Why use ATAs when most good VOIP routers have FXO/FXS ports?

Forums › VoIP › Why use ATAs when most good VOIP routers have FXO/FXS ports?

gxtoast

5 posts

Wannabe Geek

#38790 4-Aug-2009 12:54

I am pretty confused at the proliferation of ATAs in this country. In Australia I hardly ever hear of people purchasing ATAs for consumer applications. People in AUS just purchase a good quality ADSL 2+ modem/router with FXO/FXS ports for plugging in an analogue phone. Or, they spend a little more and get a proper VOIP phone. Like this one:

http://gigaset.com/shc/0,1935,hq_en_0_145510_rArNrNrNrN,00.html

Internode (arguably the best ISP in Australia) has this device for AUD$199 (and I hear people pay upwards of $150 for a ripoff ATA... and they aren't even POE (power-over-ethernet) devices - you have to plug them into a GPO (general-power-outlet)).

http://www.internode.on.net/residential/home_phone/nodephone/hardware/

So, it begs the question, why are Kiwis not being smarter and buying VOIP enabled routers, like these ones:

http://au.billion.com/product/voip/bipac7401VGPR3.php

I am looking at a naked DSL solution for my Aunt and Slingshot are pushing ATAs, and I'm like "wtf, just give me a configured DSL voip router that allows me to plug in a single analogue phone". But, they say that their models don't support that. So, "provide ones that DO".

Any reason why this ISP is not providing options to customers?

old3eyes

9158 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1364

Subscriber

#242612 4-Aug-2009 19:15

I have an ATA here at home and the advantage for me is I can plug in a series of cordless fones cheaply . I haven't come across a IP fone with a analog adapter out the back..

Regards,

Old3eyes

coffeebaron

6304 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3567

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#242621 4-Aug-2009 19:21

A Linksys WAG310G works very well over Xnet Fusion service
http://www.xnet.co.nz/vfx/hardware.shtml
http://www.xnet.co.nz/fusion/

Rural IT and Broadband support.

Broadband troubleshooting and master filter installs.
Starlink installer - one month free: https://www.starlink.com/?referral=RC-32845-88860-71
Wi-Fi and networking
Cel-Fi supply and installer - boost your mobile phone coverage legally

Need help in Auckland, Waikato or BoP? Click my email button, or email me direct: [my user name] at geekzonemail dot com

gxtoast

5 posts

Wannabe Geek

#242625 4-Aug-2009 19:23

The phone in the link of the OP post has analogue connectivity:

To give you maximum flexibility, the Gigaset C470 IP lets you easily switch between internet and fixed-line phoning at the touch of a button ? whichever suits you best. You can also add up to 6 extra handsets to your phone system and experience the convenience of multiline calling . That means up to 3 family members or friends can make parallel calls ? up to 2 VoIP calls and 1 fixed-line call at the same time.

But, that isn't for additional analogue phones. Though, seriously, why would you want to use analogue phones with a cool ip phone like that?

I can understand that ATAs can serve a purpose in some situations, but it doesn't really explain why ISPs aren't providing options in NZ and are pushing ATAs for 'every' situation. ATAs are costly and all they do is basically bridge two technologies.

If a customer is setting up from scratch, they don't want to be forced to have to buy a modem AND an ATA... that's just poor. Unless there are technical reasons for it, in which case the support/helpdesk/sign-me-up people should state it when questioned about it.

Where I work, we recently converted about 4,000 people (we have 12,000+ users over 100 sites across Australia) over to VOIP technology and all the faxes had to be put onto ATAs. Did CISCO think to create a POE device? No, so we had to install totally cumbersome units that could not be rack mounted or used "in-line" at the device endpoint. Made deployment and management a total nightmare (when you look at efficiency of POE technology).

The funny thing is that all the VOIP devices are POE... go figure. ATAs could easily be POE.

I hate ATAs, haha!

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#242655 4-Aug-2009 20:23

At the end of the day most people want the cheapest solution - an ATA at $100 is cheaper than a new modem at $200. VFX have supported and recommended Linksys modem/router/ata units through several generations and there are plenty of people using these.

Most people already have an ADSL modem and aren't necessarily using VoIP as their primary phoneline so aren't into spending big $ on a solution.

In regards to PoE ATA's there is absolutely nothing stopping you from using PoE injectors and splitters for non PoE devices.

gxtoast

5 posts

Wannabe Geek

#242686 4-Aug-2009 21:50

Yes, I understand ATAs are cheaper than routers/modems. However, my point is that some ISPs are not providing choice for their naked DSL products. The result is that customers are forced to purchase both if they wish to use their analogue phones with naked DSL.

About Splitters, however. I had not seen these before and they seem like a great solution for those occasional difficult problems. But, because it comes down to budget, it would be hard to justify purchasing the costly CISCO ATA and a CISCO splitter for hundreds of fax machines.

The CISCO ATA is a similar size to a modem router (and fairly heavy) and cannot realistically be accommodated at the device end (even with a splitter). The splitter doesn't really make up for the lack of innovation from a market leader such as CISCO, when they really could have made available an in-line enterprise POE ATA. An in-line POE ATA could be attached to the end device with a 0.5m phone cable and easily spotted by Desktop staff and relocated with the device. As it stands, ATAs are deployed at the switch end and are not visible to Desktop staff and can be easily overlooked. Plus, each CISCO ATA bridges two analogue devices, so you get unused ports creeping into your ATA infrastructure as devices are relocated but the ATA left behind to continue servicing the second device. So much additional deployment/management complexity created by a lack of innovation. It creates significant expense for large enterprises. But, I digress.

