R.I.P. Sangoma Being Acquired

[tycho]

My question:
Is FreePBX and Asterisk licensed in such a way as close-sourcing them would be impossible?
EDIT: This was the whole idea of GPL, when you make a useful change, you MUST contribute it to upstream.

Let me pose a different tack: setting AI aside, given how mature PBX systems are, is there really any need for "feature upgrades" for many users? If there is a future change in phone tech -- whether in terms of cutting-edge devices, or even the network, sure; your PBX needs to adapt to that. But otherwise a call is a call, a hold is a hold, a forward is a forward, a park is a park, etc. Maybe the latest and greatest open source Asterisk and FreePBX are forked, and all that is done going forward are bug fixes and security fixes...

 

[dallas]

Let me pose a different tack: setting AI aside, given how mature PBX systems are, is there really any need for "feature upgrades" for many users?

Probably not, but the elephant in the room would be the operating system.

 

[mbellot]

So... I join @kenn10 in suggesting you begin taking a careful look at FS PBX and FusionPBX. Except for our honeypots, we've been running these platforms for more than a year now with zero problems.

For a small home user (two trunks, three endpoints) which makes more sense from an ease of use standpoint for initial setup and ongoing maintenance?

 

[kenn10]

For a small home user (two trunks, three endpoints) which makes more sense from an ease of use standpoint for initial setup and ongoing maintenance?

Using Voip.ms instead of a PBX. If you are used to a product, it will always be easier to stay with it than moving to another product. At least it will until what you use becomes unsupported, lacks security fixes, and is discontinued; at which point you are in panic mode to move to something else.

 

[wardmundy]

Using Voip.ms instead of a PBX. If you are used to a product, it will always be easier to stay with it than moving to another product. At least it will until what you use becomes unsupported, lacks security fixes, and is discontinued; at which point you are in panic mode to move to something else.

Problem #1 is that the entire VoIP.ms platform is reportedly built on Asterisk.

 

[mbellot]

If you are used to a product, it will always be easier to stay with it than moving to another product.

Which explains the M$ behemoth.

I guess I'll look at both.

 

[tycho]

Using Voip.ms instead of a PBX.

This. Or similar.

Actually, for personal use, once I got an Obi200 long ago, I slowly stopped using my home hardware-based IPBX. Even though now deprecated, the Obi does everything I need even for reasonably geeky home telephony.

For non-home use -- small biz and other stuff -- I still use IPBX, in a cloud instance (for a number of years it has been RackNerd with zero problems).

But maybe it is time for me to start more seriously looking at FS...

 

[wardmundy]

The good news is that those using Incredible PBX don't have to rely upon the FreePBX repos for updates. Whether there will be additional updates, of course, is anybody's guess at this juncture.

 

[Samot]

Guess what happens to non-profit generating parts of the company like FreePBX.

I'm curious as to how this conclusion was drawn and why everyone is running with a speculative theory? I didn't realize that killing off a completely 100% commercial revenue stream (i.e. PBXact) plus other revenue streams was the plan. Multiple commercial revenue streams rely on FreePBX and Asterisk. I mean it is a good way to make the entire reseller agent ecosystem get mad and cause churn at that level.

Who knows, maybe you're all right and BRC will just say F it and cut 15M-20M+ of annual revenue. Not like they need SIPStation or FAXStation since those user bases are almost completely FreePBX users.

 

[KNERD]

I'm curious as to how this conclusion was drawn and why everyone is running with a speculative theory? I didn't realize that killing off a completely 100% commercial revenue stream (i.e. PBXact) plus other revenue streams was the plan. Multiple commercial revenue streams rely on FreePBX and Asterisk. I mean it is a good way to make the entire reseller agent ecosystem get mad and cause churn at that level.

Who knows, maybe you're all right and BRC will just say F it and cut 15M-20M+ of annual revenue. Not like they need SIPStation or FAXStation since those user bases are almost completely FreePBX users.

Well, Compaq took over DEC mainly for their global service organization then ended up dumping off the computer and semiconductor manufacturing operations. So yeah, why would any company dump off revenue generating operations?

 

[Samot]

Well, Compaq took over DEC mainly for their global service organization then ended up dumping off the computer and semiconductor manufacturing operations. So yeah, why would any company dump off revenue generating operations?

No, they shut down the *failing* PC and Notebook line and kept everything else including the semiconductor part. You left out the part that Compaq was dying, this was a last ditch effort to compete with IBM and four years later was bought by HP and then the semiconductor part was killed. This also wasn't a case of a holding company buying something. So it's an apples and oranges comparison.

It also wasn't what I was asking. I quoted the statement where I asked how the conclusion was made. Which was that the FreePBX revenue was non-profit revenue. How is that known? Where did the data for this come from?

 

[wardmundy]

Looking forward to 2027 and the Word-Eating Banquet.

 

[dallas]

I was a c-band manager at Avaya. I started with AT&T, spun off as Lucent Technologies, and spun again as Avaya.

Interesting insight.
As an aside, I worked for Lucent Technologies in Oz. In 2000 I took a six week trip (on leave) to the US for a convention. When I returned there was new signage in the foyer of the building. I thought another company had taken space in the building but returning to my desk I found that I was now working for Avaya.

 

[kenn10]

I found that I was now working for Avaya.

At my end, we all knew it had happened as it was announced on an all hands conference call. I guess being on leave, you missed all the fanfare and emails. The big change was that the company moved to a performance based structure for management. The years of AT&T and Lucent giving useless people "positions" in the interest of diversity ended and everyone had to actually work. Many fled the company or were terminated after inadequate performance, so all of that was good. We all thought that the page had turned and things would look up but the heavy load of craft contracts, retirement expense, and dwindling sales after Y2K took its toll when the company went private and the board of directors sold their souls to the holding companies.