Megaconference

["Leonard, Mark" <>]

Nice! All points well taken…

I will be running tests this summer with the 2 systems and will post results here…

Couple last quick questions--

If I have the machines sitting side by side (C-20 vs Mac mini) and they are reporting that they are both in a call at 1920kbs, 30fps, HD video in and out, zero packet loss…Are there any other 'quantitative' results I should be looking at? Can I measure delay?

I plan on hammering on the echo cancellation capabilities of each of the codecs but I was just wondering about other (hardware) variables I should be looking at…

Thanks again for all the input. My own personal bias is that over the years there has been no way the soft VC client can come close to a dedicated VC codec in call reliability and support issues and total cost of ownership. I don't have to tell this group that technology is moving incredibly fast and I see the $15k codec (with it's $1k+ a year forever! service agreement) going the way of the fax machine…sure there will be a few around but most of us will have figured out something better…

Happy Friday-

~Mark

PS— it's only a matter of time until someone  comes up with a HD PTZ production USB camera for under $500—right?  or maybe we'll find the fix somewhere else…   ;>)

http://www.gizmag.com/kubi-telepresence-robot-tablets/25389/

From: Paul Bonnett <>
Date: Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:50 AM
To: 'Rusty Presley' <>, David Devereaux-Weber <>, "" <>
Subject: RE: [Megacon] Videoconferencing "Soft Client" vs Codec Hardware

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.

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>