Member Discussion

I Canceled My IPVM Membership - Disruptive Players In This Space, Like Verkada, Are A Threat To IPVM's Members

not the resource that I thought I signed up for. I'm not so sure that this site is as "independent and objective" as they say, or even set out to be. It seems clear to me that the disruptive players in this space, are a threat to the distributors, integrators, and reviewers of traditional and legacy surveillance solutions. Who, by-in-large must comprise most of its membership. I run a full-service IT shop, where surveillance video is just a fraction of what we do. So I'm really just a 'drive-by' participant on these solutions. And perhaps not a great member... Additionally, contributors to this site i.e. John Honovich - Are not of the professional quality that one would expect for a paywalled site. I can get similar "analysis" from a reddit forum.

NOTICE: This comment was moved from an existing discussion: Verkada Salesman Falsely Alleges Competitor Bankruptcy


Allen, thanks for the feedback.

I wanted to address your accusation that we are unfair to Verkada because they are a 'threat' to most of IPVM's membership.

To give you some context, lots of people are mad at IPVM, for various reasons. Last year, a member infamously canceled his membership when we criticized Axis - Axis Brags About "Whiskey Tasting" With Independent Consultants. See: I Do Not Appreciate The Inference That Axis Is Buying Spec, And I Have Demonstrated That By Canceling My Subscription. In 2020, there is no more 'traditional' nor incumbent company than Axis.

Additionally, contributors to this site i.e. John Honovich - Are not of the professional quality that one would expect for a paywalled site.

More broadly, we have been criticizing companies, new and old, since I founded the company in 2008. Not everybody likes it or agrees with it, we aim to be fair, we aim to allow diverse viewpoints, including your own.

As for Verkada, I actually like that they are pushing for cloud management, I think there are many benefits to that - improved cybersecurity (generally), reduce remote access complexity, options for remote storage, etc.

There are 2 really fundamental things I dislike about Verkada:

1. The culture - Verkada's (sales team, at least) has a frat boy culture where their people are not merely aggressive, they are deceptive. We can agree to disagree on this. But we've been following them closely and have seen and heard this over and over again. IPVM has fought against deceptive claims from our beginning, e.g., Avigilon Dirty Tricks, Lying At Arecont Vision.

2. Lock-in - For you, as an end-user, Verkada poses a big risk to you or your successors that need to deal with a system that locks customers in. That's not 'good' disruption. It makes customers heavily dependent and constrained by what Verkada chooses (or not) to do. We discussed this more, here - The IP Camera Lock-In Trend: Meraki and Verkada.

Thanks again for your feedback and if we can ever help, let us know.

I guess we will see if Verkada decides to remove features or services and yet charge the same. What recourse is there.

They already raised prices once last year.

I do think, in general, they will be adding many more models and features as it is certainly in their interest to do so and is the normal path for early stage tech companies. The bigger challenge comes 5 to 10 years down the line, who they eventually sell to, etc.

Thanks John for your response. It IS appreciated, and understood. As I begin to understand more about you, this site, and the mission - I confess to misspeaking about some of my talking points (not being objective, and nexgen solutions being a threat to this market). Should have kept those opinions to myself...

I thought I would just go away... But - As you extracted a message from my original post and created a new one (and as I begin to receive other responses); I feel it necessary to remind you and everyone of my sole intent of my original post - which escalated to me canceling my membership - and became a Verakada vs. everyone narrative...

I simply took issue with calling out personally the Verkada rep to the level that you did. Sure! Beat Verkada up on this matter! But that kid was likely just parroting and maybe even required, to deliver talking points provided by a supervisor, on his sales calls.

It - in my mind - cheapened the site. This is a pay-for site. I just expected a little more professionalism on the content.

Which brings me to my final mea culpa. I take full responsibility for misreading and bringing my expectations of what I felt the site should be... It is not my site, I did not start it. I am not a long time member (under 2 years). My participation and access of the content was very minimal. However, a very valuable resource as we went through (and actually - still are) a process of refreshing our surveillance video technology. So my comments were made from a snippet of time on the site. Yet appeared from a position of a long time member.