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 458

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#242776 5-Aug-2009 00:49

gxtoast: I am pretty confused at the proliferation of ATAs in this country. In Australia I hardly ever hear of people purchasing ATAs for consumer applications. People in AUS just purchase a good quality ADSL 2+ modem/router with FXO/FXS ports for plugging in an analogue phone.

The saturation of ADSL2+ is higher in Australia, and thus the move to VoIP is easier when you aren't restricted to a (max) ~800kbps upload speed.

Since there is higher demand, ISPs there have a greater range of devices. Give it time, ISPs here will eventually stock a wider range of equipment.

gxtoast: Internode (arguably the best ISP in Australia) has this device for AUD$199 (and I hear people pay upwards of $150 for a ripoff ATA... and they aren't even POE (power-over-ethernet) devices - you have to plug them into a GPO (general-power-outlet)).

Why would you want a PoE powered ATA when most standard residential homes won't be running a UPS, and have plenty of GPOs aka power sockets available? It would be adding extra unnecessary cost and another point of failure.

gxtoast: I am looking at a naked DSL solution for my Aunt and Slingshot are pushing ATAs, and I'm like "wtf, just give me a configured DSL voip router that allows me to plug in a single analogue phone". But, they say that their models don't support that. So, "provide ones that DO".

Go to somewhere like Ascent and buy what you are after.

gxtoast: Any reason why this ISP is not providing options to customers?

Most of an ISPs customers will be standard ADSL so they will stock the brand of modem that suits the greatest proportion of their customers.

gxtoast: Though, seriously, why would you want to use analogue phones with a cool ip phone like that?

Cost. Very hard to make such a big jump in $$ for a (perceived) small gain in functionality.

gxtoast: Unless there are technical reasons for it, in which case the support/helpdesk/sign-me-up people should state it when questioned about it.

For the average Joe Bloggs customer, explaining all the technical reasons for having an ADSL router with a built in ATA with FXO/FXS capabilities will be well outside their realm of understanding.

gxtoast: Yes, I understand ATAs are cheaper than routers/modems. However, my point is that some ISPs are not providing choice for their naked DSL products. The result is that customers are forced to purchase both if they wish to use their analogue phones with naked DSL.

There is choice - a customer is not required to purchase an ADSL router from their provider. There are plenty of online IT stores which they can choose from.

Some customers may opt to not even purchase an ATA as their dependance on a landline has been removed since they may now be heavily using a mobile phone.

gxtoast: About Splitters, however. I had not seen these before and they seem like a great solution for those occasional difficult problems. But, because it comes down to budget, it would be hard to justify purchasing the costly CISCO ATA and a CISCO splitter for hundreds of fax machines.

Push forward the business case of reducing the requirement on fax machines, and move towards email, or upgrading existing photocopiers for scan to email. This will remove your requirement to continue supporting a dead technology.

Mighty Ape

Shop now at Mighty Ape (affiliate link).

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#242838 5-Aug-2009 09:03

Why stick with Cisco gear?

If you need analogue ports there are plenty of high capacity rack mount SIP ATA's.

Putting ATA's next to devices is IMHO very unwise. Not only does it require extra network ports or passthru but it also introduces additional points of failure and creates an unnecessary complex network.

A single rack mount ATA and then analogue direct to the fax machine is a far better option. If you're across multiple sites and have multiple fax machines or other analogue extensions such as lift alarms at each site it makes things so much simpler.

joshp

205 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1

Trusted

WorldxChange

#242951 5-Aug-2009 12:17

gxtoast:
The funny thing is that all the VOIP devices are POE... go figure. ATAs could easily be POE.

try these: http://nicegear.co.nz/accessories/linksys-poes5/

they work pretty well with the Linksys ata range.. not sure what the voltage is on the cisco ones :)

Cheers

http://wxc.co.nz

gxtoast

5 posts

Wannabe Geek

#245629 12-Aug-2009 15:01

I found a POE ATA from Planet:
http://www.planet.com.tw/en/product/product_ov.php?id=3576

Unfortunately they included a second Ethernet port, which means they could not make this device more in-line, like this device from Patton:
http://www.patton.com/products/pe_products.asp?category=328&MiDAS_SessionID=9ed461f0f5cd4bf3a5f3fecabafe8267

For me, the perfect ATA for transitional environments in large enterprises would be a POE enabled Smart M-ATA. This would allow simple, easily managed deployments.

ChillingSilence

301 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 36

#246731 14-Aug-2009 17:49

The HT-486's are cheap as chips (A guy on TradeMe sells them for $55 - csdesign), and while they're not super-reliable (Easy to make them fall over - Try iLBC / g729 for the first call and then make a 2nd) for many home users they're a great step in to VoIP :)

richms

29098 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10209

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#247067 15-Aug-2009 22:01

I dont use a router with an ata for the same reason I dont have a router with wireless - I dont want them directly connected, I have a machine inbetween them all doing firewalling the way I want it done, not some lame falls over all the time crap implimentation in a slow CPU on an old buggy linux like most routers seemto have in them.

Richard rich.ms