VTC Network manager at a government with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
2025-01-08T14:51:40Z
Jan 8, 2025
They are discontinuing the product and they are moving over to Pexip. The only issue we have is with some of the bridging stuff, particularly with respect to DTMF and outgoing calls. That's our biggest issue.
Senior Engineer - UC - Service and Solutions Deployment at FVC
Real User
Top 10
2024-05-14T14:06:16Z
May 14, 2024
Polycom RealPresence Clariti is very bad when moving towards the cloud. I think that Microsoft Teams and Zoom have already taken over the market. Polycom is currently looking into more end devices than server components and infrastructure. A cloud version would have been better, but that will not be feasible for Polycom now. It would have been helpful to have a cloud version during the migration stages, but now the time has gone. As a company, it's better for Polycom to look into the video conferencing devices rather than the infrastructure. Earlier, one of the advantages was that the infrastructure was very much open, and it was easy to integrate the tool with other platforms like Cisco. That is not the scenario now, and Polycom should concentrate on the endpoint hardware devices.
The firewall integration should be improved, but it depends on what works on the network from the customer side. In some situations, we used Poly endpoints with Cisco servers. The integration generally works well, but we had trouble finding the appropriate content-sharing protocols, which was the main problem. However, the audio and video are fine.
What I'm pushing Poly for right now, is the ability to leverage the access for customization. For example, for APIs to be more flexible. The customer needs this platform to be a little bit more customized. On the other hand, Poly is developing a new proprietary protocol that is called EVO. It's not yet implemented on the Poly endpoint. The idea of the Clariti 2.0 is good, however, they're still moving too slowly. Regarding Clariti 2.0, the documentation is not there. It's hard to find the documentation for the new platform to integrate it properly.
Virtual Meetings have transformed the way professionals communicate, offering seamless interactions across geographies. As businesses adapt, these platforms provide comprehensive and efficient solutions to connect teams globally.Expanding exponentially over recent years, Virtual Meetings are central to maintaining business continuity and enhancing collaboration. Users report that such platforms offer reliable service and comprehensive tools to support varied communication needs. They cater to...
They are discontinuing the product and they are moving over to Pexip. The only issue we have is with some of the bridging stuff, particularly with respect to DTMF and outgoing calls. That's our biggest issue.
Polycom RealPresence Clariti is very bad when moving towards the cloud. I think that Microsoft Teams and Zoom have already taken over the market. Polycom is currently looking into more end devices than server components and infrastructure. A cloud version would have been better, but that will not be feasible for Polycom now. It would have been helpful to have a cloud version during the migration stages, but now the time has gone. As a company, it's better for Polycom to look into the video conferencing devices rather than the infrastructure. Earlier, one of the advantages was that the infrastructure was very much open, and it was easy to integrate the tool with other platforms like Cisco. That is not the scenario now, and Polycom should concentrate on the endpoint hardware devices.
The firewall integration should be improved, but it depends on what works on the network from the customer side. In some situations, we used Poly endpoints with Cisco servers. The integration generally works well, but we had trouble finding the appropriate content-sharing protocols, which was the main problem. However, the audio and video are fine.
I'd like to see a wider range of use cases for this product.
What I'm pushing Poly for right now, is the ability to leverage the access for customization. For example, for APIs to be more flexible. The customer needs this platform to be a little bit more customized. On the other hand, Poly is developing a new proprietary protocol that is called EVO. It's not yet implemented on the Poly endpoint. The idea of the Clariti 2.0 is good, however, they're still moving too slowly. Regarding Clariti 2.0, the documentation is not there. It's hard to find the documentation for the new platform to integrate it properly.