JH please stop saying"WE"

It's "You"

As the founder, I do set the culture for the organization and that culture is to criticize companies, whether its American or Chinese, incumbent or new entrant, that we believe are being unethical or deceptive. The story that led to this - Verkada Salesman Falsely Alleges Competitor Bankruptcy is a perfect example of that.

Yeah.... I don't get this, at all. I see equal opportunity bashing for a plethora of different reasons, and it is very, very, obvious. So obvious that I infer simple hurt feelings, or ulterior motives of some sort. I have yet to see a manufacturer or even a single product escape with no criticism at all.

The Simon Cowell/Gordon Ramsay style of feedback is not for everyone, but John H. is not quite at their level, nor does a criticism of not being professional fit merely because the feedback is blunt/harsh/etc. If you need some fluff reviews look elsewhere.

I don't need need fluff pieces. Loved the content - Just trying to be Captain Justice :)

Allen, before you go. How long have you had your IPVM subscription?

signed up in May 2018, renewed May 2019 - membership still good to 5/2020

:)

People who "announce" cancellations like this (not just of IPVM subscriptions) are usually doing it to try and call attention to themselves moreso than the issue itself. You get attention sure, but it winds up being in the same manner a petulant child gets attention.

Regardless of intent, I respect people publicly complaining. It is an important means to call attention to issues and seek to address grievances.

And I can see why someone who does not know much about IPVM would conclude that IPVM is out to get a single company they follow vs that IPVM criticizes broadly.

I actually agree with you Mr. Undisclosed.

But I REALLY got attention, when John Honovich extracted a message within a thread of another one, and started this new one. A bit out of context...

If you don't like what you hear, than shoot the messenger. Those of us in the industry remember fight for open systems. Some didn't want it at first, weren't fans of ONVIF. It was finally accepted and most agree it was a good thing. Now you have Verkada, Meraki, etc trying to go back the old way. Even Avigilon finally got with the program. Verkada uses, at least was, Hisilcon chips. Verkada had an outage. That is news not necessarily bashing.

Do I agree with everything one here, NO, but I have won several projects because of information I read on here. I am open to hearing another side of the story and I am intelligent, some might say barely, enough to make a decision based on facts and trusted opinions from other industry veterans.

These public flounces are rarely a good look. In this case, def not. There seems to be some serious fanboi-ism and brand loyalties at play that drives some of these flare ups. I have preferred brands but I don't expect them to be perfect. They're going to have some drawbacks screwups too. Let's call it like it is, not like we want it to be.

Verkada interested me a short while ago but recent facts have shut that door. I will point out that a 'closed' system isn't inherently bad. I've been using Meraki for several years and it's my highly preferred go-to. I've gotten pushback from clients going 'all in' on Meraki so I've adjusted my platform: Meraki routers, open LAN, Ruckus WiFi, Axis cams. That's pretty damn 'open.' Meraki has already been through the start up and acquisition phase landing at Cisco but maintianing their botique offering. Maybe Verkada will do the same or go full Uber. The point is, if your platform is solid 'on the cloud' it's a good thing. I can't remember a single instance of Meraki's dashboard ever going down since I started with them in 2013.

In the mean time, I come here for technical data and objectivity. I will be requesting my employer sign up on a corporate plan with IPVM to replace members lost over trite polical tempests.

No, JH did not encourage or pay me to say it. I would cancel if he did.

If Allen Hammond believes there is a threat to IPVM's members, how does canceling his membership counteract that threat? Wouldn't it be better that he air his grievances, but stick around until his membership expires to see if his contribution does anything?

If others have that kind of feeling, I would encourage them to at least stick around and engage in follow-up discussion; maybe they'll change their minds.

Agreed - my membership is good to May. I'll do my best...

But my job is 97% non-related to IPVM matters. I'm just not the right member.

It's a garbage hit piece post, I hate and fear Verkada just like most people here but let's not put too much into John's denials and redirects, it was juvenile and petty. I don't mind it against Verkada but I can see exactly how Allen got to where he did here AND my disdain for that company doesn't cloud my ability to call the post what it is.

