PCS-HG90

thanks god ... there is a "litte known" MCU vendor named Codian who can make Tandberg interoperable with other "little known" brands

Blame yourself for tandberg being late comer to HD and using different standards, you master of bashing.

Thank you for pointing ppl to read my posts in www.wainhouse.com forum, they will read yours and end up with their own opinion.

I understand that everyone who not agree with Tandberg Marketing has to be an idiot. We got used to it so don't mind, I won't take it personally :)

Do I like the HDX ? NOT REALLY, I find it a rushed out product with unproven stability anyhow from an Hardware point of view they could have waited a bit longer and use the new TI DSPs which are incredibly faster (the same codian is using in the 4500).

Anyhow they decided to use the TIs used in the 4200 ... it is their problem and not mine. It does not change the fact that HDX seems to have way better performance in HD comapred to the tandberg products.

I have to admit that you were happily posting on the forums once you had the best product on the market. This is not yet (today) the case, in my humble opinion.

Things will keep on changing with new prodcuts being annoucned by all of the players but don't be sad ... everyone gets the technology leader every few and often .. it is a "circle", be patience

Did you really think I could let you spread marketing FUD here too ?

so let's get fair .. and stop bashing polycom ... they got better 720P then yours ... overall if I had to pick either an HDX or an Edge I would certainly buy an Edge but we need to tell customers the truth.

You prolly do not know that almost no one is reading wainhouse in my country .. all of my posts did not bring me a single P.O.

I post because I love to discuss with a challenging enemy like you :rambo: , you always remind me Steve Jobs and its distorsion field (if you attended an Apple WWDC Keynote you would know what I mean).

Difference is I love Apple and Jobs ... you little bit less

Can't we just discuss technology instead of marketing?

[Morgan81]

[Ducking under the flames]We are a midsize company looking to purchase a video conferencing system. The local Polycom rep is trying to get us to go with the HDX 9001. It seems fine, but I know virtually nothing about systems other than Polycom's. What would be the Tandberg equivalent of this system? Does anyone else out there with the HDX system have a review or some opinions about it they could post? Try a 6000 or 3000 MXP. We have these models in almost every conceivable configuration and are very happy with the results. It kinda depends on your setup, who you're going to be communicating with and what your end goal is, so feel free to add a little more detail.

[Now back to your regularly scheduled flame war]