I'm thinking that a good alternative approach is the "cluster" concept. Here in the US, I can put together a ZM box that will handle four cameras nicely for $500 or so. Suppose I want to design a system for 20 cameras for a five floor office building. Rather than assemble a "SuperZMbox" and route all the video cables to one location, I would choose to put a server on each floor. This approach has the advantage that a hardware failure will not bring down all 20 cameras.
If we had an interface that would integrate multiple ZM servers, such a cluster sytem would scale beautifully. A simplified user interface would not need to include admin functions , as these could be done using the regular ZM console on each server.