Vile and petty would be saying 'I can get similar 'analysis' from a Reddit forum.' This coming from somebody who's biz is less than 5% IPVM related. Analysis being in quotes just for extra negative emphasis.

Show me the Reddit forum of comparative value to IPVM. Or, just like the neg superlatives, it's all hot air. Criticism, as with anything else of value, should stand on it's own merits without needing embellishment or hyperbole.

He clearly stated what he could get from Reddit - the pettiness. The information about the drinking game etc. that was meant to poke fun and/or discredit the kid.

But, continue on making broad generalizations and shaping your "point" out of thin air, by all means

The information about the drinking game etc. that was meant to poke fun and/or discredit the kid.

He's not a 'kid', he's an adult who works at a prominent corporation in our industry.

And the information was not about 'the drinking game' it was about his employment at a company who sold dice for drinking games.

Jason, you understand the difference?

I do, I also understand that delving into the minutia and splitting hairs doesn't make it less petty.

Jason, you falsely characterized him as a 'kid' and that it was information about 'drinking games' rather than his business. As long as we are clear on that, I am good.

And use IPVM as the standard for proper criticism. There is never embellishment or hyperbole.

This is actually kind of absurd:

The information about the drinking game etc. that was meant to poke fun and/or discredit the kid.

If I have somebody selling me on a sophisticated platform such as cloud based security I will absolutely be interested in their CV and/or related industry experience. This isn't pettiness, this is objectivity and quite simply, vetting. Imagine me being sold on the platform and going back to my owner to sell it, only to have him ask to set up a meeting with said 'kid.'

Asserting the JH is 'petty' just like Reddit is ridiculous. Giving this point oxygen will turn this place into Reddit which benefits none of us. But it opens up a related point.

As a long time participant in open and closed forums, many in my own profession, managing a forum to keep it productive and informative is a lot of work. Many news sites from back in the day shut theirs because they become unmanaged cesspools and free for alls. So a hat tip to JH for doing the work and not letting it turn into Reddit.

I'll be issuing challenges on his opinions of Meraki in another thread, one that is fresh and not a year old.

I work for a manufacturer that has a group account, I'm not sure how many of us have access but I would guess ≥15, plus I interact with employees at other manufactures that have access and have heard the occasional comment where people refer to IPVM as the tabloid of the security industry. That does not appear to be the prevailing thought among my colleagues (I don't view it that way) but those people probably feel similar to what Mr. Hammond expressed above.

have heard the occasional comment where people refer to IPVM as the tabloid of the security industry.

I believe that. I think part of that is because IPVM is critical and virtually all manufacturers in this industry literally have no experience of public criticism outside of IPVM (recall, e.g., back in 2017 when Hikvision repeatedly said IPVM was the single source of negative Hikvision coverage). Also, a lot of those same manufacturers are quite happy when IPVM criticizes their competitors.

As a hobbyist and occasional installer, I value IPVM for the technical data it develops and the ability to pick the brains of folks more well versed in this industry than I.

I agree, however, that John vacillates on professionalism more than I would have expected for a site of this caliber. While it's generally agreed that he is simply being vehement about putting the industry's feet to the fire when called for, the language and tone used sometimes leaves a bit (and in some cases, much) to be desired. There's a fine line between honest investigative journalism and malevolent bullying.

However as John has again brought to our attention in this thread, it is his site to run as he sees fit, and we are free not to participate. I honestly believe though if he were to afford these criticisms a bit more weight and ratchet down the rhetoric, the site would be no worse off and improve in industry perception. The technical tests and reviews are, hands down, the best I've seen, and deliver content worth paying for. Making front-page posts targeting individual salespersons and having verbal fistfights in the discussion threads? Unbecoming.

For me the technical side is a pro that outweighs the rest so I continue to participate here. Your mileage may vary.

