Open systems have several advantages over end-to-end solutions, the flexibility to integrate different devices being the most prominent. But not everyone is convinced that open architecture is the way to go.
Open systems have
several advantages over end-to-end solutions, the flexibility to integrate different devices being the most prominent. But not everyone is convinced that open architecture is the way to go. Several systems integrators (SI) are quick to point out that end-to-end solutions come with various benefits, as the guarantee of compatibility between devices helps them handle any problems that their customers might encounter.
Edo Pribadi, CEO of the Indonesia-based Epri Total Integrasi said as much when asked about why he prefers end-to-end solutions.
“I prefer end-to-end solution, because end-to-end solutions help to protect the business for the partners to maintain customers,” Pribadi said. When asked what changes he would like to see in open architecture that could persuade him to take the alternative, he said, “the open solutions should be user-friendly and able to develop their capabilities depends on the customer’s needs, and always come with a good development team.”
Abdullah Al-Malki, GM of the Saudi Arabia-based ITQAN also said he preferred end-to-end solutions due to the ease of use that they offer.
What end-to-end lacks
The SIs who preferred open solutions were also willing to give their opinions on how end-to-end solutions can be improved to better serve the market.
“One improvement for end-to-end solutions is to provide a more open recording system,” Bob Mesnik, President of the US-based Kintronics said. “Some companies are actually doing this. They offer recording systems (such as NVRs) that support ONVIF cameras. They also need to provide more features and functions to compete with the third-party systems.”
Others are less optimistic in giving suggestions. Nicky Stokes, MD of the UK-based ISD Tech said most manufacturers have certain specific strengths in one or more areas, but none of them have proved to be strong in all the segments. If any solution provider can reach this level, we might see more SIs looking at end-to-end solutions as an option.
“While we are in the open architecture camp, we are constantly evaluating what’s available in the video surveillance market – we pride ourselves in maintaining an expert knowledge of what’s on the market and the strengths that different vendors can offer,” Stokes said. “In our experience, most vendors have specific strength in one or more areas but none offer the full breadth of choice to compare with what open architecture offers. If one manufacturer could truly deliver excellence and choice across the product spectrum, then we’d of course seriously consider an end-to-end approach. We acknowledge too that an end-to-end solution is less challenging than a multi-vendor system when it comes to upgrades and software updates, although this is likely to become less so.”
Walter Candelu, Commercial Director of Securitas UAE, is of the opinion that end-to-end solutions can compete in the market only if they "open" their protocols and therefore start integrating with third party devices.
“Integration, however, should not be limited to the ONVIF standards but proper native integration, therefore it would not be an end-to-end solution anymore,” Candelu concluded.