Why Milestone system?

[GV.Jackie 0]

I am thinking aboout build up pure IP cam solution, maybe 50-60 IP cameras.

Many pepople recommend Milestone system to me, but I heard it costs $150 per channel license, could somebody please advise me the strength of Milestone system?

Thanks a lot for your help!

[Mark Eggett 0]

I tend to recommend Milestone as it supports such a broad range of manufacturers cameras allowing you to select the best camera on the market for the purpose. The majority of software is manufacturer specific restricting this choice.

 

With the number of cameras you are looking for, you would need to be looking at the Enterprise or Corporate version of the software where devisec are licenced individually. Compare this to a 50 camera DVR solution and you would need to purchase 64 channels making the last two cameras very costly!

 

Also, having installed Milestone for a number of years, I've seen the development that goes into the software with the new features and functionality released on a regular basis. Milestone are verymuch at the forefront of IP Surveillance management where a lot of other systems I've trialled seem to be playing catch-up.

 

At the end of the day it will come down to the specifics of your requirement and the experience of the installer you work with to best address them.

[Gracef 0]

Hi, in fact,most H.264 hardware compression cards can support maximum 64 channels.so it can be cater to your need of 50----60 IP cameras solution.

Additionally, as to the IP surveillance system software , i think the most important aspect is the software function but not only how many brand IP camera can support.

[GV.Jackie 0]

With the number of cameras you are looking for, you would need to be looking at the Enterprise or Corporate version of the software where devisec are licenced individually. Compare this to a 50 camera DVR solution and you would need to purchase 64 channels making the last two cameras very costly!

 

Many thanks for your sharing. That dose help me a lot on the choice decision. However, there is one question, I thought Milestone sell their license on channel basis?

Why can't I buy exactly 50 channels?

[rory 0]

Compare this to a 50 camera DVR solution and you would need to purchase 64 channels making the last two cameras very costly!

 

Actually you can get a 2 channel DVR if needed, very cheap, or even if you do 4 x 16 channel DVRs it still works out approx $5,000 cheaper than the Milestone software licenses on an NVR. Just food for thought

[Mark Eggett 0]

While you can build some very cheap systems, ultimately you get what you pay for. If the focus on these forums is price then fair enough, I personally see more value in putting together a technically superior solution.

 

The components that make up a quality IP based system ARE generally more expensive than their analogue counterparts BUT the installation cost and ongoing cost of an IP system are significantly better not to mention the functionality.

 

That said, compare the cost of a 250Gb hard disk from a D/NVR manufacturer and then compare that to a quality PC hard disk from your local PC reseller...

 

Also, the only Milestone based NVR is a JVC product and while a "step in the right direction" it's sadly quite expensive and limited in comparison to a true server based Milestone solution

[rory 0]

Actually i was talking about the most expensive consumer PC based DVR system ... high quality computer parts and a high quality DVR card ..

 

Also i was meaning the Milestone software licence per camera, the base price, then the custom built NVR, and network hardware (not wiring), against 4x custom built 16 channel Real Time PC DVRs using the latest hardware.

 

ps. typically, once installed correctly, there are no ongoing costs for a CCTV system.

 

But dont get me wrong, i do understand the usefulness of the IP based system with 50+ cameras .. especially even moreso when dealing with wireles over 16 cameras.

[survtech 0]

ps. typically, once installed correctly, there are no ongoing costs for a CCTV system.

I only wish that was true!

[rory 0]

ps. typically, once installed correctly, there are no ongoing costs for a CCTV system.

I only wish that was true!

 

what are you having problems with, or should i say paying for?

Short of vandalism, acts of god, bad parts, which can occur in any industry ..

actually dont answer that .. cause we would then be getting way off topic

but please do start a new thread on that if you like

[Mark Eggett 0]

ps. typically, once installed correctly, there are no ongoing costs for a CCTV system.

I only wish that was true!

 

I Second that - MACs anyone?

 

Capture cards have their place, but they have the majority of the shortcomings of DVR/NVR's and if you are comparing a solution based on a "...Consumer based PC..." we are talking entirely different leagues.