I agree, however, that John vacillates on professionalism more than I would have expected for a site of this caliber. While it's generally agreed that he is simply being vehement about putting the industry's feet to the fire when called for, the language and tone used sometimes leaves a bit (and in some cases, much) to be desired. There's a fine line between honest investigative journalism and malevolent bullying.

This is exactly where I am, and I have made similar posts in the past about this exact thing. The best way that it can be described is "clickbait", or to use a sports term, "shock jock." Not everything is that way by any means, but there are things that are framed in misleading or dishonest ways that demonstrates, as UI#8 says, a lack of professionalism.

I also take significant issue with any "employee" being called out by name for pretty much anything. Leaders, executives, etc are all completely fair game for things that they say, but a rank-and-file employee shouldn't be called out like that regardless of what they said or did. John wants Wyze to stop blaming their employee for something, but he's certainly willing to put another employee on blast when it supports his agenda.

Definition of vacillate

1 : to waver in mind, will, or feeling : hesitate in choice of opinions or courses

2a : to sway through lack of equilibrium

Ponder that definition a bit and you'll see it was the wrong word. Even ignoring that and assuming you just want more "niceness", I see this sentiment as misplaced in any technical field of any kind.

Well I have seen John respond diplomatically, and sometimes respond (in my opinion) petulantly, in which the latter the other party actually asked if he "got up on the wrong side of the bed". I think my use of the term was appropriate, but I appreciate the English lesson anyways.

ratchet down the rhetoric, the site would be no worse off and improve in industry perception

I agree with you that overall industry perception would improve. It's not clear how to get that to improve without sacrificing our mission to call out unethical behavior.

A lot of the negative perception is simply because we criticize powerful organizatons. The only way we end that is to remove the criticisms entirely, which would neuter IPVM. We might make more money, we certainly have more 'friends' among people in Chelmsford, San Mateo and 杭州, but it would undermine the broader purpose that IPVM has to call out and push back against unethical behavior.

Making front-page posts targeting individual salespersons and having verbal fistfights in the discussion threads?

The salesperson told an end user that his VMS provider was facing bankruptcy to try to deceive him into buying his product. You can characterize it as 'targeting individual salesperson' but I see it as a public notice and reinforcement for companies to not engage in such behavior.

People can characterize such interactions differently but I don't see this as a 'verbal fistfight', Allen and I respectfully disagree on some things and I feel we have both fairly calmly explained our positions.

#8, overall, I think your points are fair. There is always going to be some reasonable level of differences in what tone and style to take on tackling issues.

A lot of the negative perception is simply because we say criticize powerful organizatons. The only way we end that is to remove the criticisms entirely, which would neuter IPVM. We might make more money, we certainly have more 'friends' among people in Chelmsford, San Mateo and 杭州, but it would undermine the broader purpose that IPVM has to call out and push back against unethical behavior.

This is untrue and a blatant cop-out.

There are ways to criticize powerful organizations without "punching down" and making exaggerated statements. The post you made about the Verkada salesperson could have been made just as well and arguably better WITHOUT the personal information. Information about what various manufacturers or integrators or whoever can be made WITHOUT misleading and grandiose headlines. There are very straightforward and basic journalistic practices that can be implemented that would still allow criticism by way of presenting facts WITHOUT the unnecessary exaggerations and over-valuing of opinions. I would argue that such a thing would not only increase your membership (and at the very least stop the attrition), but would encourage more interaction from members as well.

This is untrue and a blatant cop-out.

Do you notice the irony that you are a person who is calling for less exaggeration and misleading statements but you start your response with that? I've engaged calmly and thoughtfully with everyone on this thread. Perhaps you can extend that same courtesy in your remarks.

better WITHOUT the personal information

I recognize your concern about not naming the employee but let's be clear, this is not personal information, all the information reported was work information. I know nothing about Verkada's salesman as a person - he could be a great or terrible person with his friends, family, neighbors, that's not germane.

There are very straightforward and basic journalistic practices that can be implemented that would still allow criticism by way of presenting facts WITHOUT the unnecessary exaggerations and over-valuing of opinions

I don't see any journalistic principles that would go against reporting the name of the Verkada employee that made these false work statements, which have been acknowledged by the company. If there are certain journalistic principles you feel we should better consider or specific examples of what we should or should not present, I am happy to consider and respond. Thanks.

