Why PSIM Will NEVER Be Popular

Author: John Honovich, Published on Jun 15, 2015

How do you like this vehicle?

***, ****, **** ** *****, ******** *** *******, ***** **** - *****'* **** ** *********.

***, **** ** *** **** **** ******?

***, * ********* *** ****** ******** **** * *** ** sense.

* ***** *** ***** *** ** *** **** ** * regular *** *** **** ** *** *** ********* '********', **** ** not ***** ** **** ****:

PSIM ** *** ********* *** ** *** ******** ******** ********

**** ** ** ***, **** ** *** ********* *** ** the ******** ******** ********. *****'* **** ** ********* ***** ** and **** **** *** ***** **.

***, *** ***** **** *** *** ****** ** **** ******** enough ********, **** ** *** '****' ******.

PSIM's ********

*** ******** *** **** *** *** **** ** **** **** years *** *** **** ** *** **** ** **** *** years **** ***.

********** ******: ***** *** ******** ** ********* ****** *****, ******, *********, etc. ** **** **** **** ********* **** **** **** ** these *** ** *** **** ** ***** ** **** *** 'sophisticated' * **** ** ** **** ** *** ******* ***** existing ******* **** **** ******* **** ******** ** ********* ** millions ***.

************* ******* ** **** ***********: **** ***** *** ****** ********** ************* *** ******* ** ******** their ****** ** **** **** *** ******** *********** **** ***** systems. ****, **** ***** **** **** **** ****** *** ** would ********* *** ********* ************'* ********* ** **** ****** ***** from ***** ******** ******** (*.*., **** ********* *** **** **** the **** ** *** ***** ***** ******* *** *********).

**** *****, **** ** *** '******' ***** *** ***** ** large ************* (*.*.,****,****,******, ***.), ****** ***** ****** **** **** **** ********* ** allow **** ***********.

********* *****

*** ***** *** ****** ******** **** ***** **, ********* ******* will *** ******** ******* ************ ** '****-*****' **********, **** ******* levels ** *********** *** ************* *****. *** ******* **** ****** **** other ***** ***** ******* *********** *** *** ****-******* ****** ***** they ******.

PSIM **** ****

**** **** * ****, **** *** *****, *********** **** ************ **** ** ** ***** $*.** ******* '********'.

***, ** ** ****** ***** **** *********. ******, *** ****** to **** ******** *** **** '****' ********* *** **** **** ****** **** **. **** *** **** *** ********** **** ******* ******** *** ********* ****.

Give ** **

******, **** ** ** ******** ******** **** ******** ******** ** to *******. **'* **** ***** ***** ** ** *******.

**** **** *** **** **** **** *** ** ***** ** that ** *** ****** *** **. **'* **** * ***** of * *****.

**** ******** **** *********. **** ********** ***** *********** ** *** exist. *** ** **** *** **** *** ** *** **** that ** **.

Comments (28)

Someone once told me that PSIM stood for:

  • Perhaps
  • Someday
  • I'll
  • Materialize

After I chuckled in response, we had a constructive conversation about it. Does it have its place? Sure, but I think as a distinct market segment it has 2 things going against it:

  1. As a "layer" on top of other systems, it is a derivative product. As such, it is always going to be a small market.
  2. "Fuzzy" definition. Frankly, any system that manages physical security information is a "PSIM", so how do you even define it, to a customer, as something that is distinct from a PACS or a VMS?

I sat through a few presentations to an airport customer looking to purchase a PSIM. It was a learning experience finding out the separate needs and wants of the various departments who would be the system managers and end users.

The single largest detractor was cost.

Some products focused their pitch heavily on how it could bring multiple systems together and allowed changing of key components later without creating issues with the users. As an example, this airport through the years had two primary access control products installed in quantity and at least three VMS solutions to integrate. As the airport migrated to a single product of each the dependency on integrations would fade somewhat. Some products focused their pitch on how an emergency with a strong work flow and following reporting requirements could be easily managed across required inputs such as elevator, fire, escalator, gates, intrusion, people flow, access control, first responder access and more. Some focused extensively on the reduction of lifecycle training for operators by having a workflow driven common platform. Shorter training cycles and more useful and skilled personnel.