[zmxtech 0]

Some Options software should have that are important

 

 

Motion detection options -gimme lots you cant have enough

bandwidth and image size

image "no send" grey-areas for IP cams

 

my 2c

[Mark Eggett 0]

"image "no send" grey-areas for IP cams"

 

I don't understand.

[G-Mac 0]

A few things I think are important in a complete IP video surveillance solution.

 

Modularity. Consider the cost of a normal camera vs. a IP camera of equal video quality. If just the camera gets mashed, do you want to pay that premium for a whole new IP camera? I recommend that the camera and video to IP streamer be separate devices.

Vandalism was noted earlier. You can save future costs by installing the a normal analog camera in the open where it needs to be and run a short analog wire to an IP streamer that is safely protected.

 

Flexibiliy.

If your cameras are outdated and you want new ones, go get them without having to buy hew IP Cameras.

If your DVR is old, go get a new one without worrying about whether your IP Cameras work with it.

If new network video streaming abilities are invented in the future, buy a single package that does it without changing the Cameras or the DVR.

 

So, Analog Camera connects to nearby IP Encoder. Then here's your network, which could be wireless or what-have-you. IP Decoder near the DVR turns it back to Analog to go back into the DVR. Any of the three technologies can be made better later, by different companies, and you can upgrade without dumping the entire package.

The initial per-channel cost goes up, yes. I think future flexibility is worth it, but do the customers?

[rory 0]

A few things I think are important in a complete IP video surveillance solution.

 

Modularity. Consider the cost of a normal camera vs. a IP camera of equal video quality. If just the camera gets mashed, do you want to pay that premium for a whole new IP camera? I recommend that the camera and video to IP streamer be separate devices.

Vandalism was noted earlier. You can save future costs by installing the a normal analog camera in the open where it needs to be and run a short analog wire to an IP streamer that is safely protected.

 

Flexibiliy.

If your cameras are outdated and you want new ones, go get them without having to buy hew IP Cameras.

If your DVR is old, go get a new one without worrying about whether your IP Cameras work with it.

If new network video streaming abilities are invented in the future, buy a single package that does it without changing the Cameras or the DVR.

 

So, Analog Camera connects to nearby IP Encoder. Then here's your network, which could be wireless or what-have-you. IP Decoder near the DVR turns it back to Analog to go back into the DVR. Any of the three technologies can be made better later, by different companies, and you can upgrade without dumping the entire package.

The initial per-channel cost goes up, yes. I think future flexibility is worth it, but do the customers?

 

Yeah but everything gets outdated sooner or later, analogue, IP, network, TVs .. doesnt matter how high tech or easy something may seem at the time, it will surely be outdated in the not to soon future, and something new will take its place. Thats just the way the cookie crumbles.

 

Just do your best at the time with what you have available and what the client needs. Most importantly, be happy with what you do.

[GV.Jackie 0]

If your DVR is old, go get a new one without worrying about whether your IP Cameras work with it.

 

I think you stilll think about the compatibility between your new DVR and existed IP encoder. It's highlt possible that they are not compatible.

[Mark Eggett 0]

An interesting point G-Mac, however each time you convert from analogue to IP or vice versa you are degrading the quality of the image slightly - the same can be said for modern CCD "Traditional" cameras being sent over Coax to DVR's!

 

Also, IP Cameras tend to have a lot of technology on-board which reduces the strain on the DVR/NVR/Server and allowing more devices to be connected to a single recording "Device".

[G-Mac 0]

 

I think you stilll think about the compatibility between your new DVR and existed IP encoder. It's highlt possible that they are not compatible.

 

I agree - however if you use a IP decoder to dump back to analog before it goes to the DVR, then the new DVR simply needs to take analog.

 

So, the comment above is also true: Things just get outdated. That's the point - you can set a system up so that the entire system doesn't get outdated at one time. Only pieces of it do, and you can upgrade different components as costs and other considerations allow/require.

 

This is partly philosophical, of course. Are you the kind of person who buys a combo Microwave/Toaster/Coffee Maker, or do you buy three different devices? There are strong arguments for both ways.