Megaconference

["Zinner, Mike (MNIT)" <>]

The big difference is clarity, field of view and fixed focus as far as the actual cameras go.  Running a classroom on a MAC with camera is risky.  A C20 is much less likely to lock up in the middle of a lesson.  You have multiple inputs (like a graphics camera or DVD player) on the C20, but you’d be limited to the webcam and whatever’s on-screen on the MAC with a soft-client.  If $ is the issue, you might want to look at Polycom’s new offerings.  Very small codec and good pricing.

 

From: [mailto:] On Behalf Of Leonard, Mark
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 1:16 PM
To:
Subject: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware

 

Hello Megalister's--

 

I'm curious if anyone out there has run a side by side comparison of say a Cisco C-20 against a 'soft client' like this--

• Mac mini 2.6Ghz Intel Core i7
• Cisco Jabber (enterprise version- MOVI)
• USB Camera with pocessing within the camera
• Pretty capable USB speaker phone

Sure…in a perfect world we would always buy the dedicated codec for video collaboration-- right?   —  but I'm really starting to wonder about reasons not to run  the $1000 set up above in non mission critical events—

 

How about it?

Anyone out there running a H.323 soft client  in a classroom set up? 

 

And yes— to make it a little tougher… I must have 30fps, 1080, and connection speeds around 1000kbs  :>)

 

And no— I'm not so interested in the 101 web based videoconferencing services that have popped up as this is really a 'hardware' discussion. In my eyes— the weakest link in the soft client is the camera. Buying a $3K+ USB camera to compete with the Cisco HD camera kind of defeats the purpose of looking at workarounds to a dedicated VC codec.

 

Thanks for looking at this-

Have a great long weekend-

 

~Mark

 

Mark Leonard

Media and Collaboration, UNH IT