I guess until you have sat in an emergency center dispatch chair with radios and alarm going on a critical event and then had the biggest boss ask for something "NOW" that required pulling data from three systems it's hard to place a value on these things. With that said......they are expensive to install and maintain. A benefit is tying in 10 different systems. That becomes an albatross when you can't/won't/aren't ready to update one system and it holds you back on others or it breaks the system etc.

If even the airport client you mentioned was put off by the cost, who is the target demographic that is actually investing in PSIM?

Largest detractor but They bought one and the last I heard are happy with it. Several airports have them installed but as described by others no two are alike.

I noticed the following on Linkedin's PSIM Trends about PSIM being taken over by something called CSIM "Converged Security & Information Management"

Heck I haven't even gotten to PSIM!

So what's the main difference and advantages to CSIM over PSIM?

Lol, that's Vidsys' marketing group.

According to this video, the main tangible difference of CSIM that Vidsys emphasized was cybersecurity:

And according to this press release, it is IoT.

In other words, Vidsys is wrapping themselves in the buzzwords du jour.

I love the Van analogy


Great article. You have touched on a few of the major limitations of PSIM. Here are a few more:

  1. Most system configurations and settings still have to be performed using the application software of the underlying systems, not through the PSIM. Most PSIMs give you an integrated interface on the monitoring side, but not on the configuration side. This is a huge disappointment for end-users who think that they are getting a truly unified system.
  2. All underlying applications need to continue to be supported and upgraded. Most upgrades will require that the PSIM "driver" that connects to the application also be upgraded, sometimes costing tens of thousands of dollars per upgrade.
  3. The feature set of the combined systems usually defaults to the least capable feature set of all of the systems being integrated. For example, if one access control system supports global anti-passback, and another one doesn't, chances are good that the overall system won't have global anti-passback.

I believe that Steve Hunt, creator of the Security Dreamer blog (not very active these days) claims credit for coming up with the "PSIM" acronym. We have had a few lively debates over the years as to the future of PSIM. He had a greatly expanded view of how PSIM could be used, arguing that the data generated from such a system could be used not just for security, but for a multitude of other business related purposes.

Great article and had me laughing. Nice way to start the day.

Have heard that some customer's actually want a PSIM as it incorporates Case Management functionality as opposed to having to buy seperate Case Management Software. Any truth to this?

I am sure there is someone out there that thinks that but I doubt it's a common approach. Mostly because case management software is far less expensive than PSIM so that's a lot of extra money to spend if you do not really need all of it. Also, I'd be surprised if most PSIMs have the depth of case management that real case management software offerings deliver.

No end user objects to the idea of PSIM, it is an ideal we all aspire to being able to provide. It is the price and time investment that is the barrier to entry for many right now.

"No end user objects to the idea of PSIM .... It is the price and time investment"

Good point.

The question then becomes - how can you get the cost down? For that, you need to make integration quicker while increasing scale (i.e., the number of customers using / buying it). Of course, that brings us back to the core problems - the market is fragmented, making scale very hard and integrations are typically time consuming and limited.

Most of our (bigger) customers want, buy and use our PSIM solutions. With over 400 interfaces to the most common manufacturers in the building technologies field, i do not see any problems - only positive aspects IMO. If you have 10+ subsystems with a whole lot of components and need them to interact based on various scenarios, you can not rely on simple I/Os or such. Furthermore, since many companies are outsourcing security personel, you need a common GUI everybody understands without the use of 10+ different trainings or GUIs.

In the end you have to be flexible - no interface yet? well we or our partner develop it to our customers needs. Function not included? same here.

..a circumstance, maybe none of the smaller integrators are able to or capable of and therefore neglect PSIMs.

