At a glance
- Client: NetApp
- Location: Santana Row headquarters, San Jose, CA
- What this covers: How the display standard for NetApp's meeting rooms got chosen — the trial process itself, not the full rollout
- Participants: Bart Saunders, Multimedia Specialist at NetApp; Eric Benson, Creation Networks
- Outcome: Avocor G Series interactive displays selected as NetApp's standard
The situation
NetApp's Multimedia Group had a decision to make: as people returned to its Santana Row headquarters after the pandemic, the existing meeting room displays weren't going to cut it for the hybrid, collaboration-first way the company wanted its rooms to work. Two requirements mattered most — real touch interactivity, and BYOD support so employees could join meetings from their own laptops and devices without friction.
That's a normal starting point for a display refresh. What's less normal is how NetApp and Creation Networks went about answering it.
Why a shoot-out instead of a spec sheet
A spec sheet tells you what a display is supposed to do. It doesn't tell you how it feels to actually touch the glass, how responsive the interactivity is with a real hand instead of a stylus in a demo video, or whether BYOD actually works the way the pitch deck claims. For a decision that was going to become NetApp's standard across a large number of meeting and huddle spaces, that gap mattered enough to close in person rather than on paper.
So Bart Saunders and Creation Networks organized an on-site shoot-out: multiple interactive display options, side by side, in real rooms, tested by the people who'd actually use them every day. This is the same reason AV design and integration projects at this scale benefit from a hands-on evaluation step before a standard gets locked in — the wrong call here doesn't get made once, it gets repeated in every room built to the standard afterward.
What the trial was actually testing
The evaluation centered on a short list of things that are hard to judge from a spec sheet:
- Touch quality — responsiveness and feel of the glass under a real finger, not a stylus in ideal conditions
- BYOD reliability — whether personal laptops, tablets, and phones actually connected cleanly, every time
- Build and finish — since these displays sit in customer-facing meeting rooms, not just internal spaces
- Digital whiteboarding — a feature NetApp's teams cared about enough to weigh heavily in the decision
The result
The Avocor G Series came out ahead on touch responsiveness and finish, and BYOD performed reliably during the trial with no notable issues. That combination was enough for NetApp to settle on Avocor as its standard display for meeting and conference rooms going forward — not just for the rooms in scope for this project, but as the baseline for future spaces too.
The full technology rollout that followed — the specific display sizes deployed, the Logitech video conferencing pairing, and the broader meeting-room technology story — is documented in our companion case study, NetApp Enhances Meeting Experiences with Avocor and Logitech Integration. This piece is specifically about the decision process that got NetApp there.
Frequently asked questions
Why run an on-site product trial instead of just following manufacturer specifications?
Specifications describe intended performance under controlled conditions; they don't capture how a display actually feels to the people who will use it daily, in the rooms it will actually sit in. Touch responsiveness, BYOD reliability, and finish quality are all things that are hard to fully judge from a data sheet and easy to judge in twenty minutes with the device in front of you. For a decision that becomes a company-wide standard, the cost of an in-person trial is small compared to the cost of standardizing on the wrong display and discovering it room by room afterward.
What should a company evaluate in an interactive display shoot-out?
The criteria should map to how the room is actually going to be used, not to a generic checklist. For NetApp, that meant weighting touch quality and BYOD compatibility heavily, since those were the two capabilities the previous displays lacked and the two the Multimedia Group specifically wanted solved. Build quality and finish mattered because these displays are visible to customers, not just internal staff. A different organization with different usage patterns — say, one prioritizing wireless casting over touch, or large-format visibility over interactivity — would reasonably weight the same evaluation differently.
Does choosing a display standard from a trial actually reduce long-term costs?
It can, primarily by avoiding the more expensive alternative: standardizing on paper, discovering a shortfall once dozens of rooms are already built to that standard, and re-specifying afterward. A single verified standard also simplifies procurement, training, and support going forward — one set of spare parts, one training session for facilities staff, one support playbook — benefits that compound across a large number of rooms in a way they wouldn't for a single isolated purchase.
DISPLAY STANDARDS • CORPORATE AV
Let's Talk About Your Display Standard
Tell us how many rooms you're standardizing and what's not working with your current displays, and we'll scope a trial from there. A CTS-D engineer replies within one business day — no charge, no obligation.
Protected by hCaptcha — its Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Technology partners on this project
Creation Networks, Inc. — nationwide commercial AV integrator, CTS-D certified, based in Concord, CA and Incline Village, NV. Design, engineering, programming, installation, and support from a single point of contact since 2006. Call 888-230-3661 or email sales@creationnetworks.net.