I view your reply as attempting to hide behind the fact that you "criticize powerful organizatons" as a total cop-out. That's not an exaggeration my part -- I find it disingenuous at best and blatantly dishonest at worst. It's also completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, as I demonstrated later in my prior post -- you can criticize powerful organizations in a non-insulting, non-clickbait, non-shock jock way. I encourage criticism of any manufacturer/integrator/whoever, if that criticism is presented in a fair, unbiased, and objective manner. Using sensationalist headlines and making outlandish statements is none of those things.

Regarding the fact that employee information is not "personal", that is also a complete cop-out and highly disingenuous. You are connecting an "offline" conversation that was had in a direct manner with someone with an "online" presence. Doing that with an executive or leadership member of a company is a totally different story than doing it with a rank-and-file employee. It's similar to the concept of how public figures have a very high standard for libel/slander protection, while private citizens have a very standard and a high level of protection. This guy very well could have his future career prospects harmed by a mistake he made that you're now broadcasting to an extremely large audience. I don't view such indictments of lower-level employees to be your place, and I think it's a drastic and dramatic overstepping of bounds. A perfect example is that if you see this type of "secret shopper" thing on any television news report, the name and likeness of the person is almost always blurred out. You took the extra step to insert information about this person, and as I said before, it adds NOTHING to the story. It's completely irrelevant and immaterial, but you took the extra steps to add it.

Regarding journalistic principles, I'd start here. Specifically, take note of the harm limitation principle bullets 1 and 3. Also, this would be a good start as well.

Using sensationalist headlines and making outlandish statements

Can you please be specific? For example, in the article we are discussing, the title is Verkada Salesman Falsely Alleges Competitor Bankruptcy. How would you change? What would you recommend?

Regarding the fact that employee information is not "personal", that is also a complete cop-out and highly disingenuous

I am genuinely responding to your stated concern because in your previous comment you emphasized the 'personal' aspect:

WITHOUT the personal information

I think now we agree that the information was work-related. We disagree on whether or not disclosing the employee's name was appropriate.

I'd start here. Specifically, take note of the harm limitation principle bullets 1 and 3.

I'm copying 1 and 3 for others to see below:

Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.

Recognise that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.

This person is neither a victim nor a 'child'. He's an adult working at a technology company. He chose to make such claims to a large end-user about the state of the industry in the pursuit of his own gain.

That being said, one thing I did on purpose was to not put his name in the free / public section to avoid people being able to search or find this randomly in the future when he, like virtually all Verkada salespeople, move on to other industries.

Btw, for a person who criticizes using exaggerated statements, you like to unload yourself. The following is all from the comment I am responding to:

total cop-out... blatantly dishonest... completely irrelevant... insulting... clickbait... shockjock... outlandish statements... complete cop-out... highly disingenuous...

I agree.

Regarding "Journalism ethics and standards", a Wikipedia article you cite to located at: Journalism ethics and standards - Wikipedia

I'd just like to share a story which was a very valuable lesson to me early in my career. I am an attorney and I was pursuing a con-artist on behalf of a creditor who came into Pasadena, California, in the 1980s and mesmerized the community, including my client. I developed a rapport with a reporter, a Stanford graduate and a member of a prominent family in Pasadena, and gave him the inside track of how this man bamboozled people and institutions out of millions of dollars for his development projects. He took their money and squirreled it away in off shore banks and capitalized on their beliefs that he was a very rich developer (sound familiar??). I fed reporter the story, under the supposed protection of "off the record", as well as facts and leads that made a smashing career for him as an investigative reporter; his byline appeared several times on the front page with breaking stories repeatedly beating the Los Angeles Times. We joked that he could be a candidate for a Pulitzer Prize, he was an excellent writer and the stories very engaging.

