IPVM Security Manager's Guide to Video Surveillance - Reviewed
I want to do a quick video today - this
one's gonna have to be very brief because there's some construction going
on across the road. So, ah yeah sorry about
the background noise. But anyway yesterday a friend sent me an email through, it was a colleague
in the industry, who had seen some videos I'd put up recently around the subject
of "open platform", companies who have "open platform" systems who are marketing their products as being "non-proprietary". If you haven't seen those videos I've provided the links
in the description below.
But basically he sent me a download link
to this "Security Managers Surveillance Guide" and said check out
chapter 21 and 22. He said you know it's there's some "interesting points" in
there that you should have a look at. So I read through part of the guide last night I think a seasoned Security Manager probably wouldn't bother with this guide, it is free, if you're new to the surveillance industry there's some interesting things in there. But, anyway
getting to the point, Chapter 1, sorry Chapter 21, under the subject of the "Danger of buying
packages" the author states "a dangerous and mass movement is underway for video surveillance companies to sell you packages.
Packaging together cameras, encoders and IP video management systems vendors hope to entice you with an
integrated, optimized end to end solution." Well I don't know about you but if there is a mass movement underway for surveillance companies to entice, or
vendors to entice buyers into integrated, optimized
solutions that would seem like a positive thing right?
Optimize means to make something more efficient, more
effective, it's working towards perfecting
something, so in my opinion that's a positive thing. But anyway the author goes on to say "One of the great ironies is that while
everyone is paying lip service to open platforms the industry is clearly moving toward
tightly bundled packages. I think this is very risky and you
should carefully consider the dangers of buying packages." Okay, so we're being, the author is trying to
convince us of the idea that one of the great ironies is that everyone's paying lip service, or
companies are paying lip service, to having "open platform systems" but at the same time they're selling tightly bundled packages between hardware and software. I think the real irony here, 'cause there is
nothing ironic about that.
The real irony here is that the author actually doesn't understand the true definition of an open platform
system. "Open platform" just means that the system or software has been built using open, freely available standards, and it has
published API's and documents that help other
integrators to build solutions around that system or
software, that's it. That's an "open platform", software or
system. You can have open platform systems that are tightly bundled packages Apple's an example of that.
Take the iMac. The iMac is a very tightly integrated, I guess in some ways a closed system, ecosystem. But the Apple OS X, the operating system that
everything hangs off, even though that's licensed and it's
proprietary, it has open source components that enable
developers to create very deep integration into that Apple ecosystem. So yeah I
think here it's interesting that this "independent author" has been so influenced by these "open platform" vendors who are selling the idea of "openness means non-proprietary", which is a load of rubbish.
Anyway, going on the author states "Whose selling
packages, Verint, March, American Dynamics
Pelco, Cisco, DVTel, Bosch Indigo Vision, Avigilon. MOBOTIX
isn't mentioned here but certainly MOBOTIX. Have tightly bundled solutions that have
deep integration. "You can even see the beginnings of this
with Axis and their expansion of cam station.
Today Panasonic announced it was moving to selling packages. It's almost easier to ask who is not selling packages Milestone being the most obvious
large player." So basically all of these companies that's being listed
here, all sell software that is proprietary, Milestone has
a proprietary system, but they're also open platform. They are
all built on open standards, they all have API's that enable
third-party integration with their system so to say that they're not open platform is
ridiculous. Really and the thing is, is that Milestone has been spruiked in this document quite a bit about, you know how it gives you options with different brands
of cameras and so on.
That's true but the thing is is that Milestone has now been bought out by
Canon. Now Canon is a company who is for profit they are not a charity and they're going to do everything now, now that they own the intellectual property they are going to
do everything within their power to make sure that the integration between
Milestone and their IP cameras is at the most advanced level. They're gonna make sure that the
integration is 100% proprietary because they're gonna want depth of integration. Just like Apple has with the hardware
that they use, they have very deep integration.
That's the benefit of having tightly
bundled solutions. That's why Apple has, is one of most reputable brands in
the world today because of the fact that they are unapologetic about using closed ecosystems. All of these systems anyway are proprietary you download a license
agreement, you've locked yourself into a proprietary technology, that's it, It's as simple as
that. The thing is the other point, the other irony here
is that Milestone who, you know, have been always talking
about, "hey we work with everybody" have sold out to a large vendor who are very proprietary
in their approach, nothing wrong with that and are going to continue down that road as well with the Milestone software.
So I just
think you should always take these types of guides with a pinch of salt, do your own research because when you do a little bit of digging quite often you come up with information that is not accurately presented. Anyway before I wrap up the video I just wanted
to cover three dangers, that this author highlights that he believes, you know buyers should watch out for, in
terms of tightly bundled packages. Ok - Danger 1 "Packages Are Too General - video surveillance buyers have a wide variety of needs however most packages are horizontally positioned, that is they're not optimized for any specific use case. Packages can
restrict flexibility and adaptability to different use cases.
