[OpenSIPS-Users] Freeswitch vs Asterisk

[Erik Dekkers]

The reason people are yelling on the internet "Freeswitch is much better than asterisk" is pure frustration. 
They have used asterisk for years, were faced with crashes and since they are using freeswitch they don't see those crashes anymore (apart from the reason of those crashes).
No wonder they tell everyone freeswitch is better than asterisk. From their point of view asterisk is bad.

It's not Mr. Collins opinion that asterisk is worse than freeswitch. It are the ex-asterisk people who are saying that, think about that.

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: users-bounces at lists.opensips.org [mailto:users-bounces at lists.opensips.org] Namens paul.gore.j at gmail.com
Verzonden: donderdag 9 december 2010 16:27
Aan: OpenSIPS users mailling list
Onderwerp: Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Freeswitch vs Asterisk

I just want to reply to mr Collins with FS: your post looks very much like advertisement, and I have seen that "fs is so much better than *" all over internet from people connected to fs. That is unethical to say the least. 
In fact we have exprerienced fs crashes with core dump at least  once in 6 months and we process just under 40K calls/month. 
As to "nat tools" which you mentioned they just do not work. In fact usually * box works much better for natted users.
As to xml curl interface - we do use it, and it's a pathetic way to feed a dialplan to a switch, since it's inefficient resource wise, but there was no other way available for real time solution where's * supports real time db out of the box. 
Trust me we do have development experience with both * socket interface and fs one, and in my opinion * solution is far better and has far less bugs.

-----Original Message-----
From: James Mbuthia
Sent:  12/08/2010 5:55:42 PM
Subject:  Re: [OpenSIPS-Users] Freeswitch vs Asterisk