What I learned is that there is no such thing as "off the record". I specifically told the reporter about what occurred in a pre-hearing judicial conference in chambers and told the reporter he could not publish what I revealed until the matter came for open hearing since the judge and counsel would then know I was the source of the story. There was no breach of confidentiality on my part, but it was an inside scoop. He, and more importantly, his editors, decided it was more important to publish the story and breach my "off the record" promise and condition. I confronted him after the story was published and he profusely apologized and his excuse was that his editors and publisher had considered it very carefully and felt it more important to jeopardize revealing my anonymity just to get the story out a few days ahead of time.

Lesson learned: 1) journalism ethics are expedient, and 2) there is no such thing as "off the record." I therefore question a reference to a presumed industry code of ethics when I experienced first hand how what I mistakenly believed was a seminal tenant, e.g. "off the record" and protecting a source, was compromised when beating the other newspapers to a story was at stake.

Attorneys are subject to discipline, fines, and disbarment, when they breach promulgated ethics by their state's bar. I am unaware of any similar enforcement mechanism for journalists, so while the journalist may devotedly point to written standards, I am unaware of any enforcement mechanism that puts teeth behind the guidelines, it's pretty much voluntary with no consequences.

I am unaware of any enforcement mechanism that puts teeth behind the guidelines, it's pretty much voluntary...

ethics are not laws. they are about how to behave, regardless of law.

ethics are not laws. they are about how to behave, regardless of law.

Ethical standards of professional organizations are enforceable regardless of law, and frequently have the backing of the force of law (i.e. the practice of medicine, or law). You can lose a professional license without having broken any criminal law.

I agree with you that overall industry perception would improve. It's not clear how to get that to improve without sacrificing our mission to call out unethical behavior.

I feel it's less about calling out the unethical behavior than sometimes the manner in which it's done. Choice of language, tone, etc. It's not the content that I find less than optimal, it's just the delivery.

The salesperson told an end user that his VMS provider was facing bankruptcy to try to deceive him into buying his product. You can characterize it as 'targeting individual salesperson' but I see it as a public notice and reinforcement for companies to not engage in such behavior.

If that were truly the case, why not make it a point of stating this was the company's behavior rather than this individual salesperson? Individuals within an organization frequently do things that aren't in the company's interest or are against their policies, but dealing with the fallout from that should be an internal matter between the company and the individual. I don't feel that the public naming and shaming is necessary to make the story newsworthy.

#8, overall, I think your points are fair. There is always going to be some reasonable level of differences in what tone and style to take on tackling issues.

And that's fair enough. As I like to say my opinion is worth precisely what you paid for it. Overall I really like this site, even as just a hobbyist and casual installer.

Individuals within an organization frequently do things that aren't in the company's interest or are against their policies, but dealing with the fallout from that should be an internal matter between the company and the individual.

I think that's fair if the individual said something internally only. If the salesperson was sitting in Verkada's office talking to another Verkada salesperson, "Hey company X is bankrupt | financial difficulties | etc." it's clearly an internal matter. But the salesperson told an end user on a sales call which is an external interaction.

Choice of language, tone, etc

This came up earlier, not sure what language, tone people want changed. Going back to the article - Verkada Salesman Falsely Alleges Competitor Bankruptcy still not sure what language people want changed? I do recognize that a few people claimed the reporting of the salesman was 'personal' but I think I fairly well established that everything reported was based only on their business activities, even if those activities involved selling dice for drinking games.

I guess we'll agree to disagree on point 1.

The tone, etc referred to some other posts I've read where you seemed a bit less than cordial. I can't recall offhand which thread it was, but I will concede you generally are not like that. ;)

There is nothing like IPVM out there. The industry is rampant with deception and IPVM has been invaluable in deterring this. Along with a good calc, great courses, and the best tests, there is most often solid objective reporting. However, the graphics and headlines can sometimes seem sensational and tabloid-like and there are sometimes opinion pieces disguised as news. That's what keeps things provocative which is essential for any media company.

occasional comment where people refer to IPVM as the tabloid of the security industry.

I guess it depends when one happens to look, both past and present. Which thread/topic. Some are worse than others.

