Page 74 - Security Today, March/April 2023

Unified Solutions
End-to-End or Multi-Vendor Solutions?
For Campuses, There are Benefits to Each.
As campuses prioritize security upgrades, many are looking to replace standalone technologies with systems that work together as a cohesive solution. While investigating options, decision-makers will ultimately reach a fork in the road. Do they invest in an end-to-end system from a single vendor or pursue a multi-vendor, integrated approach?
Before making a purchase decision with long-lasting operational and financial implications, here’s what stakeholders should consider.
The Benefits of End-to-End
There are many good reasons for campuses to invest in an end-to- end, or single-vendor, solution. End-to-end systems from a single manufacturer are generally faster to install, configure, and learn to operate because everything is designed to work together seamlessly, out of the box. Such systems typically offer, at minimum, access con- trol, video management, and basic video analytics. Some manufac- turers also have intercom, audio, body worn, and visitor management capabilities.
Single-vendor solutions are also easier to maintain. Software and firmware updates are less likely to cause adverse effects within the system. Help with sales, warranties, maintenance, and tech support issues can go through the same point of contact. Plus, standardizing on one manufacturer can sometimes simplify cybersecurity challenges. IT departments can rely on one set of listings to create a cyber-hardened solution that spans from edge devices to the head end.
In short, end-to-end systems are perfect for campuses seeking technology that delivers reliable functionality and is easy to buy, operate, and maintain.
End-to-End Should Not Mean Trapped
For many campuses, end-to-end solutions are sufficient. So, what's their downside? There isn't one, when the platform is built on open standards like ONVIF and OSDP. In these instances, customers can
14 campuslifesecurity.com | MARCH/APRIL 2023
easily add technology from other manufacturers if they need some- thing beyond what the single vendor offers. The end-to-end solution becomes a starting point from which to expand.
To futureproof investment in an end-to-end system, stakeholders must investigate whether their core manufacturer has nurtured a robust partner ecosystem. Some manufacturers invest so heavily in partner relationships that they can offer deep integrations that perform as seamlessly as if everything were from the same vendor.
On the opposite end of the spectrum are proprietary end-to-end solutions. Some of today's most popular proprietary systems are cloud-based and built upon a software-as-a-service model. In some instances, the cameras are relatively inexpensive and onsite VMS servers unnecessary, so, as a result, two significant upfront hardware expenses for large campus installations are diminished. However, the customer is locked-in and devices can require recurring annual fees to remain operable, and nothing can be repurposed if the customer migrates to a new platform.
Furthermore, if a campus needs to expand its system with new capabilities, its options are slim. It must hope the vendor remains committed to introducing new technologies compatible with its platform. Few third-party integrations will exist, and those that do will certainly not be best-in-class. All that said, whether on-prem, SaaS, or cloud architectures, the customer should perform due diligence to determine how proprietary a manufacturer actually is. In conjunction with this research, it’s important to determine the long- term total cost of ownership (TCO) when making decisions.
The Benefits of Integrated Solutions
While end-to-end solutions offer the path of least resistance, many campuses opt to work with their system integrator to design a cus- tomized, multi-vendor solution instead. Reasons include:
• The installation requires a high degree of customization because of
mission-critical or business operation use cases.