megaconference - RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware
Subject: Megaconference
List archive
- From: Paul Bonnett <>
- To: 'Rusty Presley' <>, David Devereaux-Weber <>, "" <>
- Subject: RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 14:50:16 +0000
- Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
- Authentication-results: sfpop-ironport02.merit.edu; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
Our schools (and HE) use desktop clients quite a bit now and although it does pose some horrible support scenarios, on the whole people do accept they are doing
VC ‘on their own terms’ and we can only support them so far. We strongly advise people (although they do ignore it) to close every non essential application whilst in a VC as applications like outlook can grab your processing
capability that was doing HD video capture, just at the wrong time. SVC helps enormously with this; and multi core processors help too, but many of our schools/academics are still running low spec hardware (but still have the
Star Trek VC expectation), so it is a challenge. The biggest challenges we find are admin rights on machines & firewalls (local and institutional) We provide the Codian designed ConferenceMe on our service (which we branded Janet Desktop) and to make life easier, we built a test area for uses to check
functionality, prior to meetings. Feel free to check it out: Regards, Paul Bonnett Videoconferencing Technical Coordinator Direct line: +44 1235 822 332 Janet, the UK’s research and education network. From: [mailto:]
On Behalf Of Rusty Presley We have not seen this particular problem using ScopiaDesktop. We have seen problems with soft clients when they try to have more than one type
running at the same time on windows machines, eg skype, scopiadesktop, google hangouts etc in regards to resource assignment. Rusty Rusty Presley IT Specialist VI Alabama Cooperative Extension System/Auburn University 67 Extension Hall, Auburn University, AL 36849 (334) 844-3504 Office (334) 750-8863 Cell From:
[]
On Behalf Of David Devereaux-Weber Mark, One negative experience I've had using a software codec (Cisco Jabber Video) is when a user was demonstrating a statistical analysis software program. There was contention for CPU between the stats program and the video
codec. When CPU contention happens, both functions suffer. Dave -- On May 24, 2013, at 1:15 PM, "Leonard, Mark" <> wrote: 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--
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 Janet(UK) is a trading name of Jisc Collections and Janet Limited, a not-for-profit company which is registered in England under No. 2881024 and whose Registered Office is at Lumen House, Library Avenue, Harwell Oxford, Didcot, Oxfordshire. OX11 0SG. VAT No. 614944238 |
- [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, (continued)
- [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Leonard, Mark, 05/24/2013
- [Megacon] RE: Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Zinner, Mike (MNIT), 05/24/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Matt Carner, 05/24/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Rusty Presley, 05/24/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Peter Hayes, 05/24/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Simon Horne, 05/24/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Peter Hayes, 05/24/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Ben Fineman, 05/24/2013
- [Megacon] RE: Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, George Wiley, 05/24/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, David Devereaux-Weber, 05/30/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Rusty Presley, 05/30/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Paul Bonnett, 05/30/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Leonard, Mark, 05/31/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Ben Fineman, 05/31/2013
- Re: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Leonard, Mark, 05/31/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Paul Bonnett, 05/30/2013
- RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Rusty Presley, 05/30/2013
- [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware, Leonard, Mark, 05/24/2013
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.