I think I've cancelled and re-upped a few times over the last six years or so. (Has it been that long?) I can say as some one who previously felt the same as the original poster, IPVM has got a lot better as it's grown.

I personally feel that IPVM used to be pretty TMZ like. I used to just sign up for a quarter, or what ever the least amount was (I swear I used to be able to do some payment other than yearly, but that's irrelevant) and cancel once I felt I learned everything I could.

As the staff, and other paying folks number has grown, I feel it's less that way. I don't know John personally, but I think that's just how he is. Or maybe that's just the nature of text based stuff.

John certainly has the knowledge, I would never dispute that, but he can come on a little strong sometimes too. In the hay day of Avigilon it was hard for me to stay a member here. Not that I loved Avigilon or anything, but the constant attacks were unbearable for me, a technician.

As others have said there isn't anything else like IPVM. So it's easy to see it as an extreme, when every other source is just all "Yay, <insert company> is great and makes the best products ever!" It's easy to see IPVM as an extreme the other way because there isn't really an in between. It's IPVM, or paid advertisement disguised as white papers and reviews.

Right now the only thing that would cause me to cancel would be cost. It's not much, but I pay for this myself and sometimes budget is tight. Gaining credit from comments has been huge for me, and caused me to maybe comment a little more often, which is good.

I personally get more out of just having a place to talk to other like minded people than anything else. The discussions from other members alone is enough to make this site worth it. Of course the reviews and articles are amazing, but still.

who previously felt the same as the original poster, IPVM has got a lot better as it's grown.

I agree with you. Part is gaining experience. You publish a lot of things, you get a lot of feedback from various people and you try to figure out the best approach to minimize the inflammation while maximizing the impact.

Part is IPVM is bigger. We now have a half dozen people who work on tests on an ongoing basis so even if 'John' is criticizing Axis or Verkada or Hikvision, there's many more people working on core testing.

And I do see the two parts of IPVM related. 'John' criticizing people without research and testing is just hot air. The fact that we have real information on how things work now with the newest technology makes our criticism and analysis much fairer and accurate.

Thanks again for the feedback, Daniel!

Anyone unhappy with blunt criticism and exposure of deceptive marketing/sales practices in this industry should consider the other industries where that sort of thing is common (auto sales, for example), and the general customer distrust because of it. Anything that works to keep industry players more honest is positive for everyone in the industry.

And I would say that naming names is part of the deal, regardless of level within a company.

I hereby cancel my subscription to this thread and here is my screenshot showing so

#MeToo

Is that the new vision test chart?

If you put aside whether or not you agree with IPVMs opinion on emerging vendors, I challenge the original poster to find a site covering this industry which has as much original content and hands on testing.

IPVM is not solely a technical resource for me. Acquiring knowledge as to the sort of tactics being employed by my potential competitors is valuable as well. Even more valuable is knowing the sort of person employed to wield said tactics. I'm sure Sun Tzu said something similar in the art of war. Proceed at will IPVM, I can decide the value myself.

Acquiring knowledge as to the sort of tactics being employed by my potential competitors is valuable as well

Thanks, David. We see that in terms of readership as well, there are a lot of people interested in reading 'inside baseball' type of reporting.

I'm sure Sun Tzu said something similar in the art of war.

Or in the modern day adaptation The Art of VAR :)

I hope that most read what IPVM has to offer and then continues to research. Personally I enjoy the back and forth from the membership (and John H) because it opens up other tidbits of information I was unaware of and quite possibly would have missed.

John, I think you guys do a great job. You don't allow your self or IPVM, to get bullied into staying mainstream. I have yet to find another resource that provides the testing, news, etc. that IPVM provides. And to be honest, sometimes I like you and sometimes I don't... but here I am.

I’m tempted to post a Bye Felicia meme, but that meme is almost as old as these arguments. Give me one source better than IPVM for our industry. I will be waiting.

I don’t always agree with every single article, but I always respect the effort they put into their work. The independent aspect of the reviews is unparalleled. Sure they have their favorites and disliked brands, but it’s usually for reasons I can understand, even if my stance is different. It’s ok to not agree 100%.

