Senior Engineer - UC - Service and Solutions Deployment at FVC
Real User
Top 20
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.
What are virtual meetings? Virtual meetings are real-time online interactions that make use of integrated audio and video, chat features, screen sharing, webinars, and application sharing.
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.