Exacq vs Avigilon

As far as you know - does Exacq manufacture their own cameras or are they OEM?

Reactions:

John Honovich

In reply to Itamar Kerbel

IPVM

As far as we know, at least some of the lower end Exacq / Tyco / AD Illustra cameras are from Dahua.

Reactions:

(3)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #3

•Jul 11, 2015

In reply to John Honovich

Illustra PRO cameras (the new 3 and 5Mpx cameras, fisheye and PTZ cameras) are developed and produced by Tyco factories (most of them in DSC in Canada).

Reactions:

(1)

Donatas Fankinas

Very interesting and good article! thank you, John.

I am deep in using Avigilon (more than 20 servers and more than 250 cameras(most of them are analog and third party) in large teritory). several years ago I found this VMS. It was great discovery after using different DVRs with dificult and complicated management.

It all is true, what Avigilon VMS is polished and easier to use (as example very simple and comfortable record time line), great online support (often I'm not in time to install new online update with fixed issue. One update for all sites and hardware), tightly controlled channel structure, not strong hardware appliance (exactly 4 ch encoders are not strong side, but not cameras (cameras are strong product, but fairly expensive)).

What about third party cameras and DVRs, I discovered to conect to them through web page in Avigilon ACC view.

Questions:

1. It is interesting to compare Avigilon patented HDSM (network load between cameras, server and client sides), load of hardware (servers with conected more than 10, 20 cameras and client machines (processors, RAM, graphic, HDD and etc.)) with other brands. I am not sure, but I guess, what Avigilon is leader in this side.

2. Specially for me, it would be very interesting to read Avigilon vs Bosch article :).

Reactions:

John Honovich

In reply to Donatas Fankinas

IPVM

Donatas,

Relevant to HDSM and remote monitoring, see: VMS Remote Monitoring Tested. Exacq supports multistreaming and transcoding which works quite well.

As for Avigilon, it depends on the version of HDSM. V1 is JPEG2000 and now is basically dead. V2 is multistreaming, similar to Exacq and many others. V3 is for HD Pro cameras only.

Reactions:

(3)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

In reply to John Honovich

Can you cite any sources on HDSM V3? Avigilon's website indicates the following:

High Definition Stream Management 2.0

Until now, HDSM was most effective with the JPEG2000 compression standard. This was primarily due to the dynamic adaptability of the JPEG2000 compression standard with high-resolution imaging. While JPEG2000 provides coding flexibility and high imaging performance, it also produces higher average bitrate streams and less overall compression than H.264, and is not a widely used standard within the video security surveillance industry.

As a result, HDSM 2.0 was developed to operate with the H.264 compression standard, simultaneously providing users with high-resolution imaging performance, further bitrate reduction of H.264 and the intelligence and flexibility of HDSM. This technology pairing provides a unique and superior network performance over systems solely utilizing H.264 compression."

Reactions:

John Honovich

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

IPVM

What Avigilon refers to as 'HDSM 2.0' is their 3rd implementation of HDSM. HDSM '1.0' is either (1) JPEG2000 or (2) multi-streaming, depending on the camera.

Reactions:

(1)

Michael Miller

In reply to John Honovich

Relevant to HDSM and remote monitoring, see: VMS Remote Monitoring Tested. Exacq supports multistreaming and transcoding which works quite well.

To be clear Avigilon also supports transcoding.

As for Avigilon, it depends on the version of HDSM. V1 is JPEG2000 and now is basically dead. V2 is multistreaming, similar to Exacq and many others. V3 is for HD Pro cameras only.

The big difference between Exacq and Avigilon when it comes to multi streaming is Avigilon is completely automatic unlike Exacq (from what I remember) is manually configured for each camera. This makes Avigilon easier to deploy and use but Exacq has more control of the streams.

Reactions:

(2)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

"Both are mid-market brands, with strong products. Neither are great for super low end, super cost sensitive applications and neither are as sophisticated in the high end as Axis or Genetec."

Can you offer some more clarification on what some of the key feature distinctions are between the mid-market options discussed here and the high-end options? What do the high-end options offer that I wouldn't get with Exacq or Avigilon?

Reactions:

Undisclosed #2

In reply to Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

IPVMU Certified

Mid-market sounds a lot like Tier 2.

Reactions:

(3)

Undisclosed #2

In reply to Undisclosed #2

IPVMU Certified

Just to clarify, I wasn't saying that Avigilon or Exacq was Tier 2, or any Tier in particular for that matter.

Instead I was pointing out that the segmenting term 'mid-market' seemed similar to the "Tier 2" of the unpublished Tier system from the other thread.

Reactions:

Undisclosed Manufacturer #1

This remains to be an unsubstantiated claim if we're going to use the criteria outlined in the link provided as High-end/Tier 1:

Longer answer: being 'tier 1', i.e., in your description, 1,000+ cameras, typically requires supporting the following features:

Enterprise management
Health management
Deep third-party system integration (access, intrusion)
Rules for triggering actions / responses
Alarm / event management
Network video wall
Server / recorder redundancy or failover
Video analytics and LPR integration
Edge storage support
Well documented API / SDK
Sophistication / completeness of each of the above
Actual track record of in-production large scale systems to verify that this all really works"

My understanding of both Exacq and Avigilon is that they are fully capable of all the items John has identified as Tier 1, so my question remains, what's the difference? Maybe it's having an IP Horn that puts companies like Axis in High-end.

Reactions:

(1)

John Honovich