Cisco Tandberg Buy Raises Questions About SMB Video Conferencing

Big IP communication vendors have talked the SMB (small to medium-size business) talk for some time. Almost all have said at one time or another they want to bring big-company communication capabilities to small companies. Bringing video conferencing, formerly a high-end enterprise solution, to the low-end market is a perfect way to do so. Thus Cisco's announced acquisition of Tandberg would seem to be a case of walking the walk. Tandberg makes low-end video calling equipment costing a few thousands of dollars, in contrast to Cisco's telepresence systems going for hundreds of thousands. In theory, the move could make video conferencing a common tool SMB tool. But questions remain as to whether that will really happen.

One question is whether Cisco will develop and market Tandberg gear in an SMB-friendly way. It could integrate the new equipment with its existing products in ways that make it more suitable for enterprises than for small companies. For example, it may end up requiring other Cisco equipment and software to work effectively, which may in turn involve the need for Cisco-certified IT staff. Such an approach would effectively make the new products a better fit for the branch offices and smaller locations of enterprises, which already have such resources. SMBs without existing Cisco infrastructure or expertise could find the equipment harder to use.

A second important question is how easily Cisco-branded Tandberg equipment will communicate with non-Cisco video gear in the future. Cisco has a history of preferring proprietary protocols and equipment. Even implementations of the SIP (session initiation protocol) standard, which Tandberg supports, can differ among vendors. And there are all kinds of subtle technical and commercial ways to make equipment less compatible. Thus SMBs with other brands of videophones could find it hard to communicate with those using Cisco gear for quite a while, despite Cisco's professed dedication to multi-vendor interoperability. And that could be almost as bad as having no video conferencing at all.

Comments

[Larry Lisser]

Glad to see this angle of the deal addressed. The SMB video conferencing market remains unclear in many ways - including will they use it, need it, want it. Much of this is often determined by who brings it to market, who that vendor targets and how they package the offer. Yes, this does create an opportunity for Cisco, however I would expect them to be better at selling it to branch offices of enterprise that look like SMB's, rather than to SMB themselves. Recently, I reviewed some of the other vendors and influences in place to get - or not - video to the SMB market: http://bit.ly/1KBu8r

[twitter.com/Vidtel]

You raise an interesting point about the potential for Cisco to subtly work against interoperability. Interoperability with video endpoints is a widespread problem and it may well be better addressed by a third-party who can build gateways between the various video equipment suppliers.