Well, he would say that. wouldn’t he?
“Everything that can be invented has been invented.”
--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1889
I read with interest the article last month by Mike Newton of Dedicated Micros and I have to say that my first thought was one of disappointment, and my second; “Well, he would say that wouldn’t he?” I was disappointed that Mike seemed to use the chance to open a really good debate on the future of IP vs. Analogue CCTV as a promotional piece for Dedicated Micros, and also to try and hold back the market in an unhappy compromise of hybrid systems.
The things people say...
“I think there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
--Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943
I also had a sense of déjà vu when I read Mike’s article. In my career I have often heard similar arguments. When I started in the IP field in Data Capture and EPOS (Why would you ever want live data? – Batch processing is always best) through to general IT (What? – Connect every computer in the world to every other one? – Are you mad?), then to Wireless Communications (Why on earth would I ever want to log onto my email or work remotely from a coffee shop?) before coming to rest at present in IP CCTV (No, NVR’s will never take off – VCR Tape will always be best). At every step there have, and always will be, those who either cannot or do not wish to see the future but yet tomorrow always becomes today and those who stand still will be left behind.
Speaking as the Country Manager of a Value Added Distributor for IP CCTV solutions and with my experience across a number of IP fields I feel that I should at least try to put the other side of the IP vs. Analogue debate. There are many independent market research reports that state that at some time in the near future IP will replace analogue based solutions as the technology of choice. Even Mike acknowledged that IP is the future, but I think his pitch was slightly skewed by the fact that Dedicated Micros don’t have a pure end-to-end IP solution,and indeed no vendor does have the complete end-to-end solution, as it’s not the current business model of the market: – Everyone plays to their own strengths be they recording, camera and / or encoder manufacturing or storage / transmission.
However, as the entire physical security market of Intruder,Access Control, CCTV and even potentially Fire, moves to an IP based platform, both System Integrators and End Users will request and expect totally integrated IP solutions. From the customer’s perspective, there are three main deployment scenarios: (1) integrating existing analogue edge components with an IP backbone, (2) migrating existing analogue installations to IP over the life cycle of the system and finally, (3) installing a complete Greenfield pure IP solution that meets the project needs, budget and allows for future proofing.
All these scenarios present challenges in both planning and deployment, but these can be identified early enough to ensure that there are no surprises and the project can be designed, managed and delivered within agreed timescales and within budget.As explained below, Mike’s estimated £1.8M cost for a 750 camera system is wrong and misleading. I would love for a client to be prepared to spend £1.8M on a system, but I doubt such a customer readily exists. I think that Mike has been overtly disingenuous with some of the statements he has made regarding the cost of deployment for his theoretical 750 camera system; and I do not agree with the cost analysis, ROI arguments or system supply figures that Mike has quoted. Unsurprisingly though, we’re in agreement that the end user should never face any hidden costs or the need to deploy a “costly, high speed backbone”. But that’s never been an IP-related issue in my experience.
Remember the 5 p’s – proper planning prevents...
“There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.”
--Ken Olson, President, Chairman and Founder of Digital Equipment Corp, 1977
The secret to successful IP solution deployment lies in acknowledging two simple factors: (1) fully understanding the concept and requirements of system design for IP including how everything fits together and (2) how and where to source all the correct components from multiple manufacturers.
When looking at any of the three deployment scenarios above there are different challenges to each with regard to existing system components, so it’s worth looking at any additionally required components and responding to some of Mike’s comments. It should be noted that through good system design each project model can be deployed in a number of ways – central storage, distributed storage, redundancy, failover and remote high quality recording with low quality live view are all possible. These solutions can easily be implemented across existing infrastructure (without impacting IT services such as email, IP telephony or data processing applications), or new IP CCTV deployments with the use of networking functionality such as VLAN’s (the ability to create separate “virtual” LANs on the same switch) or by utilising low cost switches to create a separate LAN for the surveillance system.
However, I struggle to understand Mike’s concept of requiring 211 servers to run video analytics. Video analytics was one of the most over-hyped features of IP based video post 9-11. It was to be the Nirvana of video solutions allowing us to spot and identify suspects’ faces, track suspicious behaviour and generally replace the need for CCTV operators. Sadly this is not yet the case. That said, however, video analytics has made great strides forward and does have a key role to play in the future of IP CCTV.
Today it is possible to analyse video for incorrect motion or direction, loitering, left or removed objects and a host of other functions very accurately. In the past this did require a low camera feed to server ratio due to the limitations of the hardware platforms however with the improvements in processor and memory technology this argument no longer holds water as most IP camera manufacturers are looking to deploy analytics on the cameras or encoders themselves to reduce this server loading.
Some of the technologies Mike references such as Transcoding are available to a number of vendors within the IP or NVR space so this should not be seen as a unique feature of a Dedicated Micros based solution but there are a number of features available to IP solutions that are not available to hybrid solutions such as intelligent maps, integration with other systems such as Access Control or multi site co-locations.