Megaconference

[Koorus Bookan <>]

If one was starting from scratch and wanting to operate in a vacuum or 
homogeneous environment(which is not the case) for desktop VC , you 
could cringe  and use SfB. MS is heavily counting on past success of 
consumer skype which has been losing ground to competition which are 
plenty. As a paying customer of skype finally decided to leave Skype due 
to issues I have had in the past couple of years(very shoddy for 
overseas calls). The dream of MS that everyone would settle for skype is 
just that, a pipe dream. I wonder what the next name change will be.

The following are immediate concern in edu world:

Interoperability, QoS, the desktop nature of design, quite expensive 
(after all said and done) and yet not a full solution, subject to all 
the regular MS antics. (I.e Skype was good for most part, and now there 
are glitches with it).

These things are contrary to common wisdom of "telepresence" that says 
people should feel close to real physical presence in a VC session with 
minimal hiccups in order to break the physical distance barrier.

Certainly SfB as a teaching tool is like fitting a square box into a 
ball shape. Just because you connect person A to B doesn't mean you can 
call it a classroom. Anyone claiming so haven't seen how and what people 
do in a virtual classroom.

Cisco is pushing Webex as a teaching tool, MS is pushing skype as such, 
neither one are proper tools.

koorus



On 5/9/2016 6:52 PM, Jon Winterbottom wrote:
> Hi all,  I'm finding myself posting a lot about skype for business recently.  
> Since I'm feeling the push to go with S4B as our primary solution for all 
> things video conferencing, I would like to know why others haven't?  Or if 
> you are using it what is the primary use.   Is there anyone out there that 
> has successfully implemented S4B that is using it to conduct online courses?  
> Thanks to those who have already commented on some of my previous posts.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sent from my iPad