Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '3CX Phone System - General' started by giuregol, Jan 25, 2007.
Does the new BETA support BLF feature?
Simply... yes or no...
We dont have BLF support yet. Its something we will look into in the future, but it wont be available until q2 of this year...
Could one of the admins confirm the status of this feature.
I would like to know that your Q1 started at which month.
Any news for support T.38?
In general, BLF is just abbreviation that describes "fuzzy" content. (like a VM can be a "Voice mail" as well as "Virtual Machine" )
Could you please describe what do you expect from this functionality? What is missed in current version of PBX(3.1) in comparing to "BLF"? In which environment you interpret this "BLF" abbreviation? Which kind of hardware you need to connect to PBX?
News: It will be supported
In phone/PBX terms, BLF isn't a fuzzy term. BLF = Busy Lamp Field.
For example--The Grandstream GXP2000 has an add-on extension that adds extension buttons with status lights. You set those as BLF buttons and if the extension that is assigned to that button is in use, the light turns red so that the user (typically a receptionist) knows that the person is on the phone.
This would be a very good thing to add soon, as it is a must for larger installations.
Such functionality is completely covered by Call Assistant and provides much more information then "red light" on GXP2000 button
P.S. Selected question is a key question
I have a feature request out there that explains why CallAssistant doesn't do it all: you CAN'T resize the window so it only shows 11 extensions.
Plus, if you are on the phone, you may not want to have to look over at the computer display when it could be shown on the phone in front of you. And in my time of working on IP telephony (Cisco and others), most people won't use a CallAssistant type app because all they know is the phone. Don't forget that we might be tech-junkies who like those features, but the 45 year old woman answering the phone is not.
Also, there is not a Mac version of CallAssistant. I'm not a Mac guy by any means, but my office is 50/50. That keeps half of my users from using it or the softphone.
I'm not trying to be argumentative--just that for this to be a great solution (it's already a good one, but I'm always hoping for more), then it needs to have these sort of features.
We can implement Call Assistant for Mac as well as implement resizing of Call Assistant window. Will it resolve your problem with "BLF"?
P.S. Please, don't think that "45 years old woman" has a less capability to handle GXP2000(or Call Assistant ) than any of "tech-junkies"
Resizing would be more important for me. Having it supported on the phone would be equally important.
And I joked about that, but it has happened to me before. The receptionist refused to use the Cisco implementation of a CallAssistant type program and would only use the functions on the phone. Sometimes, people just don't want to learn new things, so you have to have a way to get them to adopt these new ways that are better.
Actually, we've discussed resizing of CA to show more lamps. And, we decided to make additional window for that, which will be attached to CA (like secretary extension is attached to GXP phone ). Anyway, it will look much better soon.
And another good news. We're going to support BLF. But for that we need to implement presence server. This task is scheduled, but has a low priority, so it probably will be available by the end of year, or even later.
That would be a great thing to have it a separate window to the side.
Will the line status show in that window at the same time?