In today’s cancel culture, I swear people just need to have such a hard line on every single subject. Nuance is dead. (See even I have this flaw). Tribalism is alive and well. Ride or die. It’s absurd.

Thanks to John and his crew for the amazing work they do. I wouldn’t be where I am today without this space, it’s content, and the many great members who contribute here.

I admit, I’m ride or die with IPVM!! ✌🏻

Wow JD, So if IPVM opened up a youtube like superchat where other's can donate a monetary value to posts like/hated in this thread you would already have this month's subscription rent paid. Perhaps IPVM could take 25% of each superchat for hosting that service.

IPVM, hook us up so the subscribers and UDers can donate to on reports, posts, trolls and wish lists, just cap it so it is not so serious, nothing over 2 bucks?

...you would already have this month's subscription rent paid.

based on the big board, i'm pretty sure JD's subscription has already been extended gratuitously well into the next decade :)

Definitely! Best of Luck!

I believe I have (gladly) paid for a one year subscription twice, starting in 2012. I believe everyone has a chance at contributing and receiving credit. We all get the opportunity to complete polls and other questionnaires. My current sub expires in Dec 2024, so I guess I’ve banked enough credits. I appreciate the opportunity to earn sub credits, but at $199/yr I would surely pay if needed.

If anything, this just speaks even more to the reasons to trust John and his crew. Not only do they NOT take ad money or industry bribes, they offer free access to people who contribute.

Whether or not my “contributions” rise to your standard of worthwhile is another question entirely. 🤣

My current sub expires in Dec 2024

Class of '28 here :)

We will remember you fondly.

:)

I follow IPVM and have been a member for several years. I see no signs of deception. I know they don't back down from a good fight if they believe they are in the right. It is actually refreshing to see someone stand their ground. I have said this before, but as a consulting engineer, I find this forum to be very useful, because I can see perspectives both, pro and con, from people I respect in the industry, namely the integrators and the folks on the front lines. I relate these perspectives to my clients. I have convinced several clients from using Hikvision based on what I have learned in this forum.

Like Mike the Lemonade guys says... "in a world gone soft, somebody has to be hard"...

Thank you all for your perspectives, keep it real John H!

Tim

I have only been a member for 1 day. It’s like being in a kindergarten lets get professional.

#12, thanks for your first comment. IPVM is what you choose to spend time on. We have 800+ tests, we have the Calculator design tool, we have 300+ statistics reports, ~200 tutorials, etc.

But we also have these debate / argument discussions and posts, some people love them, others avoid them.

Anything we can do to help you get started?

you've been on 1 day and somehow find a 4 month old string to comment on?

13 you found me, maybe they should be deleted after a month old news then. Is there a lot of old news on here.

I found you because you commented on a thread - which shows up in the Comments column on the right hand side of the main page. i.e. any new comments on any thread are moved to the top of that list:

IPVM Image

the Discussions forum threads live forever - but unless you actively search for key words, running across older Discussion strings isn't generally something I ever run across.

Maybe - as a new subscriber - you searched for 'cancel IPVM membership'.... just in case you ever would want to. Which makes sense to me as something that anyone might do.

and this is how I assume you found this thread.

...running across older Discussion strings isn't generally something I ever run across.

stranger things have happened :)

Actually I was skimming through all discussions. No need to cancel still got a year to go lol

I assumed incorrectly then... happens on occasion. ; )

welcome to IPVM!

and FTR: I don't think that this thread should be construed as the norm for most Discussion threads - though the threads do sometimes blow up with alternative viewpoints from the legion of subscribers John and team have built up.

in my opinion, there is great value in Discussion threads as they offer viewpoints from all levels of industry players...

Get a grip man, back to the kindergarten

IPVM, it been a year with you, and you have helped me grow to manage two WAN with hundreds upon hundreds of devices, and I feel the information you have provided me with far exceeds anything I have gotten through Reddit. You have Milestone representatives willing to tackle hard questions as well as veteran security integrators that have really pulled me out of pickles. What I paid for has far exceeded its value.