Be careful that the package properly addresses your needs." OK, that could be argued whether you're going with
open platform video management software or whether you're going with an end to end
solution.
The reality is it's either going to deliver what you want it to do or not. You don't know where your business needs are going to be in five or ten years time and no matter at any point you're always
going to be at the mercy of that vendor. Not very dangerous really, I think
that's a bit of a weak argument. Danger 2 - "You Are Screwed If You Choose A Market Lagging Package - since there are so many vendors selling packages some of them are going to lose.
You cannot expect to have a dozen companies that all that are all basically offering the same thing to succeed If you choose a package that loses, you're in trouble it will be very hard to expand the package you'll be likely locked into it's limitations." That could happen with any company, you know as I said in this document you see a lot of positive spin around
Milestone and their XProtect range, as though that's a good way to go, but now they're owned by a
hardware vendor Canon and you know, they're a major competitor of all the other IP
camera brands out there. I mean this is obviously where they're wanting to go and they're going to put their needs first before everyone else. So there is an
example of being "screwed", If you've invested in Milestone and you've got fifty different brands of cameras hanging of that system you know - you're in a bit of a
precarious situation. Who knows what's going to happen with
that in the next few years.
So I don't know - weak argument. Danger 3 "You're Controlled If You Choose A Market-leading Package." So basically
what he's saying is you're screwed if you choose a market-lagging product and you're screwed if you go with a market leader. "If the package wins you become at the mercy of the vendor that is why so much ill will exists towards companies like GE Security and Tyco and you've got to wait until
they integrate, basically is what he is saying here, you've got to wait for new products or features to be integrated, you're at the
mercy of those large players. They've locked you in.
But the same could be argued with any open platform video management
software. They either integrate the new feature, or device or
whatever or they don't Look at ONVIF, ONVIF is an
example of that Profile-S the streaming specification
was introduced years ago. It's taken ages for that to be implemented. Profile-G.
The recording specification. That came with
the promise of plug-and-play edge storage, SD card recording, so few
vendors have implemented it. You know, it's been months, it could take
two or three years, who knows! But these scenarios, these three so called "dangers" play out with every single technology, in every aspect of the security industry so it's not specific to "packaged solutions". Anyway that's a wrap from me, I just thought that was quite interesting and thank you very much to Steve for sending
that through.
Thanks for watching.
one's gonna have to be very brief because there's some construction going
on across the road. So, ah yeah sorry about
the background noise. But anyway yesterday a friend sent me an email through, it was a colleague
in the industry, who had seen some videos I'd put up recently around the subject
of "open platform", companies who have "open platform" systems who are marketing their products as being "non-proprietary". If you haven't seen those videos I've provided the links
in the description below.
But basically he sent me a download link
to this "Security Managers Surveillance Guide" and said check out
chapter 21 and 22. He said you know it's there's some "interesting points" in
there that you should have a look at. So I read through part of the guide last night I think a seasoned Security Manager probably wouldn't bother with this guide, it is free, if you're new to the surveillance industry there's some interesting things in there. But, anyway
getting to the point, Chapter 1, sorry Chapter 21, under the subject of the "Danger of buying
packages" the author states "a dangerous and mass movement is underway for video surveillance companies to sell you packages.
Packaging together cameras, encoders and IP video management systems vendors hope to entice you with an
integrated, optimized end to end solution." Well I don't know about you but if there is a mass movement underway for surveillance companies to entice, or
vendors to entice buyers into integrated, optimized
solutions that would seem like a positive thing right?
Optimize means to make something more efficient, more
effective, it's working towards perfecting
something, so in my opinion that's a positive thing. But anyway the author goes on to say "One of the great ironies is that while
everyone is paying lip service to open platforms the industry is clearly moving toward
tightly bundled packages. I think this is very risky and you
should carefully consider the dangers of buying packages." Okay, so we're being, the author is trying to
convince us of the idea that one of the great ironies is that everyone's paying lip service, or
companies are paying lip service, to having "open platform systems" but at the same time they're selling tightly bundled packages between hardware and software. I think the real irony here, 'cause there is
nothing ironic about that.
The real irony here is that the author actually doesn't understand the true definition of an open platform
system. "Open platform" just means that the system or software has been built using open, freely available standards, and it has
published API's and documents that help other
integrators to build solutions around that system or
software, that's it. That's an "open platform", software or
system. You can have open platform systems that are tightly bundled packages Apple's an example of that.
Take the iMac. The iMac is a very tightly integrated, I guess in some ways a closed system, ecosystem. But the Apple OS X, the operating system that
everything hangs off, even though that's licensed and it's
proprietary, it has open source components that enable
developers to create very deep integration into that Apple ecosystem. So yeah I
think here it's interesting that this "independent author" has been so influenced by these "open platform" vendors who are selling the idea of "openness means non-proprietary", which is a load of rubbish.