"i do not see any problems - only positive aspects IMO"

The problem is cost for everyone but your 'big' customers. For sure, someone who has 10+ subsystems has spent millions or tens of millions on systems already, so they likely can justify spending a million more to add PSIM. Yes/no?


I agree that PSIMs make not that much sense for budget-driven customers with just a video surveillance and an access control system.

I agree with you here, John. I would only add that even some of the "big" customers are recognizing the long term cost aspects of multi-tiered complex integration models versus minimizing the number of integrations where possible.

F, yes, I've seen occasions where users see their PSIM quote and respond, "I might as well just get replace all my old X, Y or Z."

It just depends how big or complex or locked in they are. It's a tough call.

Can you clarify, as you did with IDIS and ASIS, what the term's accepted pronounciation is:

  1. P-S-I-M
  2. P-SIM
  3. (P)SIM with the P like (PSychology)

Most people pronounce it P-SIM.


How many crimes prevented, how many arrests made? These are simple enough metrics for establishing PSIM value. Where is the proof?

The above is simply one example. There are obviously various iterations of multi-tiered integrations using many types of systems depending on the End-User customer.

John brings up a good point about huge investments in lots of systems where some EUers need to develop easier methods to "monitor". I certainly agree that the PSIM models have there place with a very select type of customer. However, they have to recognize the long term affects of their decision as the cost of the back-end support and administration may actually be much more than spending the money to invest in a product that could potentially minimize the number and levels of integration required.

This article brings back so many memories. Back to the days when we were trying to figure out what we were going to do about PSIM. Our parent business unit at the time saw it as a strategic imperative that they be able to leverage what PSIM seemed to offer. They were interested in the biggest integration projects and felt the need to offer everything to everything functionality. And not just about data integration but also workflow, ‘rules engines,’ geospatial, lots of reporting. PSIM to them was another integration platform arrow in their quiver. Pelco’s interests were a little more tactical--we just needed to stave off competition from other VMS that had more/better integration with third party access or intrusion systems. There was a tricky balance to be had accomodating use cases in our own VMS vs giving up others to the PSIM. In both cases we were looking at the upper right quadrant on a chart with criticality in one axis and integration complexity on the other axis.

What happened next might be predictable. Look at all the possibilities, get overwhelmed by the permutations, admit that no one product would solve all needs, decide to ‘partner’ with all of them. Basically, we went from a build-vs-buy-a-PSIM discussion to deciding to do nothing.

As a software abstractionist it didn’t surprise me. Successful integration frameworks emerge when many integrations happen and common patterns emerge that can be encapsulated into reusable components. The best integration frameworks (that is, those that actually work), are the result of many many iterations. PSIM would never quite get there for a number of reasons: lack of standards, lack of sufficient economic drivers, simply lack of enough jobs that required the integrations. PSIM was really about taking snapshots of integration implementations and trying to say those were products. Without enough customers in need of exactly that same implementation, there’s no market.

So then is this accurate?

NICE (or the company formerly known as NICE) is campaigning against the term PSIM now:

“PSIM is not the right term for where we’re heading; PSIM is the wrong terminology for the right technology,” he says. “Until the industry comes up with a better term, there will continue to be confusion about what PSIM is and isn’t. I wouldn’t be surprised if a new term emerged within the next six to 12 months.”

We currently use a PSIM type software in Immix by Sureview to do video monitoring of our customers facilities. They had a failed attempt to move us to their new Cloud version which didnt perform as well as the Enterprise version, which they stopped any new development on. We use is for video monitoring and customer incident retrieval from the website so not much access integrated into it. Are there any other platforms comparable?

7, so the cloud video does not work that well and the Enterprise version they stopped developing? Is that correct? It sounds crazy?

What brands do you need to connect? That tends to be the most commom limitation? And is this for a guard tour or?

cloud was so much slower to load with exceeding their system requirements tremendously.

