Re: [Linux-aus] Hello everyone! and Grant Request

[Tim Ansell <mithro@mithis.net>]

On Sun, 2005-07-03 at 15:24 +0800, Mark Tearle wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Jul 2005, Tim Ansell wrote:
> 
> >>>> FXS devices are still very expensive however (the cheapest being around
> >>>> $AUS 70 per line). A FXS line is required for every internal phone, so
> >>>> while it Asterisk might be able to get away with a small number of FXO
> >>>> lines it needs numerous FXS lines.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Is $70 per line really that expensive? If so, what price is affordable?
> >
> > Yes, I believe that $70 per line is out of the reach of small businesses
> > and home offices.
>
> Even with FXS lines you've forgotten to include the on-costs of handsets
> (around $70 each for workable quality ones)
> 

I already have numerous handsets. As well a decent DTMF handset can be
bought for around $AU 20. I would expect decent wireless capability for
around $AU 80.

> Compare that with the cost of a SIP handset such as the Budgetone at 
> around $140 and FXS isn't really such a great solution for a single
> line.
> 
> > I would like at least 6 lines for my house,
> > * My room
> > * Parents room
> > * Sisters room
> > * The home office
> > * Dads shed down
> >
> > This would cost me $420 just to setup the phone interface. I would then
> > have the extra costs for the Asterisk box, cable runs, etc. Then if I
> > was a company I would most probably have support costs.
> 
> What about Softphones?
> 

I still have to run cables, Asterisk box, etc.

      Handset $AU 20
My FXS Device $AU 20
-------------------
       Total $AU 40

Compared to $140 for a soft phone. (It's 3.5 times the price.)

Granted soft phone have other advantages and I would most probably get 1
or two soft phones if I had a more office like setup. 

<snip>

> 
> Mark

I still think $AU 20 (~$US 12) is a bit expensive. All a FXS device is,
is a 8K DAC with some Ringing Logic. In reality if I had more experience
I should be able to get the cost down even further. Prices around the
$3-$6 per line are not unreasonable.

Thanks for your time and response.

Tim Ansell