Anyway, going on the author states "Whose selling
packages, Verint, March, American Dynamics
Pelco, Cisco, DVTel, Bosch Indigo Vision, Avigilon. MOBOTIX
isn't mentioned here but certainly MOBOTIX. Have tightly bundled solutions that have
deep integration. "You can even see the beginnings of this
with Axis and their expansion of cam station.
Today Panasonic announced it was moving to selling packages. It's almost easier to ask who is not selling packages Milestone being the most obvious
large player." So basically all of these companies that's being listed
here, all sell software that is proprietary, Milestone has
a proprietary system, but they're also open platform. They are
all built on open standards, they all have API's that enable
third-party integration with their system so to say that they're not open platform is
ridiculous. Really and the thing is, is that Milestone has been spruiked in this document quite a bit about, you know how it gives you options with different brands
of cameras and so on.
That's true but the thing is is that Milestone has now been bought out by
Canon. Now Canon is a company who is for profit they are not a charity and they're going to do everything now, now that they own the intellectual property they are going to
do everything within their power to make sure that the integration between
Milestone and their IP cameras is at the most advanced level. They're gonna make sure that the
integration is 100% proprietary because they're gonna want depth of integration. Just like Apple has with the hardware
that they use, they have very deep integration.
That's the benefit of having tightly
bundled solutions. That's why Apple has, is one of most reputable brands in
the world today because of the fact that they are unapologetic about using closed ecosystems. All of these systems anyway are proprietary you download a license
agreement, you've locked yourself into a proprietary technology, that's it, It's as simple as
that. The thing is the other point, the other irony here
is that Milestone who, you know, have been always talking
about, "hey we work with everybody" have sold out to a large vendor who are very proprietary
in their approach, nothing wrong with that and are going to continue down that road as well with the Milestone software.
So I just
think you should always take these types of guides with a pinch of salt, do your own research because when you do a little bit of digging quite often you come up with information that is not accurately presented. Anyway before I wrap up the video I just wanted
to cover three dangers, that this author highlights that he believes, you know buyers should watch out for, in
terms of tightly bundled packages. Ok - Danger 1 "Packages Are Too General - video surveillance buyers have a wide variety of needs however most packages are horizontally positioned, that is they're not optimized for any specific use case. Packages can
restrict flexibility and adaptability to different use cases.
Be careful that the package properly addresses your needs." OK, that could be argued whether you're going with
open platform video management software or whether you're going with an end to end
solution.
The reality is it's either going to deliver what you want it to do or not. You don't know where your business needs are going to be in five or ten years time and no matter at any point you're always
going to be at the mercy of that vendor. Not very dangerous really, I think
that's a bit of a weak argument. Danger 2 - "You Are Screwed If You Choose A Market Lagging Package - since there are so many vendors selling packages some of them are going to lose.
You cannot expect to have a dozen companies that all that are all basically offering the same thing to succeed If you choose a package that loses, you're in trouble it will be very hard to expand the package you'll be likely locked into it's limitations." That could happen with any company, you know as I said in this document you see a lot of positive spin around
Milestone and their XProtect range, as though that's a good way to go, but now they're owned by a
hardware vendor Canon and you know, they're a major competitor of all the other IP
camera brands out there. I mean this is obviously where they're wanting to go and they're going to put their needs first before everyone else. So there is an
example of being "screwed", If you've invested in Milestone and you've got fifty different brands of cameras hanging of that system you know - you're in a bit of a
precarious situation. Who knows what's going to happen with
that in the next few years.
So I don't know - weak argument. Danger 3 "You're Controlled If You Choose A Market-leading Package." So basically
what he's saying is you're screwed if you choose a market-lagging product and you're screwed if you go with a market leader. "If the package wins you become at the mercy of the vendor that is why so much ill will exists towards companies like GE Security and Tyco and you've got to wait until
they integrate, basically is what he is saying here, you've got to wait for new products or features to be integrated, you're at the
mercy of those large players. They've locked you in.
But the same could be argued with any open platform video management
software. They either integrate the new feature, or device or
whatever or they don't Look at ONVIF, ONVIF is an
example of that Profile-S the streaming specification
was introduced years ago. It's taken ages for that to be implemented. Profile-G.
The recording specification. That came with
the promise of plug-and-play edge storage, SD card recording, so few
vendors have implemented it. You know, it's been months, it could take
two or three years, who knows! But these scenarios, these three so called "dangers" play out with every single technology, in every aspect of the security industry so it's not specific to "packaged solutions". Anyway that's a wrap from me, I just thought that was quite interesting and thank you very much to Steve for sending
that through.
Thanks for watching.
Comments
Post a Comment