Must have

Dedicated Micros






Would like to add






Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports on PSIM

Genetec Citigraf Big Data Platform Analyzed on Oct 26, 2017
A big industry debate is whether VMS software is now a commodity. However, Genetec believes it can charge a substantial premium for higher-end...
ASIS Show 2017 Final Report on Sep 27, 2017
ASIS is in Dallas for 2017 and this is our final show report (compare to our 2016 ASIS show report). When walking in, one is greeted with Dahua's...
CNL PSIM Profile on Sep 06, 2017
CNL has been one of the strongest advocates for PSIM, as one of the earliest entrants into the market releasing their command and control software...
Genetec Mission Control Tested on Jul 13, 2017
Genetec continues to move up market with their Mission Control, "Decision Support System", bringing PSIM-like procedures and incident management to...
Tyco PSIM Proximex End of Life on Mar 06, 2017
The end of life for Tyco's PSIM Proximex is here, with no more product releases coming and 3 years of remaining support. Inside this post, we...
Milestone App - PSIM Lite (Alesys) on Feb 09, 2017
Milestone has many features in their VMS, but it is not a PSIM. Italian PSIM developer Alesys thinks sensor integrations and alarm management can...
Hitachi Security Industry Profile on Feb 09, 2017
Hitachi, bigger than Sony and Panasonic overall, with $89 billion USD 2016 total revenue, is expanding into the security industry. They are...
$18.7M PSIM Acquisition Examined (IDV / Everbridge) on Feb 06, 2017
This may be the biggest deal for a PSIM developer ever. In a segment that has disappointed for more than a decade, a recent IPOed company has...
Veracity Acquires PSIM Manufacturer iComply on Feb 03, 2017
Most well-known for their Ethernet extenders, with their own video surveillance storage offering, Veracity has now acquired a PSIM. UK-based...
For Sale: PSIM Provider Seeking Offers on Dec 19, 2016
2016 saw a lot of acquisitions, and more are expected in 2017, now PSIM vendor Fortem is hoping they can get in on this action, and are marketing...

Most Recent Industry Reports

May 2018 Camera Course on Mar 16, 2018
Our next course starts on May 8th. Register now for the Spring 2018 Camera Course This is the only independent surveillance camera course, based...
ADT Hammered Again, Loses Another Billion In Market Cap on Mar 16, 2018
ADT's CEO told investors that, 'in baseball terms', ADT was batting 5 for 5. But investors told ADT's CEO, 'in baseball terms', that he was...
Camera Form Factor Guide on Mar 16, 2018
When selecting surveillance cameras, users may choose from a number of different form factors, each with its own unique strengths and weaknesses,...
Free Trip To China - CCTV.Net / Univew on Mar 15, 2018
Pack your bags? 'Closer than you think'? Well, a non-stop flight from NYC to Shanghai is 15 hours plus another 100 miles to Hangzhou...
Access Control - Restricted Keys Guide on Mar 15, 2018
Not all doors, even in larger facilities, can justify using electronic access control. And even for doors that do have electronic access control,...
Rack Mounting NVRs Tutorial on Mar 14, 2018
Rack mounting recorders is common in professional systems, but manufacturers are making it difficult, with simple design failures causing multiple...
Network Addressing for Video Surveillance Guide on Mar 14, 2018
The goal of this guide is to explain addressing devices on IP networks, focusing on how IP cameras and recorders are used in those networks. For...
Panasonic Selling Off Security Camera Factory on Mar 14, 2018
Panasonic is OEMing cameras from Dahua, as IPVM testing confirmed in 2017. Now, Panasonic is selling their security camera factory, according to...
Favorite Electrified Locks 2018 on Mar 14, 2018
Electronic lock manufacturing is dominated by 3 conglomerates (alphabetically) Allegion, Assa and Dormakaba holding numerous electronic lock...
Hikvision Chairman Joins China National Government (NPC) on Mar 13, 2018
Hikvision Chairman and Communist Party Secretary Chen Xongnian has joined the People's Republic of China's government - the National People's...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact